Fracking Insane - scientific evidence shows fracking causes illness by contaminating water and air with methane gas and toxic chemicals

The only reports saying it doesn’t are funded by the companies involved in fracking

Fracking or ‘hydraulic fracturing’ for shale gas has been being carried out for decades in the US and has now been approved by the British Coalition government (including Lib Dem minister Chris Hune) in Lancashire, including near Blackpool and by the Scottish SNP government in Scotland near Dumfries – with plans for more elsewhere (1) – (2).

 This is either a major mistake due to governments being taken in by propaganda and supposedly objective scientific studies funded by the companies involved; or else they are selling out the people they're meant to represent.

Oil companies who want to carry out ‘fracking’ (hydraulic fracturing) for gas are constantly claiming that there is ‘no evidence’ that fracking causes pollution of ground water or drinking water and no evidence it causes illnesses due to chemical and methane gas poisoning.

That claim is completely false. There’s lots of evidence of methane gas pollution of drinking water and ground water caused by fracking, found over decades, right up to the present ; and some recent evidence of chemicals used in fracking polluting water supplies.

The Evidence that Fracking causes air and water pollution with methane gas and fracking chemicals and serious illness

There’s a 1987 US environmental Protection Agency report on methane pollution of water supplies due to fracking in the mid-1980s in the US (3).

Those details of that report were not publicised by the EPA at the time for the same reason that most investigations of the effects of fracking are withheld for decades in the US - because big companies involved in fracking threatened people with law suits and legal bills they couldn’t afford if they continued to mention it ; and offered massive pay outs for ‘sealed court’ settlements on the other hand.

There are also recent scientific studies of dozens of fracking operations which found that ‘In aquifers overlying the Marcellus and Utica shale formations of northeastern Pennsylvania and upstate New York, we document systematic evidence for methane contamination of drinking water associated with shale-gas extraction.’ (4)

There are also studies from 1999 to the present showing levels of methane in well water in areas where fracking has taken place being vastly greater than in other areas – often high enough to cause explosions (5) – (7).

The US EPA has also recently found evidence of pollution of water in Wyoming with chemicals used in fracking there (8).

The documentary film ‘gasland’, which showed people made seriously ill by air and water pollution and tapwater which could be set on fire as a result of fracking, is constantly attacked as ‘propaganda’ and ‘unscientific’ by the oil and gas companies and their lawyers. In fact it is supported by all of the above scientific evidence; and the main critics of Gasland have been revealed as industry front groups – especially Energy in Depth, whose funders are all companies involved in fracking (9) – (10).

BBC reports from Pennsylvania show the same problem – tapwater so full of methane and other chemicals that it can be set on fire – as the Gasland documentary did , as well as the same serious illnesses among residents within days of fracking beginning, including barium poisoning (11).

Many of the supposedly objective scientific studies of fracking which claim there’s no evidence it pollutes water supplies are directly or indirectly funded by the oil and gas companies involved in fracking.

Even one of these studies (by the Swanson School of Engineering at the University of Pittsburgh) admits that ‘Air pollution is another factor that must be taken into consideration. Near the end of the well development, there is a practice called flaring that is used to get rid of the waste gas that is not able to be used. The excess gas is essentially set ablaze, leaving flames spewing far into the sky, burning for days on end, and emitting a significant amount of noxious gases.’ (12)

The Swanson study quotes it’s ‘additional resources’ as including  another supposedly objective academic study ‘The Economic Impacts of the Marcellus Shale: Implications for New York, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia’ which was a study funded by the ‘Marcellus Shale Coalition’, which factcheck.org found is in fact a trade association of companies involved in fracking for gas in the US (13) – (15).

A look at the full members of the Marcellus Shale Coalition and the funders of Energy in Depth shows they are the same companies (16) – (17).

Reports by the Pittsburgh Post Gazette found the Universities of Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania are among those who refuse to provide details on what departments and studies were funded by private companies, let alone which private companies; and that campus associations and other proxy groups of these universities are taking money from the oil and gas companies for fracking operations on land owned by the universities, giving their studies of fracking another source of bias and conflict of interest (18) – (19).

Unsurprisingly the Swanson report  ends with the standard (and false) industry line that ‘It is important to note that not one case of pollution due to hydraulic fracturing has ever been recorded, though there have been occurrences due to other stages of the drilling process’ (my emphasis) (20)

The second part of the sentence seems to be making a distinction which in practice reveals how dishonest the first part of the sentence is. It’s just a semantic trick - playing with words by pretending that the stage of the fracking process which causes methane gas or chemical pollution of water supplies makes any difference.

The costs of fracking vastly outweigh the benefits

What will the costs be in terms of polluting farmland and drinking water supplies if fracking is allowed to continue? What will the cost be to the NHS and in lives of making large numbers of people ill , requiring treatment and unable to work, from methane and chemical pollution of drinking water and air due to fracking? What will be the cost in lives as people start dying due to fracking pollution of air and water supplies? How can jobs for some justify illness and death for far more people?

Is the plan perhaps that the number of people who die will reduce the unemployment statistics in the long run and that any who become too ill to work in the meantime will be classed as disabled rather than unemployed?

Any local council or national government giving permission for fracking is failing to protect the health and lives of it’s own people and is opening itself up to legal action and massive costs in the future, plus the responsibility for allowing the illness and death of large numbers of people and pollution that may last long after any jobs provided by fracking are gone. We have other industries we can create jobs and provide energy with – wind power, wave power and tidal power.

The economic benefit of the jobs created will be cancelled out by the bill in illness, death and increased food costs as polluting ground water will also reduce food production by killing crops and animals.

With climate change increasing droughts and the spread of desert and water use draining acquifers and rivers to the point they can’t recover across the world from California to the Middle East, water may be the ‘blue gold’ of the twenty first century (21) – (23). Permanently polluting it for gas supplies that may last only a few decades is not wise either.

What You Can Do

In Scotland:

Email First Minister Alec Salmond on this address -  Alex.Salmond.msp@scottish.parliament.uk and the Scottish cabinet scottish.ministers@scotland.gsi.gov.uk citing the scientific evidence from the US that fracking causes air and water pollution and serious illnesses and asking them to ban fracking in Scotlandon those grounds .

Please also forward this email,  or send an email with a link to this blog post to everyone you know who might sign.

In Wales:

Email the First Minister carwyn.jones@wales.gsi.gov.uk

Please also forward this email,  or send an email with a link to this blog post to everyone you know who might sign.

In England or anywhere in the UK

Sign the  UK government e-peitition calling for total ban on fracking in the UK, and/or the petition for a moratorium until further study .

You can email Prime Minister David Cameron on this link or write to him by post on the address on this link.

You can email UK Energy Minister Chris Huhne at this address ps.chris.huhne@decc.gsi.gov.uk.

To contact your local councillor, MP, MSP or member of the London, Welsh or Northern Ireland Assemblies go to this link.

Support the campaign to get 38 degrees to start a campaign against fracking in Scotland, England and Wales – add a comment and give 3 votes to the suggestion (this is not vote rigging – 38 degrees allows people 7 votes on what campaign suggestions it should take up at any time).

Please also forward this email, or send an email with a link to this blog post, to everyone you know who might sign.

In the US

You can contact your elected representatives at any level of government through the contact details on this website , refer them to the studies showing fracking causes air and water pollution and serious illnesses and ask them to call for a ban on it.

There are also petitions you can sign up to including Save the Water Table’s petition to ban fracking.

Please also forward this email, or send an email with a link to this blog post, to everyone you know who might sign.

Sources

(1) = Guardian.co.uk 02 Nov 2011 ‘Fracking 'probable' cause of Lancashire quakes’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/02/fracking-cause-lancashire-quakes

(2) = Scotland on Sunday 05 Nov 2011 ‘Fracking’ for gas given the green light’,  http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/scotland/fracking_for_gas_given_the_green_light_1_1950654

(3) = US Environmental Protection Agency 1987 ‘Report to Congress – Management of Wastes from the Exploration, Development and Production of Crude Oil, Natural Gas and Geothermal Energy – Volume 1 of 3 – Oil and Gas’,http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/drilling-down-documents-7.html

(4) = Osborn, Stephen G et al (2011) ‘Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing’in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences May 17, 2011 vol. 108 no. 20 8172-8176http://www.pnas.org/content/108/20/8172.short

(5) = Holzman, DC (2011) ‘Methane Found in Well Water Near Fracking Sites’ in Environ Health Perspectives 119 (01 Jul 1999),http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.119-a289

(6) = AP 5/9/2011 ‘Methane in water near gas drilling sites, study finds’,http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42964307/ns/us_news-environment/t/methane-water-near-gas-drilling-sites-study-finds/#.TuPXPHpU2uI

(7) = CNN money 10 May 2011 ‘Tainted drinking water found near gas wells’, http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/09/news/economy/natural_gas_fracking_duke/index.htm

(8) = Bloomberg 12 Dec 2011 ‘Wyoming’s Tainted Water Puts Pressure on EPA to Act on Gas Fracking’,http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-12/wyoming-s-tainted-water-pressures-epa-on-to-act-on-gas-fracking.html

(9) = http://www.gaslandthemovie.com/

(10) = The Independent Petroleum Association of America 05 Jun 2009 ‘Hydraulic Fracturing under attack’,http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/HFUnderFire.pdf , ‘The "Energy In Depth" project would not be possible without the early financial commitments of: El Paso Corporation, XTO Energy, Occidental Petroleum, BP, Anadarko, Marathon, EnCana, Chevron, Talisman, Shell, API, IPAA, Halliburton, Schlumberger and the Ohio Oil and Gas Association.’

(11) = BBC news 28 Nov 2011 ‘How fracking affects a community in Pennsylvania’,  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-15919248

(12) = Korey A. Kirker & Ryan N. Burger (2011) ‘JUST THE FRACKING FACTS’, Swanson School of Engineering 9 April 20011, University of Pittsburgh , Eleventh Annual Freshman Conference, http://region8water.colostate.edu/PDFs/1267.pdf

(13) = see (10) above)

(14) = Condisine, Timothy J et al (2011) ‘The Pennsylvania Marcellus Natural Gas Industry: Status, Economic Impacts, and Future Potential’, Pennsylvania State University College of Earth and Mineral Sciences Department of Energy and Mineral Engineering http://marcelluscoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Final-2011-PA-Marcellus-Economic-Impacts.pdf , p ii ‘Acknowledgements The authors of this study acknowledge that the Marcellus Shale Coalition provided the funding for this study.’

(15) = Factcheck.org 14 Oct 2011 ‘Just the Fracking Facts’, http://www.factcheck.org/2011/10/just-the-fracking-facts/

(16) = Marcellus Shale Coalition – Full Members, http://marcelluscoalition.org/about/full-members/

(17) = See (10) above

(18) = Pittsburgh Post Gazette 07 Nov 2011 ‘Corporate funding of Marcellus Shale studies at universities raises alarms’http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11311/1188150-503.stm#ixzz1gApAdRyG  (details companies involved in fracking funding studies of fracking at American universities, some of whom refuse to provide details of who funds research – including Pennsylvania State University and the University of Pittsburgh)

(19) = Pittsburg Post Gazette 06 Nov 2011 ‘Drilling on Campus: Marcellus Shale boom puts colleges at crossroads’, http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11310/1187594-113.stm#ixzz1gB2BK1jO (details how students associations and campus groups in Pennsylvania university are selling drilling rights for fracking operations to companies on campus)

(20) = See (12) above

(21) = Reuters 14 Dec 2009 ‘California aquifers seen rapidly losing water’, http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/12/15/us-water-california-idUSTRE5BE0FP20091215

(22) = US geological survey ‘Groundwater depletion’, http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/gwdepletion.html

(23) = BBC News 06 Oct 2009 ‘Jordan faces up to water crisis’, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8292228.stm

Libya : Why military intervention by the US, Egypt or Tunisia would cost more lives than it would save and boost support for Gaddafi

My last two posts were on why Libyan defectors' claims about Gaddafi and Lockerbie may be lies like Iraqi defectors' claims on WMD; and on western governments' ulterior motive in Iraq, Libya, Iran and Venezuela - oil profits.

This post looks at the calls for military intervention by the US, Egypt or Tunisia - and suggestions for a 'no fly zone' to stop Gaddafi bombing rebels and whether these would be likely to save lives or cost them

Given the methods used by Coalition forces in Iraq – systematic torture and targeting civilians for instance – and the “El Salvador option” death squads and torturers they helped train for the new government - military intervention by the US and it’s allies would not be likely to result in any lives saved. Despite much propaganda most Iraqis were not better off as a result of the 2003 invasion and far more lives were lost than saved (1) – (3).

There are suggestions (for instance from Ian Birrel, a Guardian columnist and former speech writer to David Cameron)  that the Tunisian or Egyptian military could intervene to overthrow Gaddafi with UN Security Council approval, but these countries’ militaries don’t even have a good record on how they treat their own people and are both still run by dictatorships themselves (despite David Cameron’s attempts to portray any country he’s still promoting arms sales to as democracy, Egypt and Kuwait remain dictatorships) (4).

The Egyptian military have been involved in have recently been involved in the torture of opponents of the dictatorship according to Amnesty International (see 'Egyptian military urged to halt torture of detainees' Amnesty 17th February 2011). It doesn’t seem likely that either dictatorship would particularly want to promote democracy in the Arab world either.

An example of this kind of US and European government backed “humanitarian intervention” by proxy took place between 2006 and January 2009 in Somalia, when the US government backed an Ethiopian invasion of Somalia to overthrow the Islamic Courts Union which had just won a civil war with non Islamic fundamentalist,, but extremely brutal, warlords’ militias (5) – (6).

This resulted in Ethiopian army units raping and torturing Somalian villagers and slitting villagers’ throats as if they were goats according to witnesses who spoke to Amnesty International. The UN reported that there was a humanitarian crisis worse than in Darfur during the Sudanese genocide in both Somalia and among the 4.5 million inhabitants and refugees in the Ogaden region disputed between it and Ethiopia , many of whose people are Somali rebels who oppose Ethiopian rule. This was largely due to Ethiopian forces and their US backed Somalian warlord allies preventing food getting to areas held by their enemies and firing indiscriminately on entire towns and villages. Survivors said Ethiopian forces even killed children and a million refugees were left in Somalia and it’s neighbours. The Ethiopians eventually gave up due to heavy casualties and withdrew, just like the US in Iraq. All the killing and chaos did nothing to prevent Al Qa’ida operating in Somalia. As in Iraq, if anything the chaos made it easier for it to do so (5) – (12).

Once again oil and gas profits and control of a major export route (via the Gulf of Yemen or ‘Gulf of Aden’ between Somalia and Yemen – where Western oil companies are already operating) was probably a key motive for US involvement in Somalia too. Several oil companies - Agip of Italy , BP Amoco , and US company Conoco - have exploration and drilling rights for oil and gas which they negotiated with the murderous US-backed dictator Siad Barre before his overthrow in 1991 by his chief of police Mohammed Aidid. Those contracts remain on hold due to civil war. The bloody US-led Operation 'Restore Hope' in 1993 saw the killing of many UN peacekeepers and hundreds of Somali civilians - but failed to resolve the civil war in favour of America's protege - Barre's former interior minister Abdikassim Hassan (13) – (14).

Sending NATO fighter jets to enforce a no-fly zone in Libya has been suggested by President Sarkozy of France and by former Labour MP and Minister David Owen, to stop Gaddafi using planes on his own people. This did save some Kurdish lives from Saddam's helicopters in Iraq, but soon began to involve constant bombing by the USAF and RAF, killing Iraqi civilians along with military – and ramped up massively during ‘Operation Desert Fox’ under Clinton (which was the cause of Saddam  refusing to re-admit UN weapons inspectors until 2002, not a response to it – and they left, on US government directions, he didn’t expel them); and in the months before the March 2003 invasion under Bush (15) – (18).

Gaddafi would also most likely gain support among Libyans from any foreign military intervention in the country, which is why, in his televised speech, he asked them “Do you want America to occupy you, like Afghanistan and Iraq?” (19)

Many Iraqis who hated Saddam would fight foreign invaders or occupiers. The same would happen in Libya. Even a no-fly zone would have to be enforced by shooting down Libyan jets - and this and foreign fighter jets over Libyan skies would persuade many Libyans an invasion or occupation like Iraq was coming. This doesn't rule out a no-fly zone if Gaddafi begins having civilians bombed on a large scale, but has to be taken into account.

It’s better to let Gaddafi’s regime fall as more and more Libyans (including army units and tribal leaders with their armed followers) turn against him – and in future stop selling arms to dictatorships before the fact that they use them to kill their people in large numbers becomes headline news, instead of afterwards (20) – (21).

(1) = BBC News 23 Apr 2004 ‘Picture emerges of Falluja siege’, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3653223.stm

(2) = Guardian 17 Apr 2004 ‘'Getting aid past US snipers is impossible'’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/apr/17/iraq

(3) = Also see the links below and numbered sources listed for them, http://www.duncanmcfarlane.org/who%27s_right_on_Iraq/bothsides/ and http://www.duncanmcfarlane.org/replytogray/Iraq/ and http://inplaceoffear.blogspot.com/2010/09/are-iraqis-better-off-as-result-of-2003.html

(4) = guardian.co.uk 23 Feb 2011 ‘On Libya we can't let ourselves be scarred by Iraq’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/feb/23/libya-iraq-2003-invasion-gaddafi

(5) = USA Today 26 Dec 2006 ‘U.S. backs Ethiopian attacks in Somalia’http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-12-26-us-somalia_x.htm

(6) = guardian.co.uk 23 Feb 2011 ‘On Libya we can't let ourselves be scarred by Iraq’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/feb/23/libya-iraq-2003-invasion-gaddafi

(7) = Napoleon A. Bamfo (2010) ‘Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia in 2006: Motives and lessons learned’, African Journal of Political Science and International Relations vol 4(2), Feb 2010, pages 55 -65,http://www.academicjournals.org/ajpsir/PDF/pdf2010/February/Bamfo.pdf

(8) = Independent 22 Nov 2007, 'Somalia war-refugee crisis surpasses Darfur in its horror', http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/somalia-warrefugee-crisis-surpasses-darfur-in-its-horror-759034.html

(9) = Independent 03 Dec 2007 'Humanitarian crisis' facing Ethiopia, says UN', http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/humanitarian-crisis-facing-ethiopia-says-un-761354.html

(10) = Independent 09 Feb 2008, 'Somalia: The World's forgotten catastrophe', http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/somalia-the-worlds-forgotten-catastrophe-778225.html

(11) = Amnesty International 06 May 2008 ‘Routine killings of civilians in Somalia’,http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/routine-killings-civilians-somalia-20080506

(12) = See (5) above

(13) = Los Angeles Times 18 Jan 1993 'The oil factor in Somalia',http://articles.latimes.com/1993-01-18/news/mn-1337_1_oil-reserves or  LATimes archive link

(14) = US Energy Information Administration ‘Yemen – Background’,http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/Yemen/Background.html

(15) = New York Times 18 Aug 1999 ‘With Little Notice, U.S. Planes Have Been Striking Iraq All Year’, http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/081399iraq-conflict.html

(16) = New Statesman 17 Aug 2000 ‘Labour claims its actions are lawful while it bombs Iraq, starves its people and sells arms to corrupt states’, http://www.newstatesman.com/200008070012

(17) = Guardian 19 Feb 2001 ‘Raid shows Bush-Blair bond on Iraq’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/feb/19/usa.iraq2

(18) = Counterpunch 04 Dec 2002 ‘No-Fly Zones Over Iraq : Washington's Undeclared War on "Saddam's Victiims"’, http://www.counterpunch.org/scahill1204.html

(19) = Channel 4 News 22 Feb 2011 ‘Gaddafi – I am not going to leave this land’,http://www.channel4.com/news/gaddafi-i-am-not-going-to-leave-libya

(20) = Reuters 20 Feb 2011 ‘Libyan unit "defects" as more Arab protests simmer’,http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/20/us-protests-idUSTRE71F41K20110220

(21) = Al Jazeera 21 Feb 2011 ‘Libya revolt spreads to Tripoli’,http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/02/201122131439291589.html

Craig Murray - Berlusconi's cut

by Craig Murray (this is copied from Craig's blog as comments aren't working on his at the moment)

A very senior diplomatic source told me yesterday that Berlusconi is frantic lest Gadaffi falls and the channels are revealed by which Berlusconi gets a cut on the huge amounts of Libyan oil and gas lifted to Italy. Just at the moment that would be too much even for Berlusconi to survive.

This morning I see the Italian foreign minister is warning 300.000 Libyan refugees will fly to Europe if Gadaffi falls - as though there will be none if he stays. I have checked with other diplomatic sources, and they confirm that Italy is using the refugee warning to argue that Europe should back Gadaffi, and not impose sanctions. That point is not coming over in the mainstream media.

This blog will be back up completely revamped next week. But I thought this snippet was important. If someone wants to repost it somewhere comments are possible...

Will ‘the international community’ now create a civil war in Yemen as bad as the ones they’ve created in Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia and Afghanistan?

After the ‘underpants bomber’’s failed attempt to bomb a flight from Amsterdam to the US the Obama administration has said it will carry out ‘retaliatory strikes’ against Al Qa’ida leaders in Yemen. Yet the Bush and Obama administrations have been carrying out missile strikes on suspected Al Qa’ida leaders since 2002 and organising and training Saudi and Yemeni government forces for attacks on suspected Al Qa’ida leaders in Yemen since 2001. The SAS are also reported to have been deployed to Yemen from 2002 on and US Special Forces have almost certainly been operating too. The results have included a lot of civilian deaths in the strikes and an increase the support for extremist groups in the region.

When the editor of a Yemeni website reported on civilian deaths in a Yemeni military airstrike in September 2009 he was arrested by plain clothes intelligence officers and has not been heard of since.

A junior British foreign office Minister interviewed on BBC news recently said ‘security co-operation’ with the government of Yemen would be stepped up in parallel with development to reduce unemployment, lack of education and poverty.

Looking at the record of the same ‘coherent, integrated strategy’ in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan though the actual results are generally to create civil war and massively increase the number of terrorist attacks. In Afghanistan before the US invasion of 2001 suicide bombings were extremely rare, the most notorious targeted Ahmad Shah Massoud, a Mujahedin leader killed by Taliban suicide bombers in June 2001. Since the invasion suicide bombings have become common and civilian casualties from all causes have risen every year. Ditto for Iraq and Pakistan since big military offensives, air strikes and ‘counter insurgency’ to ‘root out extremists’.

Far from stabilising the countries involved ‘support’ from the US and it’s allies generally leads to massive destabilisation, which is used to justify military bases being set up in the country and troops being deployed to train or operate alongside the forces of the country. The only way you could interpret what’s happened in Pakistan or Iraq as ‘greater stability’ would be if you adopted Chomsky’s interpretation of the phrase – certain governments’ code-word for ‘greater influence for us’.

Afghanistan and Pakistan provide the majority of the pipeline route favoured by the US and EU for export of the post-Soviet republics oil and gas. Iraq has the second largest known oil reserves in the world, while Yemen, though having little oil or gas, is strategically important according to the US Energy Information Agency ‘because of its location on the Bab el-Mandab, one of the world's most strategic shipping lanes, through which an estimated 3.5 million barrels of oil passed daily in 2010. Disruption to shipping in the Bab el-Mandab could prevent tankers in the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Aden from reaching the Suez Canal/Sumed pipeline complex, requiring a costly diversion around the southern tip of Africa to reach western markets.’ You can see on the map below how Somalia and Yemen guard either side of the Gulf of Aden – which would be the main alternative export route for Middle Eastern oil and gas if a conflict with Iran closed off the Straits of Hormuz between Iran and Oman.

map of the middle east showing how Yemen and Somalia guard each side of the Gulf of Aden and how the important Bab el-Mandab oil tanker export route follows Yemen's coast - this map is from infoplease

(Please note that this post originally mistakenly claimed Yemen had as high a share of proven global oil reserves as Kuwait. This was wrong and based on mis-reading a column in BP's Annual Statistical review and mistaking the United Arab Emirate's figures for Yemen's, which are only 0.3% of proven reserves globally.)

American oil giants Exxon-Mobil and Hunt Oil, the French Total Oil and British Gas have had oil and gas contracts in Yemen for many years.

The collapse of Somalia’s government in the late 1980s has led to little oil exploration, so no significant proven reserves, but what surveys have been undertaken suggest it may have large reserves in its territorial waters and several major oil companies, including Conoco, had oil exploration contracts with the dictatorship of Siad Barre before it’s overthrow and have argued that those contracts are still valid if the civil war ends.

Maybe many of the members of governments involved genuinely believe they are preventing rather than inciting terrorism – and maybe the overlap between oil and gas reserves and export routes and countries where the US intervenes against Al Qa’ida is just co-incidence, but it’s just as likely that Al Qa’ida and ‘WMDs’ have become the same worldwide excuse for intervention for other motives that ‘Soviet backed Communism’ was during the ‘Cold War’.

Could it be that more progress would be made in reducing terrorism by ending the raids and the air and missile strikes and the ‘counter-insurgency’ and instead simply defending against terrorist attacks with defensive security measures and providing a standard of living above subsistence level to most Yemenis, Pakistanis, Afghans and Iraqis?

Sources

BBC News 25 Jan 2002 ‘CIA 'killed al-Qaeda suspects' in Yemen’, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/2402479.stm

BBC News Online 17 November, 2002, 14:49 GMT ‘SAS 'hunting Bin Laden in Yemen'’,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/world/middle_east/2485043.stm

Reuters 23 Sep 2009 ‘Yemen media protest arrest of third journalist’,
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLM252909

Observer 29 Jan 2006 ‘Revealed: UK's role in deadly CIA drone’,

guardian.co.uk 04 Jun 2007 ‘Briton 'killed in US missile attack in Somalia'’,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jun/04/politics.foreignpolicy

ABC News ‘Obama Ordered U.S. Military Strike on Yemen Terrorists’,
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cruise-missiles-strike-yemen/story?id=9375236&page=1

BBC News 13 Nov 2009 ‘Saudis 'renew Yemen bombing'’,

Guardian 14 Dec 2009 ‘Air strike 'kills 70 civilians' in Yemen’,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8411726.stm

Los Angeles Times 13 Jan 1993 ‘The Oil Factor in Somalia’, http://articles.latimes.com/1993-01-18/news/mn-1337_1_oil-reserves
; for full version see http://www.somaliawatch.org/archivejuly/000922601.htm

B.P. Statistical Review of World Energy 2009, http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/reports_and_publications/statistical_energy_review_2008/STAGING/local_assets/2009_downloads/statistical_review_of_world_energy_full_report_2009.pdf

Arabian Business.com ‘Company Profile : Exxon-Mobil Chemical’,
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/index.php?option=com_companylist&view=list&companyid=16826

BBC News 21 Dec 2009 ‘Houthi rebels say 54 killed in north Yemen air strike’,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8425069.stm

BBC News 24 Dec 2009 ‘Dozens killed in Yemen air strike on al-Qaeda suspects’, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8429370.stm (US gave Yemeni government $70mn in military aid in 2009)

Committee to Protect Journalists 25 Sep 2009 ‘In Yemen, critical journalist disappears’,
http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/4b25fc0123.html

AP 24 Dec 2009 ‘Al-Qaida fighters killed in Yemen air strikes’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/24/yemen-strike-al-qaida

Guardian 28 Dec 2009 ‘Al-Qaida: US support for Yemen crackdown led to attack’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/28/al-qaida-us-yemen-attack

Energy Business Review 15 Oct 2009 ‘Total's Yemen LNG Plant Starts Production’,
http://oilgaspipelines.energy-business-review.com/news/totals_yemen_lng_plant_starts_production_091015/

Three actions we can take for Georgia

While there's plenty of blame to go round, who is to blame for starting the war between Georgia and Russia is now irrelevant. Georgian forces have been utterly defeated and Russian forces are in control in Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

They were always committing as many war crimes as the Georgians - now the Russians and their Ossetian, Chechen, Abkhazian and other militias are the only ones committing these crimes (1), (2), (3). Russian claims to be withdrawing their forces also seem to be empty (4).

The same Russian troops and pro-Russian Chechen militia-men who tortured, stole, murdered and raped their way across Chechnya for a decade, when Chechnya attempted to declare independence from the Russian Federation, are now burning Georgian villages, raping women and stealing from and firing at journalists, UN staff and foreign aid workers in central Georgia and South Ossetia - or at least the militia-men are while the Russian regulars (probably under orders from superiors) let them. Georgian men and boys considered 'of military age' are being taken away to unknown fates - possibly killed (5), (6), (7), (8), (9).

The EU and the US aren't prepared to put troops in to stop this, given the serious risk of a major war - and possibly even nuclear war. There are still actions we and our governments can take (one already taken by Bush being to send unarmed troops to Tbilisi to discourage Russian forces from entering it).

First our governments can put forward a motion to the General Assembly of the UN calling for an immediate withdrawal of Russian forces (including all militias allied to them) from central Georgia and from those villages in South Ossetia mostly inhabited by Georgians. The motion should also provide authority for the deployment of a UN peacekeeping force to deploy on both sides of the border between the South Ossetian region and central Georgia and along the main roads from Tbilisi airport to South Ossetia to protect civilians and allow humanitarian aid to be distributed.
This will not have the same weight as a UN Security Council motion but the Russian government will be unable to veto it and it's the next best thing to a UNSC motion.

A second motion should call for the future of South Ossetia and Abkhazia to be determined by referenda organised by the UN on independence, autonomy within Georgia or re-unification with Georgia. If these republics vote to become independent they can hold their own referenda on whether to then join the Russian federation. Russia cannot be allowed to conquer territory through war in breach of the UN Charter.

Second they could expel Russia from the G8 economic policy making group and refuse it entry to the World Trade Organisation. Third we could make it clear EU governments won't pay for Russian oil or gas until Russian forces and allied militias withdraw from central Georgian and allow UN peacekeepers into it and South Ossetia. Since Russia's economy is heavily dependent on oil and gas exports this would hurt Russia's economy as much as the EU's. They may be able to re-direct some exports to China and the far East - but the price they get for them would drop.

Georgian civilians lives are important enough to make it worth suffering power cuts until the Russian government relents or we can get alternative energy sources or reduce energy use through energy efficiency measures like government subsidised home insulation. It's also necessary to send a message to Russia that while we accept its right to defend itself and Russian citizens in South Ossetia we won't stand by, mute while they annexe territory by force or let militias murder civilians.

Of course we can also donate to the ICRC or other charities providing aid to Georgians, Ossetians and others - but the first three measures would make it easier and safer to get more aid to those who need it as soon as it's needed.

(1) = Herald (Scotland), 'Civilians allege militias raped and killed',
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2426955.0.0.php

(2) = Human Rights Watch 14 Aug 2008, 'Russia/Georgia: Investigate Civilian Deaths
High Toll from Attacks on Populated Areas', http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2008/08/13/russia19620.htm

(3) = Human Rights Watch 15 Aug 2008, 'Georgia: Russian Cluster Bombs Kill Civilians'http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2008/08/14/georgi19625.htm

(4) = BBC News 15 Aug 2008, 'Day-by-day: Georgia-Russia crisis',
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7551576.stm

(5) = see (1) above

(6) = Channel 4 News 14 Aug 2008, 'War of words breaks out between Russia and the US; tanks remain in Gori', http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/international_politics/war+of+words+breaks+out+between+russia+and+the+us+tanks+remain+in+gori/2400822 , (see first video on that page)

(7) = Human Rights Watch 13 Aug 2008, 'Georgian Villages in South Ossetia Burnt, Looted', http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2008/08/13/georgi19607.htm

(8) = Amnesty International 14 aug 2008, 'Georgia, Russia: Suffering of civilians must stop and abuses must be investigated', http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/EUR56/007/2008/en/4dfeef19-6a25-11dd-8e5e-43ea85d15a69/eur560072008eng.html

(9) = Amnesty International 14 Aug 2008, 'Civilians vulnerable after hostilities in Georgia', http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/civilians-vulnerable-after-hostilities-georgia-20080814