Black Gold and Political Economy
By Siddique Malik
Louisville, KY

When a sector of the economy lacks genuine competition, consumers suffer, and this is exactly what is happening in the area of oil and gas. The lack of competition in this sector is not because of a shortage of providers and producers but because of a lack of alternative products. This is the reason there is never a price-war between oil companies. A tacit price-fixing is in place in this market.
What other reason could possibly explain almost uniform price at all gas pumps regardless of the company that owns them? At the slightest provocation, oil prices jump up, but they come down very slowly. Is there a solution to this virtual enslavement of the consumers of black gold (oil)?
Yes, there is! It is a two-prong solution: Reduce the demand for oil to help lower prices, and develop alternative energy products to induce genuine competition in the field. But who is going to do that? Certainly, it must not be the kind of solution that President Hugo Chavez, blinded by his hatred of America, is trying to apply in Venezuela. No doubt, America’s record in the area of its relationship with Latin America is dismal. But this should not be a reason for a country in the region to destroy its oil industry by injecting a heavy dose of government control into it.
Nationalization or excessive government control may satisfy the needs of a megalomaniac leader like Chavez, but sooner or later it would destroy the affected industry. This is what happened to the oil industry in Libya and Algeria, and banks, educational institutions, and other industries nationalized by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto on the New Year day, 1972, in Pakistan. When the push came, the behemoth of state-control, the Soviet Union, fell like a house of cards. China has learnt this lesson and is adjusting very fast.
Naturally, the solution will have to come from the private sector, albeit, it would need to be helped and perhaps even stimulated by the government. If the government and Congress could shed their obeisance toward the energy sector, they should encourage the private sector to enhance intra-city public transit systems and establish a nation-wide high-speed inter-city train network. This would cause the demand for gasoline to shrink, making prices decline and thus teaching the avaricious oil companies that have become addicted to their de-facto monopoly a much needed lesson. It would also encourage these companies to put their heart into research and development. This might see the emergence of ethanol and other alternative energy products in America. This, in turn, would stimulate competition, giving control to the consumers.
These changes would place the automotive industry into an overdrive to develop vehicles that use various types of energy sources, not just the blood of freedom and human dignity, also known as gasoline. A considerable amount of oil that flows into the US market originates in the suppressive Middle Eastern countries in which the concept of freedom and equality is as alien as is the headscarf at Florida beaches. We have no choice but to consume this import because we need to get to places to which we need to go. You see: Freedom of travel and movement is one of the basic freedoms that we Americans cherish. Never mind that exercising this freedom helps dictators of oil-producing countries suppress their people. We are in a hurry; don’t want to miss the freeway exit thinking about other countries’ problems.
When the results of this glibness reverberate back to our shore in the form of terrorism, we would budget more money for the Department of Homeland Security and push Pakistan to do more to stem terrorism. Meanwhile let us enjoy the weekend. Would it not make sense to lower our living standard just a bit so as to help freedom and human dignity take root in suppressed societies? By the way, this would also help nip the evil of terrorism in the bud.
So far, the auto industry has played in the hands of the oil industry because it does not want to rock the boat and endanger its revenues. Surely, it has pretended that it is developing vehicles that use alternative energy sources, and some such models are available for purchase. But the efforts have been half-hearted. I am sure some of the lobbyists who earn their money by keeping mass-transit legislations from reaching the floor of Congress are paid by the automotive industry in addition to the oil industry. You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours! If there is sound and fast mass-transit system, who is going to buy cars?
Recently, the French high-speed train, TGV, established a record speed of 356 miles an hour. At this speed, a train could take us from Louisville to Chicago in 53 minutes, from Los Angeles to San Francisco in 64 minutes and from coast to coast in less than 6 hours. If one could take such a train or even a train with a little less speed, one would generally avoid driving or even flying to long-distance destinations. Modern high-speed trains are powered by pollution-free nuclear energy; no oil dependence and no harmful gas emission. This would help stem global warming, too. Moreover, this is what I call genuine competition.
China is a rookie in the field of capitalism and consumerism. Yet, it is already on track to establish a nationwide network of high-speed trains. While it is warming up to the Middle Eastern regimes so as to have a steady oil supply, it is taking steps to keep its oil-dependence at bay. American leadership needs to emulate such a vision.
At the risk of being accused of repetition, I would again argue that a great benefit would emerge from America's reduced oil dependence: We would be able to deal with dictators of the Middle East on terms that suit their people, not just these dictators. This would help freedom and democracy spread without wars – not to mean that warmongering is a way to foster these values --improving America's international image. Did those who were desperate to bring democracy to Iraq ever think of this slow but sure option?
Since fast trains need special tracks, a network of these tracks would need to be built. Improving intra-city public transit systems would require massive building efforts, too. Imagine the boost these activities would give to the economy by creating thousands of jobs. The question is not if it would be a win-win situation, the question is if the vested interests want a win-win situation for Americans.
A few months before the crucial mid-term elections in 2006, the gasoline prices started to drop slowly and by the election day, they were at the lowest they had been for quite a while. Soon after the elections, this price transformation took the reverse route and the oil prices are now back in their high range. Market forces at work? I don’t think so! Market forces in the oil sector hold their ugly dance when a cue emerges on the horizon. This is why I want genuine competition in the field. I want genuine market forces to go to work for the exploited and desperate oil and gas consumers.
In the second paragraph while talking about a possible solution I asked: Who is going to do it? Now, we know who is not going to do it. Neither the politicians, nor the energy sector would take the lead. It would be, “we the people”. In a democracy this entity has the real power. Only, if it could wake-up and order its servants (the government and the legislators) to act. By doing so, it would bring tremendous economic savings to itself and foster freedom and democracy in the most unlikely places. No war needed.
- smalik94@hotmail.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Editor: Akhtar M. Faruqui
© 2004 pakistanlink.com . All Rights Reserved.