Russia
Breaking Wall St Oil Price Monopoly
By F. William
Engdahl
January 13,
2016 "Information
Clearing House"
- "NEO"
-
Russia has
just taken significant steps that will break the
present Wall Street oil price monopoly, at least for
a huge part of the world oil market. The move is
part of a longer-term strategy of decoupling
Russia’s economy and especially its very significant
export of oil, from the US dollar, today the
Achilles Heel of the Russian economy.
Later in
November the Russian Energy Ministry has announced
that it will begin test-trading of a new Russian oil
benchmark. While this might sound like small beer to
many, it’s huge. If successful, and there is no
reason why it won’t be, the Russian crude oil
benchmark futures contract traded on Russian
exchanges, will price oil in rubles and no longer in
US dollars. It is part of a de-dollarization move
that Russia, China and a growing number of other
countries have quietly begun.
The setting of
an oil benchmark price is at the heart of the method
used by major Wall Street banks to control world oil
prices. Oil is the world’s largest commodity in
dollar terms. Today, the price of Russian crude oil
is referenced to what is called the Brent price. The
problem is that the Brent field, along with other
major North Sea oil fields is in major decline,
meaning that Wall Street can use a vanishing
benchmark to leverage control over vastly larger oil
volumes. The other problem is that the Brent
contract is controlled essentially by Wall Street
and the derivatives manipulations of banks like
Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JP MorganChase and
Citibank.
The
‘Petrodollar’ demise
The sale of
oil denominated in dollars is essential for the
support of the US dollar. In turn, maintaining
demand for dollars by world central banks for their
currency reserves to back foreign trade of countries
like China, Japan or Germany, is essential if the
United States dollar is to remain the leading world
reserve currency. That status as world’s leading
reserve currency is one of two pillars of American
hegemony since the end of World War II. The second
pillar is world military supremacy.
US wars
financed with others’ dollars
Because all
other nations need to acquire dollars to buy imports
of oil and most other commodities, a country such as
Russia or China typically invests the trade surplus
dollars its companies earn in the form of US
government bonds or similar US government
securities. The only other candidate large enough,
the Euro, since the 2010 Greek crisis, is seen as
more risky.
That leading
reserve role of the US dollar, since August 1971
when the dollar broke from gold-backing, has
essentially allowed the US Government to run
seemingly endless budget deficits without having to
worry about rising interest rates, like having a
permanent overdraft credit at your bank.
That in effect
has allowed Washington to create a record $18.6
trillion federal debt without major concern. Today
the ratio of US government debt to GDP is 111%. In
2001 when George W. Bush took office and before
trillions were spent on the Afghan and Iraq “War on
Terror,” US debt to GDP was just half, or 55%. The
glib expression in Washington is that “debt doesn’t
matter,” as the assumption is that the world—Russia,
China, Japan, India, Germany–will always buy US debt
with their trade surplus dollars. The ability of
Washington to hold the lead reserve currency role, a
strategic priority for Washington and Wall Street,
is vitally tied to how world oil prices are
determined.
In the period
up until the end of the 1980’s world oil prices were
determined largely by real daily supply and demand.
It was the province of oil buyers and oil sellers.
Then Goldman Sachs decided to buy the small Wall
Street commodity brokerage, J. Aron in the 1980’s.
They had their eye set on transforming how oil is
traded in world markets.
It was the
advent of “paper oil,” oil traded in futures,
contracts independent of delivery of physical crude,
easier for the large banks to manipulate based on
rumors and derivative market skullduggery, as a
handful of Wall Street banks dominated oil futures
trades and knew just who held what positions, a
convenient insider role that is rarely mentioned inn
polite company. It was the beginning of transforming
oil trading into a casino where Goldman Sachs,
Morgan Stanley, JP MorganChase and a few other giant
Wall Street banks ran the crap tables.
In the
aftermath of the 1973 rise in the price of OPEC oil
by some 400% in a matter of months following the
October, 1973 Yom Kippur war, the US Treasury sent a
high-level emissary to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. In 1975
US Treasury Assistant Secretary, Jack F. Bennett,
was sent to Saudi Arabia to secure an agreement with
the monarchy that Saudi and all OPEC oil will only
be traded in US dollars, not Japanese Yen or German
Marks or any other. Bennett then went to take a high
job at Exxon. The Saudis got major military
guarantees and equipment in return and from that
point, despite major efforts of oil importing
countries, oil to this day is sold on world markets
in dollars and the price is set by Wall Street via
control of the derivatives or futures exchanges such
as Intercontinental Exchange or ICE in London, the
NYMEX commodity exchange in New York, or the Dubai
Mercantile Exchange which sets the benchmark for
Arab crude prices. All are owned by a tight-knit
group of Wall Street banks–Goldman Sachs, JP
MorganChase, Citigroup and others. At the time
Secretary of State Henry Kissinger reportedly
stated, “If you control the oil, you control entire
nations.” Oil has been at the heart of the Dollar
System since 1945.
Russian
benchmark importance
Today, prices
for Russian oil exports are set according to the
Brent price in as traded London and New York. With
the launch of Russia’s benchmark trading, that is
due to change, likely very dramatically. The new
contract for Russian crude in rubles, not dollars,
will trade on the St. Petersburg International
Mercantile Exchange (SPIMEX).
The Brent
benchmark contract are used presently to price not
only Russian crude oil. It’s used to set the price
for over two-thirds of all internationally traded
oil. The problem is that the North Sea production of
the Brent blend is declining to the point today only
1 million barrels Brent blend production sets the
price for 67% of all international oil traded. The
Russian ruble contract could make a major dent in
the demand for oil dollars once it is accepted.
Russia is the
world’s largest oil producer, so creation of a
Russian oil benchmark independent from the dollar is
significant, to put it mildly. In 2013 Russia
produced 10.5 million barrels per day, slightly more
than Saudi Arabia. Because natural gas is mainly
used in Russia, fully 75% of their oil can be
exported. Europe is by far Russia’s main oil
customer, buying 3.5 million barrels a day or 80% of
total Russian oil exports. The Urals Blend, a
mixture of Russian oil varieties, is Russia’s main
exported oil grade. The main European customers are
Germany, the Netherlands and Poland. To put Russia’s
benchmark move into perspective, the other large
suppliers of crude oil to Europe – Saudi Arabia
(890,000 bpd), Nigeria (810,000 bpd), Kazakhstan
(580,000 bpd) and Libya (560,000 bpd) – lag far
behind Russia. As well, domestic production of crude
oil in Europe is declining quickly. Oil output from
Europe fell just below 3 Mb/d in 2013, following
steady declines in the North Sea which is the basis
of the
Brent benchmark.
End to dollar
hegemony good for US
The Russian
move to price in rubles its large oil exports to
world markets, especially Western Europe, and
increasingly to China and Asia via the ESPO pipeline
and other routes, on the new Russian oil benchmark
in the St. Petersburg International Mercantile
Exchange is by no means the only move to lessen
dependence of countries on the dollar for oil.
Sometime early next year China, the world’s
second-largest oil importer, plans to launch its own
oil benchmark contract. Like the Russian, China’s
benchmark will be denominated not in dollars but in
Chinese Yuan. It will be traded on the Shanghai
International
Energy Exchange.
Step-by-step,
Russia, China and other emerging economies are
taking measures to lessen their dependency on the US
dollar, to “de-dollarize.” Oil is the world’s
largest traded commodity and it is almost entirely
priced in dollars. Were that to end, the ability of
the US military industrial complex to wage wars
without end would be in deep trouble.
Perhaps that
would open some doors to more peaceful ideas such as
spending US taxpayer dollars on rebuilding the
horrendous deterioration of basic USA economic
infrastructure. The American Society of Civil
Engineers in 2013 estimated $3.6 trillion of basic
infrastructure investment is needed in the United
States over the next five years. They report that
one out of every 9 bridges in America, more than
70,000 across the country, are deficient. Almost
one-third of the major roads in the US are in poor
condition. Only 2 of 14 major ports on the eastern
seaboard will be able to accommodate the super-sized
cargo ships that will soon be coming through the
newly expanded Panama Canal. There are more than
14,000 miles of high-speed rail operating around the
world, but none in
the United States.
That kind of
basic infrastructure spending would be a far more
economically beneficial source of real jobs and real
tax revenue for the United States than more of John
McCain’s endless wars. Investment in infrastructure,
as I have noted in previous articles, has a
multiplier effect in creating new markets.
Infrastructure creates economic efficiencies and tax
revenues of some 11 to 1 for every one dollar
invested as the economy becomes more efficient.
A dramatic
decline for the role of the dollar as world reserve
currency, if coupled with a Russia-styled domestic
refocus on rebuilding America’s domestic economy,
rather than out-sourcing everything, could go a
major way to rebalance a world gone mad with war.
Paradoxically, the de-dollarization, by denying
Washington the ability to finance future wars by the
investment in US Treasury debt from Chinese, Russian
and other foreign bond buyers, could be a valuable
contribution to genuine world peace. Wouldn’t that
be nice for a change?
F. William
Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer,
he holds a degree in politics from Princeton
University and is a best-selling author on oil and
geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New
Eastern Outlook”.
|