Even the most politically naive American is aware of the political influence exerted by the oil and automobile industries upon government. So it was no surprise that one of the first acts Republican president Ronald Reagan passed upon assuming office was to abolish the federal agency responsible for the development of alternative sources of fuel. What else could have been expected from a man who represented the political party married to the oil and automobile industries?

That was over 20 years ago. Today, the U.S. is still dependent upon oil as its main source of energy and the Near East is its main supplier. It's frustrating to wonder what new technologies the republic might have had today had that agency been properly funded and encouraged to do what it was created to do. But let's not cry over spilt milk, the sad reality is that the power of oil and profit long has pulled the strings of the executive branch of our federal government, and everyone knows it.

Four years ago, on February 12, 1998, John J. Maresca, Vice President, International Relations of Unocal Corporation, one of the world's leading energy resource and project development companies, gave testimony before the House Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific concerning "Central Asia oil and gas reserves and the role they play in shaping U.S. policy." Maresca and his company wanted the blessing of Congress to develop these resources.

Mr. Maresca began his testimony by itemizing his company's three issues of concern. To quote, they were:

1. The need for multiple pipeline routes for Central Asian oil and gas.

2. The need for U.S. support for international and regional efforts to achieve balanced and lasting political settlements within Russia, other newly independent states, and in Afghanistan.

3. The need for structured assistance to encourge economic reforms and the development of appropriate investment climates in the region. In this regard, we specifically support repeal or removal of Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act—Section 907 restricts U.S. government assistance to the government of Azerbaijan and limits U.S. influence in the region.

"Much of the "untapped hydrocarbon reserves of the Caspian region," he said, "are in the Caspian Sea basin itself. Proven natural gas reserves within Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan equal more than 236 trillion cubic feet. The region's total oil reserves may reach more than 60 billion barrels of oil, enough to service Europe's oil needs for 11 years."

Then he got to the heart of the matter "...the area's natural resources are landlocked, both geographically and politically. Each of the countries in the Caucasus and Central Asia faces difficult political challenges. Some have unsettled wars or latent conflicts. Others have evolving systems where the laws.and even the courts are dynamic and changing. Business commitments can be rescinded without warning, or they can be displaced by new geopolitical realities..."

The great appeal of this region is in its unique position to service both European and Asian markets "if export routes to these markets can be built." He told of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium's plans to build a pipeline from the Northern Caspian to the Russian Black Sea port of Novorossisk, from which it "would be transported by tanker through the Bosphorus to the Mediterranean and world markets."

Another project, sponsored by the Azerbaijan International Operating Company, a consortium of 11 foreign oil companies including four American companies "Unocal, Amoco, Exxon and Pennzoil," will follow one or both of two routes west from Baku. One line will angle north and cross the North Caucasus to Novorossisk. The other route would cross Georgia and extend to a shipping terminal on the Black Sea port of Supsa. This second route may be extended west and south across Turkey to the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan.

"But," he cautioned, "even if both pipelines were built, they would not have enough total capacity to transport all the oil expected to flow from the region in the future; nor would they have the capability to move it to the right markets. Other export pipelines must be built."

Mr. Maresca then went on to give an analysis of the potential markets.

"Western Europe," he said, "is characterized by high prices for oil products, an aging population, and increasing competition from natural gas... Although there is perhaps room for some of Central Asia's oil, the Western European market is unlikely to be able to absorb all of the production from the Caspian region."

"Central and Eastern Europe markets do not look any better. Like Western Europe, this market is also very competitive. In addition to supplies of oil from the North Sea, Africa and the Middle East, Russia supplies the majority of the oil to this region. The growth in demand for oil also will be weak in the Newly Independent States (NIS). We expect Russian and other NIS markets to increase demand by only 1.2 percent annually between 1997 and 2010."

"In stark contrast to the other three markets, the Asia/Pacific region has a rapidly increasing demand for oil...Energy demand growth will remain strong for one key reason: the region's population is expected to grow by 700 million people by 2010...It is in everyone's interests that there be adequate supplies for Asia's increasing energy requirements. If Asia's energy needs are not satisfied, they will simply put pressure on all world markets, driving prices upwards everywhere."

Maresca then went on to suggest two possible solutions—with variations.

Option One: east across China by constructing a pipeline of more than 3,000 kilometers to central China-as well as a 2,000 kilometer connection to reach the main population centers along the coast. China National Petroleum Corporation is considering building a pipeline east from Kazakhstan to Chinese markets.

Option Two: to build a shorter pipeline south across Iran to the Indian Ocean. This option is foreclosed for American companies because of U.S. sanctions legislation.

The only other possible route option is across Afghanistan, which Marcesa pointed out, "has its own unique challenges. The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost two decades, and the territory across which the pipeline would extend is controlled by the Taliban, an Islamic movement that is not recognized as a government by most other nations."

"From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of our proposed pipeline cannot begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders and our company. In spite of this," he continued, "a route through Afghanistan appears to be the best option with the fewest technical obstacles. It is the shortest route to the sea and has relatively favorable terrain for a pipeline. The route through Afghanistan is the one that would bring Central Asian oil closest to Asian markets and thus would be the cheapest in terms of transporting the oil."

The 1,040-mile-long oil pipeline would begin near the town of Chardzhou, in northern Turkmenistan, and extend southeasterly through Afghanistan to an export terminal that would be constructed on the Pakistan coast on the Arabian Sea. Only about 440 miles of pipeline would be in Afghanistan.

Marcese pointed out that a study for the World Bank claimed the proposed pipeline from Central Asia across Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Arabian Sea would provide more favorable netbacks to oil producers through access to higher value markets than those currently being accessed through the traditional Baltic and Black Sea export routes. He claimed that U.S. assistance in developing these new economies will be crucial to business success and asked for strong technical assistance programs throughout the region. He closed by reminding the committee that Unocol urges "repeal or removal of Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act."

Fast forward four years to the months following September 11th 2001. The unelected American president has declared war not only against a Muslim named Osama bin Laden, but against the ruling Taliban party of Afghanistan. American forces have destroyed the "enemy," claimed the unelected president. Although, how American trops could tell the difference between young men trained to hate and kill Americans from those merrely fighting American invaders of their homeland remains a mystery.

Indications are that thousands of innocent Afghanistan citizens were killed by "pinpoint" American firepower. Conveniently, in the last days of fighting, Americans killed some of the warlords opposed to the U.S. choice for Afghanistan's political leadership. This leaves a new political environment in the country, one receptive to Washington's plans and financial assistance.

The tiny country of Georgia, the quiet 10-mile patch of land nestled in the Caucusus Mountains bordering Chechnya—the republic which broke away from Russia—has been promised $60-million in American assistance. On the assumption that Taliban and Al-Qaeda rebels may hide or travel through Georgia while seeking safer hideouts, part of the funding is to be used to arm and train "anti-terrorist squads."

The tiny country of Yemin is also scheduled to receive American funding and American troops to train anti-terrorist government squads. The country will also get U.S. assistance to form a Yemini coast guard.

Can you see the big picture?

Unocol wanted the American government's assistance to stabilize the Caspian region to make it feasible and profitable for oil interests to develop their pipelines through the area. Afghanistan has now been "stabilized:" The Taliban and other warlords opposing American plans have been chased away and the Pakistani government has pledged to support American policies.

But with its betrayal of the people and their beliefs, in exchange for Washington's largesse, the Pakistani government plays a dangerous game that could jeopardize the American Administration's plans.

Georgia is one of the proposed options across which the pipeline sponsored by the Azerbaijan International Operating Company will follow west from Baku to a shipping terminal on the Black Sea port of Supsa. A Yemeni coast guard—and U.S. advisors—will control strategic Arabian Sea shipping lanes over which the oil will be transported.

Because it looks like an American-inspired conspiracy, walks like an American-inspired conspiracy, and sounds like an American-inspired conspiracy, isn't it possible that the American invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were American-inspired conspiracies—long before 9/11?