Chethana Janith, Jadetimes Staff
C. Janith is a Jadetimes news reporter covering science and geopolitics.
When nations engage in conflicts abroad, there is frequently a disparity between the justifications provided by governments and public interpretations of their true motives. In the 344 foreign interventions in civil wars from 1945 to 1999 - and countless more since - official narratives often revolve around moral or ideological causes: combating terrorism, promoting democracy, countering ideologies like communism, or supporting oppressed populations. These explanations, however, contrast with the public's perception, which tends to link such interventions to strategic or economic interests. Among the most prominent and debated of these suspected interests is the pursuit of oil.
A recent study, Oil Above Water: Economic Interdependence and Third-Party Intervention, explores this issue rigorously, analyzing whether oil indeed influences decisions to intervene in civil conflicts. This research builds on previous studies that highlighted connections between military interventions and trade. For example, certain studies indicated that covert CIA operations during the Cold War were associated with increased U.S. imports from target countries. Additionally, U.S. military support was found to correlate with higher non-military trade flows between the United States and the countries it assisted.
The study Oil Above Water is one of the first to statistically examine oil’s role as a potential driver of foreign interventions in civil wars, lending insight into public suspicions. The analysis found that oil production levels and known oil reserves are substantial factors in motivating third-party military actions. Specifically, the study demonstrated that the greater the oil production or reserves of a country in civil conflict, the higher the likelihood of foreign intervention. This effect was magnified in times of tighter oil markets when global oil production is concentrated among fewer countries. In such periods, conflicts in oil-producing nations are notably more likely to attract foreign military involvement. Furthermore, the likelihood of intervention was also associated with the amount of oil a potential intervening country imports, with military action being more probable when the intervening country depends heavily on oil imports.
This research aims to provide an empirical foundation for assessing the motivations behind military interventions, moving beyond mere speculation. Focusing on civil wars, which have constituted over 90% of armed conflicts since World War II, the study examined 69 countries experiencing civil wars between 1945 and 1999, about two-thirds of which saw foreign involvement. The theoretical framework of this analysis considers the monopolistic nature of the oil market, where a limited number of suppliers means that global oil prices are highly responsive to production shifts in these countries. Recognizing that disruptions could drive up energy costs, governments of oil-importing countries have a vested interest in the stability of oil-producing nations.
Looking ahead, these findings offer potential insights into future interventions. For instance, as the U.S. becomes increasingly self-sufficient in oil production due to advancements in fracking, it may reduce its military involvement in civil wars that could impact global oil markets. Recent examples, such as the international response to ISIS's attempts to control Libyan oil fields, illustrate how countries reliant on oil imports from specific regions - such as Italy and France in the case of Libyan oil - may be prompted to advocate for military intervention. The study also suggests that rapidly industrializing countries with rising energy demands may become more active in protecting oil supplies globally. However, a potential collapse in oil prices could drastically alter these dynamics.
From a historical perspective, oil seems to occupy a strategic position similar to that of grain, a resource over which the Romans fought wars, or the spices that fueled the 15th-century Age of Discovery. Evidence from the study supports the idea that oil is a factor in military interventions, and that such actions can further the commercial interests of intervening nations. This casts a shadow on modern societies’ dependence on oil and raises ethical questions about the legitimacy of military interventions driven by resource needs. On the one hand, military action might benefit citizens of the intervening nation by stabilizing oil prices and mitigating the duration of conflicts. On the other hand, it could be argued that these interventions reflect a prioritization of national interests over broader ethical considerations. The ultimate judgment on the morality of these actions is, however, left to the public.
