Doing without the Arabs
Nicholas von Hoffman
Washington Mr Reagan called the Israeli raid on the Baghdad atomic installation a 'tragedy', but • he didn't even bother to shake his head from side to side, his characteristic gesture when publicly contemplating political iniquity. The punishment meted out to the Israelis, the temporary and probably brief suspension of shipments of yet more bombers, was hardly crushing in view of the faCt that all other Israeli munitions orders continued to be routinely freighted out of American ports.
The near approval of this latest act by the homicidal dwarf in Jerusalem does not stem from any great concern about nuclear proliferation. Only last January, when asked if he thought that the United States should do anything about other nations acquiring the bomb, Mr Reagan replied, don't think it's any of our business.' Of course, bombs in general and an Iraqi bomb or iLibyan bomb may not be looked upon in the same way. A certain number of people have been trooping about Washington saying, 'Oh, thank heaven for Menachem, he has saved us from having to contend with "the Moslem bomb." The Christian bomb as well as the Jewish bomb and apparently the Confucian bomb are okay — even a Hindu bomb is an admissible if unpleasant thought, but an Islamic or Moslem bomb is not to be imagined. If you ask how that sits in the light of the imminent completion of the Pakistani bomb, they will explain to you in the welter of confused Washington racial and religious stereotypes, 'Oh, but they're not Arabs.' If, however, they were to misbehave they would be demoted to functional Arab status, if I may be pardoned the use of this city's deplorable phraseology.
The powerful men in Washington like a hitter, and that is what Menachem and his fellow Israelies surely are. No talk, no standing around, no negotiating or other unmanly displays, just belt the opposition. The affair seems to have been the occasion for much vicarious pleasure, judging from the ecstatic mumbling murmured out of the Pentagon about the remarkable precision of the air strike, its 'surgical' quality and its flawless execution. The Israelis act the way the Administration would like to if it weren't caught in the tiresome cobwebs spun by every variety of defeatist who persists in discussing consequences and repercussions.
The more ,cosmopolitan of the Reagan entourage may have a glimmer or two of misgivings about the manner in which Begin went public with his triumph. A few persons have been overheard to regret that the Israelis didn't paint Iranian markings on their planes, do the job and then shut up about it. (Remember that the Iranians have the same American manufactured bombers). Their earlier acts of demolition and sabotage against the Iraqis' atomic project were carried out in the stealth that is born of, if not shame, at least misgivings about what others might say. Yet the crowing and the bragging added to the appeal. Only sissies are modest, so there has been the most minimal irritation at being put in the most awkward diplomatic bag since Dwight Eisenhower became inexplicably honest and owned up to American aerial reconnaissance over the Soviet Union.
Our policy makers are also being infected by the suspicion that you can do anything you want to the Arab countries, and there isn't a damn thing they can do about it. The impunity with which the Israelis can bomb, strafe, overfly, conduct commando raids and perform other acts of military acrobatics may contribute tothat view. That Begin could have his fraternal meeting with Sadat and then, within hours, order the Iraqi attack, thereby horribly comprising the Egyptian leader, can only emphasise Arab helplessness. Sadat isn't able to retaliate or even distance himself in any way from Begin's American sponsors.
Even the Saudis, so recently trumpeted here as good Arabs, are now seen as impotent Arabs. The reasoning is that they dare not make friendly overtures towards the Russians and, by succumbing to all manner of luxury, that they have introduced so many potentially disruptive persons and ideas into ,their society that the monarchy is dependent on America's strong arms to keep His Doddering Majesty on his throne. That is one thing we're exceptionally good at, of course: vide his sometime Peacock Majesty, the Shah.
Beyond that, a new way of understanding the oil question is gaining ground. It had been received doctrine in American economics until very recently that the demand for oil was 'inelastic' downward, but infinitely stretchable upward, so that we would have to pay the OPEC bandits (one of the milder terms applied to that now suddenly feeble cartel) whatever the robbers cared to charge. At first, when oil consumption ceased to maintain the rates of increase that had become customary over the last 20 years, it was attributed to recession; but now it is evident that Americans used oil the way they did because the stuff was so cheap. Nobody had ever bothered to economise, much less look seriously at substitutes.
No more, The country is finding ways to make the same number of pounds of manufactured goods and commodities with far less energy than before. Moreover, fuel substitution, notably coal, is happening on a significant scale, especially with electric power generation — which ,accounts for about a quarter of fuel usage. One electric utility is building a very large collier powered by coal-fired turbines.
Several weeks ago General Motors demonstrated two coal-powered automobiles; coal ground to the consistency of powder is puffed by compressed air into a diesel engine which, of course, will run on any combustible substance. The car company said that, even using the most expensive chemical to make the coal pollution-free, the fuel was still 20 to 40 per cent cheaper than oil. Not that the coal-powered car will be in the show rooms before the turn of the century. GM has too many billions tied up in gasoline technology, and that's not even counting the additional billions invested in gasoline stations, oil refineries, pipelines and tankers.
A collateral event is the recent decision by Exxon (Esso), the world's largest oil company, to proceed with the commercialscale development of a shale oil plant in Colorado. The real news is that the company is going ahead without government subsidies. Until now most of the big oil companies had maintained that extraction of oil from shale rock was too exotically expensive. Apparently they now think they have mastered the technology.
The Saudis believe it too, or so it is suspected in New York where their efforts at keeping crude oil prices down is thought to be out of fear that the Americans are wiggling out of their dependency on oil imports faster than anyone would have thought possible five years ago. At 30 or so dollars a barrel, the Middle East can hold its share of the market but, raise the price another ten dollars, as some of the producer countries have wanted, and that crude gets crowded out by its competitors.
Such thoughts of independence may contribute to the sense of power and abandon with which Reagan and his collaborators are conducting themselves abroad. As long as you are a certified non-Russian-Commie type, the United States will sell you any kind of implement of mass slaughter.
Opposition to these policies is spasmodic and sporadic. The Georgia cracker, the titular head of the opposition, was heard from the other day, however: there was an item in the news about his inquiry as to whether, in view of his seven years in the navy, and his four as Commander-in-Chief, he and his family are entitled to shop at the discount price 'FIX stores' at military bases.
Previous page
