But President Trump never says what Iraq's “oil grab” actually means. That is, the occupation forces in the Persian Gulf are endlessly surrounded by enemies, have no allies, and are hopelessly isolated from the Islamic world. It would have to be an unrestricted occupation, which would make America more polarized than ever before. It would reinvigorate global jihad and humiliate our fundamental values as a nation.
There have been several foreign policy fiascos over the past 15 years, but this puts the Republican Party on track to experience the biggest foreign policy fiasco in American history.
Iraq's oil is distributed throughout the country, with reserves in the north and south, but the largest quantities are in and around the southern province of Basra. Trump says he is against the Iraq war, so he has no intention of occupying all of Iraq. A lower-cost approach would therefore be to seize Basra and its surrounding oil infrastructure. He said last week that he would “leave certain groups in place” to preserve America's oil wealth. That group must be the American military.
Clearly, Iraqis will resist the loss and indefinite occupation of their most lucrative territory, so a permanent U.S. military presence in Basra will be necessary. How big a presence is depends on how much resistance it faces.
Basra province has a population of more than 2.5 million people, almost all of whom are Shiite Arabs, so their resistance alone will be difficult. But they are not alone. The Shi'ite-majority government in Baghdad will support its people and further intensify the struggle. It will divert attention from the fight for Mosul and focus on restoring Basra.
It will be a brutal war. Basra, the provincial capital, is the hottest place on earth, with this summer recording the highest temperatures ever recorded on Earth.
Basra is located right next to Iran and controls the eastern side of the Shatt al-Arab waterway, Iraq's only outlet to the sea. The Iranian government is certain to support the Shiite resistance movement in Basra, just as it did when Britain occupied the province after the 2003 invasion. For the British military, it was a painful, expensive, and thankless mission.
While Iran may be careful to avoid provoking an all-out war with President Trump by supporting resistance too openly, it is in a favorable position to create constant friction and difficulties for occupation forces and oil extraction. there will be. Iran's own oil is located in neighboring Khuzistan province. Iran fought an eight-year war to stop Saddam Hussein from seizing its oil. Will definitely reconsider the decision to postpone getting the bomb.
To escape Iraq's narrow bottleneck in access to the sea, President Trump could extend the oil grab further south to Kuwait. After all, we liberated Kuwait from Saddam Hussein a quarter of a century ago. According to Trump's logic, why not take their oil (and their country) as expired spoils?
The occupation of Basra, if it has not already done so, will unite the Arab and Muslim worlds against the United States.
Capturing Kuwait will add an additional 3 million people to the occupied territory. It also adds more oil and major Gulf ports. The United States already has a significant military presence in Kuwait, which could form the core of an occupation force. But more will be needed.
All oil exporters in the region will oppose the takeover because they believe they could be next. They could ban oil exports to cause a global oil crisis, but that would hit Europe, China, and India harder than America. They will complain to the United Nations, but with a veto it will be in vain.
They may support resistance to American occupation. That would give Trump more oil. Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province and Qatar are obvious targets. A major acquisition like this would give Washington control of the world's energy system. It also means that more territory and people will be under the control of occupying forces, including hundreds of thousands of American men and women.
President Trump started saying this long before the so-called Islamic State threatened the region and the United States, but now he says he sees it as part of the fight against ISIS.
Indeed, America's “grabbing of oil” would immediately destroy the coalition fighting the Islamic State and undermine the fight against al-Qaeda. Both terrorist organizations will claim they were right all along: America just wanted Islamic oil. The two rivals may meet again. Recruitment of extremist fighters will skyrocket.
Recruitment of extremist fighters will skyrocket.
The Islamic State will not host U.S. troops or cooperate in counterterrorism operations. Friendly Arab governments like Jordan will face major upheaval unless they sever ties with Washington. Americans traveling in the Islamic world, from Morocco to Indonesia, would be at risk. Sunnis and Shiites alike will stalk Americans.
None of our Western allies will support an oil grab. (Canada will wonder if Alberta is next.) Europeans will see such naked land grabs as a return to the days of Hitler and Stalin.
Russia, on the other hand, will argue that its occupation of Crimea was justified after the fact. Trump and Vladimir Putin will become fellow war criminals. China will want to exert more influence in the South China Sea. The growing rapprochement between the United States and India will be in jeopardy, if not completely destroyed.
Pakistan will redouble its efforts to build more nuclear weapons to prevent a fate like Iraq's. Saudi Arabia will offer Islamabad a large sum of money for the bomb. Pakistan's generals will be tempted.
In other words, the world order based on the principle that territorial seizure by force is unacceptable will collapse. The world order shaped by generations of American leaders of both parties will be threatened like never before by our country.
This is not the first time the idea of stealing Arab oil has been floated in the United States. The idea of seizing Saudi oil emerged in 1973-1974 after Saudi Arabia's King Faisal imposed an oil embargo on the United States for supporting Israel in the 1973 war. This area was openly discussed in the country's foreign policy think tanks. If President Richard Nixon had ordered the takeover, Faisal undoubtedly would have called for jihad to protect the birthplace of Islam. His younger brother King Salman will do the same today.
Oil exploitation is the most dangerous and irresponsible of the Republican candidates' policy proposals. It's something he has repeated over and over again. If you want permanent wars in the Middle East and a massive culture clash between Islam and America, that's your best bet.
