NATO, IRAQ, and oil

Brussels has come to an end. I was fortunate to discuss American issues with a UK MEP (minister of european parliament), the director of operations at NATO, a BP official who lobby's the EU fulltime, and a few other individuals. Let me say that Europe needs America. Regardless of what you hear in the media or on the news, Europe is very much supportive of the American way of life, regardless, or in spite of Iraq.

On energy policy, I will say that my view is much more realistic today. Germany depends on Russia for 30% of their oil and natural gas; 25% of BP oil and gas comes from Europe; 5% of BP's oil comes from Alaska; 20% of all oil in the world (known reserves) resides in Iraq. France has made friends with Iran. They have a national oil company, Total, that has made inroads to Iran that will provide energy security to the nation. In meetings it was clear that the UK has been miffed by not securing a position for BP through inroads into Iraq. BP has a longstanding policy (internal) that says it will not do business with Iran, so that leaves Iraq for future development. This is because Iran nationalized on BP in the early days, setting back the company many years.

NATO is a 27 nation coalition of many european countries, mainly focused on Afghanistan right now. NATO is clear that until Germany, France and other EU nations support engagement, there will be no involvement in Iraq; which we need desparately. Make no mistake, whether it is Obama, Clinton, or McCain, each will look to Europe to be more involved and take a large role in Iraq. We may need to engage France through oil for Total and Germany through other means, but we will need to make concessions and allow them to save face in this major fuck up we have created. The good news is that the US energy supply will be secure through the engagement in Iraq. The bad news is that we have charged the national credit card quite significantly to accoplish that task.

The EU was told in Munich by Richard Holbrooke, key foreign policy advisor to Clinton, over last weekend, that the EU nations should expect the US to approach them for help to stablize Iraq once a new administration takes over. Consensus is that Germany's invovlement in Afghanistan, as well as France, has created a maximum load for force in the EU. It is clear that Germany is not interested in offensive force, and is quite happy as a pacificist because of the scars of WW2 and 1.

Afghanistan, according to NATO, is much more complicated than Iraq. It is larger in population by 20X and is 20X larger in size.

The EU is a fragile organization, as a supra national treaty organization. There are over 700 parlaiment members, but the power resides in the heads of state and the 27 (each member) commissioners in the the EU Commission.

NATO is an amazing building with very tight security. it is the only organization in the world that is enforcing "legitimate" force on nations that act bad. The problem with it is that we provide the best capabilitities and forces; but other countries do not.

The US is the police of the world. We subsidize security for the world with our tax dollars.

I am off to Hamburg in a few hours, and will discuss Airbus and other matters as I can integrate thoughts.

cheers,