Who’s surprised? Various stories had been invented by media houses
across the Western world in an attempt to explain why oil prices have
conveniently fallen, just in time to pressure Russia, Venezuela and Iran, and
all while covert political subversion, attempts to sell all-out-war and other
measures have completely failed to assert US interests around the world. The
obvious answer was market manipulation, an answer US and other Western news
sources refused to admit … that is until now.
The
New York Times in their article, “Saudi Oil Is Seen as Lever to Pry Russian Support From
Syria’s Assad,” finally admits,
“Saudi Arabia has been trying to pressure President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia
to abandon his support for President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, using its
dominance of the global oil markets at a time when the Russian government is
reeling from the effects of plummeting oil prices. “
But
of course, despite this grain of truth, Saudi Arabia didn’t do this on their
own, since Saudi Arabia isn’t destabilizing Syria on its own, or for its own
interests. Saudi Arabia, while playing a significant part in the manipulation
of global oil prices, is solely blamed for the purpose of compartmentalizing
public perception. The reality is that global oil prices are being manipulated
at the behest of the US not only to overthrow the government of Syria or
pressure Iran, but to strike at Russia itself.
The
New York Times would have us believe that Saudi Arabia is rigging international
oil prices to “bring peace in Syria,” making no mention of Saudi Arabia’s role
in backing heavily armed militants streaming into the country turning it into a
war zone to begin with. The NYT also makes no mention of the prospect of peace
that might result should Saudi Arabia stop its immense state-sponsorship of
international terrorism.
For
the “cause of peace,” Saudi Arabia is already estimated to have lost $39
billion. For a regime that chops the heads off its political opponents in
public demonstrations meant to inspire medieval fear among its people, the idea
that it is willing to lose billions in oil revenue to “promote peace” in Syria
is plainly absurd, and raises serious questions about the legitimacy of the
NYT.
The
New York Times would also mention Crimea’s return to Russia, but would stop
short of linking oil market manipulation to the conflict in Ukraine. However,
this is actually the key to understanding global geopolitics and how dropping
oil prices fit in. Syria and Ukraine are linked, and Saudi Arabia’s role in
putting pressure on Russia for one that matters a little to Riyadh (Syria), and
another that matters not at all (Ukraine), shows how Riyadh’s foreign policy is
driven not by national interests, but by obligations it apparently owes to
Washington and London (significant obligations that if not met would end with
the dissolution of the House of Saud).
Instead
of focusing on Saudi Arabia and claims that it is solely responsible for global
oil prices being cut in half despite no discernible changes in supply and
demand, the global public should see a wider confrontation playing
out. The US is using its vast influence over finance, energy, the media
and many other economic and political sectors to wage full spectrum war on
those resisting its hegemonic expansion globally.
Other
news agencies who helped invent explanations regarding dropping oil prices,
included the Washington Post which claimed in its article, “Falling oil prices put pressure on Russia, Iran and
Venezuela,” that, “THE SILVER
lining in the recent financial market turbulence has been the continued decline
in the price of oil, which is down about 25 percent since June. In addition to
creating a windfall for U.S. consumers — one analysis reckoned the savings
could amount to $600 per household — the drop, if sustained, will place
considerable pressure on three problematic petrostates: Russia, Iran and
Venezuela. The aggressively anti-American foreign policies pursued by all three
countries in recent years have been financed in large part by soaring oil
revenue.”
Silver
lining? Or concerted conspiracy? The NYT provides the light shining through the
Washington Post’s cloudy analysis, confirming indeed it is a concerted
conspiracy.
What
does this say about global energy markets and their intertwining with various
other sociopolitical issues including the debate over climate change, spikes in
prices that strangulate development globally and wars waged for “humanitarian
reasons” against nations that just so happen to export oil outside of markets
controlled by Washington and London? It says a lot, and illustrates that many
of the facades and social crusades well-meaning people have taken up leave them
carrying water for one of the most perverse, destructive industries on Earth,
in human history … big oil.
The
Saudis wouldn’t last long without both internal and external security and
support both military and political, provided by the US and others to prop up
the otherwise politically and morally bankrupt petrostate. Despite exercising
barbarism as a matter of national policy not seen in other countries since the
dark ages, its head of state was given passionate eulogies by Western
dignitaries as he passed away, with London going as far as flying its national
flag at half-mast for the deceased monarch.
Showing
general respect for others, good or evil, may not be so offensive, were it not
for the fact that the US and UK regularly undermine and destroy the governments
of others guilty of far less egregious crimes than those associated with the
House of Saud. This illustrates that US foreign policy toward nations is not
determined by moral or legal obligations, but rather the utility or opposition
each state poses to the hegemonic designs driving US ambitions overseas.
Taking
this to its logical conclusion, the US and its large collection of client
states around the world, are undermining Syria, waging economic war against
Russia, destabilizing China at home while chasing their investors out of any
nation they’re found in, not based on some moral imperative, but specifically
because of the absolute, utter lack of morality. Understanding this cuts
through the various invented stories constantly emanating from the Western
media, including myths about miraculously dropping oil prices and their
“serendipitous” and “coincidental” impact they just so happen to have on all of
America’s perceived enemies.
Even
the Washington Post admits there really is no tie between Venezuela, Iran and
Russia, except claims that each is “autocratic” and “anti-American.” The real
common denominator is their respective resistance to US hegemony in their
regions of the world. And while many reasons were invented to explain the
convenient drop in oil prices, we can see once again that when events unfold
the first question to be asked in identifying the perpetrators is “to whose
benefit?” Had the Washington Post fulfilled their duty as journalists and asked
this question, readers around the world would not have waited months to finally
learn the truth behind dropping oil prices. The answer was simple but ridiculed
as “Kremlin propaganda” at the time, but of course, is now fully admitted to be
machinations carried out by Russia’s enemies.
Lesson
learned? Hopefully the next turn in economic fortune in the markets, or
terrorist act carried out that “just so happens” to benefit the US and its
partners around the world, people will hold those who stand to benefit the most
with increased scrutiny and suspicion.
Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and
writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/mystery-behind-dropping-oil-prices-solved-concerted-market-manipulation/5430117
No comments:
Post a Comment