In the year 10,191 A.G., the orange spice mélange is the most precious substance in the universe. The spice gives the Bene Gessirit sisterhood their metaphysical abilities to see beyond. It brings about accelerated evolution among the Navigators of the Spacing Guild, the only means by which interstellar and intergalactic travel is possible. It extends normal human life by decades, centuries. But spice is remarkably rare, only found on one planet in the universe, a dry, desolate otherwise uninteresting desert wasteland called Arrakis --- or Dune. The Emperor of the known universe, numerous powerful feudal houses and the spice-mining CHOAM Corporation knows that the stability of the universe is contingent upon their ability to control Arrakis and its invaluable orange commodity. The Bene Gessirit and the Guild, also understanding their dependence on spice, stand by as silent partners. The native peoples of Arrakis, the Fremen, are inconsequential to the equation---though they too see the importance of spice. When bickering among noble houses of the Landsraad threatens spice production the concerned Guild dispatches a 3^rd stage Navigator to planet Kaitan, home to the Padishah Emperor Shaddam IV, to demand answers. The spice must flow ...

Or so goes the intro to the David Lynch version of Frank Herbert’s fictional futuristic universe of feudal societies, messianic saviors, god-kings and ill-tempered giant worms. Herbert was using symbolism to speak on a very real issue he saw in the 1950s and 60s. The orange spice mélange was oil. And the global battle to control it became the backdrop for his tale. That brings us to the second part in our story.

The tactic for control of oil in the Middle East from the 1950s to late 1980s was to play off various sides against each other. No one oil producing state was to get too strong militarily, for it could threaten all others, throw the region into chaos and result in a single power monopolizing the precious black substance for themselves. After backing Iraq in its war with Iran for eight years, the US had gotten what it wanted: a near nullified fundamentalist Iran, always seen as the greater threat. But the problem was that Saddam Hussein’s regime, which America in great part helped to create, now loomed as a possible menace. It was time to not only end the love affair, but cripple the former partner as well.

By 1989, only a year after its war with Iran, Iraq was vocally rumbling about invading Kuwait---giving a host of reasons including accusations that the smaller nation was stealing its oil. The US heard, but did or said little. In fact on July 25, 1990 when US Ambassador April Glaspie went to Iraq, she stated directly to Saddam Hussein that the US had no opinion on Arab-Arab conflicts in the region---particularly between Iraq and Kuwait. Yet that wasn’t true at all.

The US was in fact very concerned about conflicts in the region. That was why when Iran (non-Arabs but still nearby) began threatening Kuwaiti tankers the US sent its fleet into the Persian Gulf and destroyed a vast portion of the Iranian navy. It was for this same reason that they had backed Iraq in its war with Iran to begin with. So why would the US ambassador lead Hussein to believe America was neutral in regional disputes when it clearly was not? Did Glaspie simply misspeak? Or was her carefully worded statement an enticement to Hussein? Was she giving their soon to be former ally a green light to attack his neighbor and thus lending the US a pretense to cut his regime down to size? The debate and suspicion continue to this day. But what is factual is that on August 2, 1990, exactly eight days after Glaspie’s possible wordplay, Iraq invaded the small oil-rich nation of Kuwait.

But if Hussein thought invading Kuwait would be met with the same US indifference and international complexity of his invasion of Iran, he was dead wrong. Kuwait was not deemed a “rogue” fundamentalist nation. Never mind that it was hardly a democracy. Never mind that freedom in the small nation was severely limited. Never mind that only a few weeks earlier, Amnesty International had accused the Kuwaiti government of jailing dozens of dissidents and torturing them without trial. All of that would never put Kuwait on the Iran “rogue nation” list. Kuwait had something better than freedom, easily accessible and well-priced oil. That gave it strong ties everywhere, democracy be damned.

Hussein also seriously misjudged the world’s changing political climate. If he was looking for some Communist vs. Capitalist era backing, he was too late. The Soviet Union was swiftly crumbling and had already ceased to influence global affairs as it had just years earlier. The Cold War had all but fully melted. In Iran, the Ayatollah Khomeini was gone --- passing away in 1989. Iran was still fundamentalist, but hardly a danger. In this newly emerging world Iraq had outlived its usefulness to the US, and to anyone. Worse still, it was now seen as the major peril to oil interests in the region. And there were no superpowers to play off each other or claims of stemming fundamentalism with which to score points. The love affair between Iraq and the US was officially over.

Hussein’s Iraq went overnight from America’s part-time sweetheart, to a tyrannical monster that had to be stopped at all cost. It was claimed that not only had Iraq violated the sovereignty of Kuwait, but that it threatened its neighbors like Saudi Arabia. At the time a great deal was made of Iraqi troops massing near the Saudi border. Today however there is dispute as to whether Hussein had any ideas on taking the country at all. Talk of chemical and biological weapons suddenly became rampant from US government officials, though Iraq’s deadly arsenal had been known of for half a decade. Some anti-Iraq propaganda even went as far as claiming that Iraqi troops were taking babies out of incubators. It would be years later that everyone learned this accusation was false, cooked up by a Kuwaiti backed ad campaign with US blessings.

But half-truths, old political ties and the like didn’t matter. The US under George W. Bush Sr., who had just earlier that year spoken of Iraq as an ally, rallied together a multi-national force not seen since WWII. The UN went along with hardly a voice of opposition. Why? Well basically put everyone in the world had an interest in oil. No one had an interest in Saddam Hussein’s regime. From Russia to China, no one saw a need to cuddle up next to a brutal dictator. Cutthroat imperialist capitalists were much more attractive. Besides, they were as interested in oil as the US. And they didn’t want see anyone in the region monopolize the precious commodity. There was also another issue. America was no doubt going to push Iraq out of Kuwait. Anyone who didn’t sign on, or at least give their blessings, could find itself shut out of the oil game once Kuwait was liberated.

So with a world united to protect oil (forget what you heard about democracy), in a rather short time Iraq was delivered a crushing and humiliating defeat. Tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers were killed in the process. But the US stopped short of removing Saddam Hussein from power. And today many people still ask why. Here’s a short answer: regional stability.

Removing Hussein from power and utterly decimating Iraq would have left the US back in the same situation: a shift in the balance of power to another Mid East state, possibly Iran again. The goal was to knock Hussein back down to size, not get rid of him altogether. With the various factions competing for power in Iraq, eliminating Hussein would leave the country in chaos---and ripe for an Iranian attack or even an Iranian-backed, fundamentalist puppet government. Hussein in power and holding together a somewhat stable Iraq could be contained. Hussein taken out of power and having to exercise direct control over the Iraqi government was a complex headache no one wanted.

The beaten Iraqi regime pulled out of Kuwait with a once powerful military greatly reduced and left in shambles---as was intended. Having to endure the humiliation that comes with losing any war, Iraq was made to submit to weapons inspections and various other policies including a “No-Fly-Zone” enacted above the 36^th parallel in its northern region and UN sanctions. All seemed finished and done with---but not quite.

For a decade the “Iraqi problem” would surface repeatedly under a different president. Iraq began to contest the “No-Fly-Zone,” which technically has no real UN backing and has been called illegal by other countries. In fact it is now patrolled by only the US and Britain (France refuses to participate any longer) who engage in near daily bombing campaigns against claimed Iraqi infractions into the region. Partly due to this as well as a host of economic sanctions, Iraq hampered the efforts of UN weapons inspectors --- even barring some from certain sites with armed guards. According to US intelligence, Hussein was even planning an assassination attempt on ex President Bush Sr. All of this resulted in numerous military strikes against the defeated nation, continued isolation and the general demonizing of its leadership. Some began to grumble that leaving Hussein in power was proving to be a bigger headache than getting rid of him would have been. There were those who suggested the US go back in, finish the job started in the Gulf War and accept the consequences. But with a booming mid 90s economy, no one had the stomach for it. If change in Iraq was going to happen, let it be by a coup rather than outside interference. For now Iraq would simply be declared an eternal “rogue state” and “containment” would be used to rein in their old ally. Whatever kept the spice flowing with minimum danger and risk was fine. Then came the 21^st century and September 11^th, 2001.

After the infamous terrorist attacks they will never allow us to ever forget, an already hawkish Republican administration set its eyes on Iraq. Even before the attacks there were rumblings over Hussein. And after fully dispensing of the Taliban in Afghanistan, the White House began using new terms like “regime change” and “pre-emptive strike” --- all in the name of a ‘War on Terrorism.’ Why the change? The answer lays not in Iraq or even Iran, but in Osama Bin Laden. Better put it has to do with his homeland, Saudi Arabia.

Since the 1960s the relationship between the US and Saudi Arabia has been generally amicable. The equation for this very different love affair was also based on oil. The Saudis provided affordable, accessible oil and the US in turn gave it military equipment and protection. But it was not always a match made in heaven. With Saudi Arabia’s control of OPEC, the partnership could get rocky as seen in the 1973 Oil Embargo Crisis. The US never liked the bargaining chip the Saudis held over them, threatening to cut off oil or raise prices at a whim. But America played along because there were little options available. September 11^th changed that thinking.

Not only Osama Bin Laden, but also 15 of the 19 Al-Queda hijackers were of Saudi descent. And though outwardly relations between the US and the oil rich Arab nation seemed fine, there was inner turmoil. Numerous American officials and energy interest groups had been complaining about the Saudis for some time. They had warned the US that its dependence on Saudi Arabia as a chief oil source was a bad idea. The political and social climate in the nation was volatile. The monarchy’s rule was waning and in the end, the nation would be more trouble than it was worth. After 9-11 and the role of Saudi nationals in the plot, their voices went into uproar.

The Bush Jr. administration, already tiresome of the Saudis, began to seriously look elsewhere for oil. The term was “diversification.” Even before then they had spoken of drilling in their own backyard and tapping their own reserves. New resources began to surface in Africa, South America and Central Asia. But still, none of them could rival the cheap accessibility and sheer depth of Mid East oil. After September 11^th, relying on Saudi Arabia was no longer a sure option---those Fremen couldn’t be trusted. But unlike Frank Herbert’s Dune and the rarity of spice, there was another major source of oil---Iraq.

It just so happens that Iraq sits on the world’s second largest reserve of oil. The country pumps out something approaching 2.6 million barrels a day, and could double that amount with proper investment. There’s literally a sea of the slick, black stuff under the desert sand. The problem is, that sand is controlled by Iraq. And if dealing with the decadent Saudi monarchy is problematic, bargaining with a megalomaniac dictator like Hussein is considered near impossible. Not only does his regime sit on a wealth of oil, but also the threat it poses (or rather the feared speculative threat it could pose) is the key reason the US is so deeply in bed with Saudi Arabia to begin with.

For the US administration it was essentially a “no-brainer” (must have been Cheney’s idea). Getting rid of Saddam Hussein was now worth the price. With Hussein gone an American friendly regime could be set up. An entirely new chapter in oil resources could be written. No more Hussein meant no more costly military containment. A second vast oil reserve would take away the Saudi advantage. And if the US was the one to topple Hussein, it could make certain the new government was forever indebted to its “liberators”—the US. Gratitude would come in untold years of affordable, accessible oil. Two birds, one stone.

The War on Terrorism provided a perfect opportunity. The Bush Jr. administration pulled out old plans that had been mulled over about Iraq. Policy advisors dusted them off and began to set them in motion. So today, a decade and more later, the world now sits on the brink of war with Iraq again. Yet this time, things aren’t exactly the same---and I’m not just talking about the least bright of the Bush clan being in the oval office. The world isn’t eager for war. Major global players already have plans. And unlike the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein smells the trap and isn’t sticking his neck out onto the chopping block.

The battle for spice is as complicated as it ever was.

End of Part II.

MORPHEUS- Exposin Fake Shyt

The views and opinions expressed herein by the author do not necessarily represent the opinions or position of Playahata.com.