Posted on 10-4-2003

Moral Treason In The 21st
by Alan Marston

`To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we
are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and
servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.' Theodore
Roosevelt, 26th US President (1858-1919)

`The U.S. government must ensure that the United States can pursue its
foreign policy and national security interests unconstrained by energy
concerns,' US Undersecretary of State Alan Larson (9 April, 2003)

Which of the two foundational political philosophies do you believe, morals
or money? Keeping in mind that in times of war there is very little room on
the fence and pretty quickly even the fence is destroyed.

The moral argument is transparent, the current US government has
perpetrated yet again an unjust, unnecessary and illegal armed robbery of
another government, namely Iraq, and in so doing the US government's
leading officials have committed themselves to military-political
immorality as State Policy.

The economic argument is transparent, the Bush administration plans to
maintain US corporate hegemony in the key sectors of the global economy,
first of all energy. Yes, by the moral but minor policy of promoting energy
supply diversification but mainly by immoral coercion using the US military
on the international stage to control oil supply to itself by force, while
promoting imperial politics under cover of "encouraging major oil
producing countries to maintain responsible production policies."

Testifying yesterday before a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee, US
Undersecretary of State Alan Larson said that the U.S. economy must have
access to energy "on terms and conditions that support economic growth and
prosperity." He told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Subcommittee on
International Economic Policy, Export and Trade Promotion that the Bush
administration has `signaled' to major oil producing countries that it
expects them to follow through on their offers to offset market
disruptions. Consuming countries on their part stand ready to use strategic
petroleum reserves to calm the market if necessary, he added. Larson said
that energy security cannot be equated with self-sufficiency, "as much as
we would like that to be the case," because the United States and its
allies' demand for imported oil is forecast to grow until at least 2020.
"So we must find more oil and gas supplies, and these supplies must be
reliable and made available on terms that permit sustained economic
growth," he said.

Larson said that the world needs a "highly flexible, resilient oil market
that will allow for some regions to compensate for ebbs and flows in
others." And that "...despite frequently expressed concerns about
"dependence" on the Middle East, Gulf producers will continue to play an
"indispensable" role in the world oil market. Larson cautioned that due to
complex relationships between political, economic and security
considerations "energy security will not be achieved by one dramatic
breakthrough but rather by sustained, patient and determined efforts."

Only the politically illiterate could not read between the lines of the
current US administration and see in bold capital letters, oil before all.
That is moral treason. The world needs regime change? Yes, in the USA, if
democracy is not to drown in a tsunami of immorality and hypocrisy.