Natural Security Blog

Beijing’s South China Sea Bet

Will Rogers — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:29:19 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

In January, CNAS published a study on the South China Sea with a chapter examining the geopolitical role of natural resources and how those resources affect state behavior across the region. One of my goals in contributing a chapter to the study was to challenge the assumption that some of these resources are as strategic as countries perceive them to be, especially with respect to the potential oil and natural gas reserves that could be beneath the seabed. For example, the discrepancy between U.S. and Chinese estimates of oil in the region (28 billion barrels vs. 200 billion barrels) influences the strategic calculus for states in the region, at a time when the global economy is beginning to recover, generating a greater demand for oil.

Until we have a better idea of what the region holds it is difficult to assess, on balance, the value of some of the more aggressive claims to the region’s fossil fuel resources. Nevertheless, I concede that the perception that these resources are strategic (whether or not they are) influences states’ behavior in the region. But if states take a step back and try to look at resources in the broader context, perhaps their perception can change and serve to dampen down the saber-rattling over resources that may actually not be as significant anyway; a pathway to cooperation or benign competition, rather than conflict?

In a piece published last Friday in The Diplomat, I directly call into question Beijing’s bet that the South China Sea’s fossil fuel resources are as strategic as it perceives them to be, and, in fact, that its aggressive behavior serves no purpose but to compromise its claim to a peaceful rise. Here’s how I see their wager:

Beijing seems to be doubling down in the South China Sea. Why? In large part it’s to secure access to potential deep sea hydrocarbons like oil and natural gas – many describe the South China Sea as the next Persian Gulf, given the possible richness of resources that supposedly lay beneath the seabed. And while there are significant differences between the two regions that complicate such a comparison – including the ease of access to fossil fuel resources and the cost of developing them – it’s a useful analogue for understanding why China views the region as critical to its core interests.

But Beijing may in fact be overestimating the strategic significance of the region’s oil and natural gas – and taking unnecessary risks that could undermine its peaceful rise.

Read on…

Read This Now: Admiral Robert J. Papp Jr. on the Arctic Frontier

Will Rogers — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:28:24 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

For those of you who have not been following the national security or defense journals recently, the U.S. Naval Institute’s Proceedings published in its February 2012 edition a great article by U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Commandant Admiral Robert J. Papp Jr. on the Arctic, paving the way – I hope – for a national level discussion on U.S. interests and goals in the High North.

“The Arctic region—the Barents, Beaufort, and Chukchi seas and the Arctic Ocean—is the emerging maritime frontier, vital to our national interests, economy and security,” Admiral Papp writes. “The difference [between the Arctic and the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans] is that in the rest of the maritime domain, we have an established presence of shore-based forces, small boats, cutters, and aircraft supported by permanent infrastructure and significant operating experience. Although the Coast Guard has operated in southern Alaska, the Gulf of Alaska, and Bering Sea for much of our history, in the higher latitudes we have little infrastructure and limited operating experience, other than icebreaking.”

Admiral Papp describes the U.S. Coast Guard’s responsibilities in the Arctic and, by doing so, lays out how the Coast Guard should be prepared to lead. “Our first challenge is simply to better understand the Arctic operating environment and its risks, including knowing which Coast Guard capabilities and operations will be needed to meet our mission requirements,” Admiral Papp states. This includes addressing the lack of USCG infrastructure that can support shore-based operations, as well as “ensuring that Coast Guard men and women have the policy, doctrine, and training to operate safely and effectively in the northern Arctic region.” In addition, the Coast Guard is “working closely with other key federal partners to lead the interagency effort in the Arctic,” leveraging its experience with “speaking the interagency language” and success with engaging the range of public and private stakeholders active in the Arctic, from local tribes to corporate adventurers.

The Strait and Narrow

Will Rogers — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:39:49 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

Chatham House published a new study last week examining the implications of maritime choke points for the global energy market. The study, Maritime Choke Points and the Global Energy System: Charting a Way Forward, is timely considering tensions in the Persian Gulf where Iran has hinted at the possibility of closing the Strait of Hormuz in response to recent threats (economic and military) against its nuclear program.

The study generally provides a great overview of the challenges associated with seaborne oil transportation through several vulnerable straits and canals. For those interested in understanding the nature of China’s Strait of Malacca Dilemma, the international waterway through which it receives approximately 65 percent of its oil imports, the report offers some useful insights. In particular, the authors make an important distinction between the Straits of Hormuz and Malacca, noting that, “Whereas there are no alternative maritime routes to the Strait of Hormuz for oil exports from the Persian Gulf, shipments through the Straits of Malacca and Singapore could be re-routed, though at additional cost, through other waterways such as the Lombok Strait.” Such a distinction may seem insignificant, but it could have an effect on China’s strategic calculus over what role it might decide to play in helping keep the Strait of Hormuz open in case of a closure, including, perhaps, by supporting UN Security Council resolutions or other policies that may seem anathema to Beijing.

The report also reinforces the national security rationale behind ratifying the Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS). According to the authors, “The UNCLOS bargain accepted twelve nautical miles as the maximum extent of a state’s territorial sea but, in order to ensure freedom of navigation through key international straits, UNCLOS established a regime of ‘transit passage’ applicable to ‘straits used for international navigation’.” What is more, the authors note that “In signing UNCLOS in December 1982, Iran claimed that the benefits of UNCLOS, such as ‘transit passage’, did not apply to non-signatory states.”

This Weekend’s News: Watching the Price of Oil

Will Rogers — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 13:29:04 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

There are several trends that are worth watching as they develop because they could affect the price of oil.

Friday’s U.S. jobs report contributed to higher oil prices, in part due to predictions that demand for energy will continue to rise as the U.S. economy recovers. “U.S. benchmark crude increased by $1.48 on Friday to end the week at $97.84 per barrel,” CBS News reported. “It was the first time since Jan. 26 that the price of crude ended the day higher. Brent, used to price international varieties of crude, rose by $2.51 to finish at $114.58 per barrel.” The report added:

Prices rose after the government reported that the U.S. economy added 243,000 jobs in January. That was the biggest increase since April of last year, when 251,000 jobs were created. The unemployment rate fell to 8.3 percent — the lowest in three years. The positive U.S. jobs data added to evidence that the world's largest economy — and biggest user of gasoline — is growing stronger.

Elsewhere in Nigeria, militants with the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta claimed responsibility for an attack against an Eni SpA oil pipeline. “A Rome-based spokesman for Eni, speaking on condition of anonymity per company policy, acknowledged that either a fire or attack had happened on the pipeline, cutting about 4,000 barrels of crude oil production a day,” The Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday. Nigeria, it is worth noting, is America’s fifth largest oil supplier.

Photo of the Week: Because No One Should Read Too Much on Fridays

Will Rogers — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 13:05:05 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

On Wednesday, John Nagl stepped down as President of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS). Since joining CNAS, John has been an avid supporter of our natural security work, often remarking that while ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are the most pressing challenges America faces, the long-term challenges to U.S. security will come from natural resource competition and climate change.

John’s service to the nation as an Army officer and his ability to articulate the importance of non-traditional security challenges in shaping the global security environment has helped put this work on the map for many national security practitioners who may not have been convinced of its importance to U.S. national security policy. We’re indebted to John for his enduring support, from his work on Fueling the Future Force to his impressing the importance of climate change to a room full of flag officers. I could wax poetic, but I won’t (my colleague Andrew Exum has a nice post about John already). I’ll simply say this: thanks boss. We wouldn’t be where we are without you.

Natural Security News

Will Rogers — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 12:34:54 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

The New York Times reports that severe winter weather could stymie a protest movement in Russia.
A Malaysia, rare earths metal refinery is close to obtaining permission to operate, which could upend China’s dominance of the market, according to The New York Times.
Ukraine says that increased domestic consumption of natural gas in Russia is responsible for decline in shipments, The Washington Post reports.
The Wall Street Journal reports that two of the world’s most powerful raw-materials companies are discussing a merger that could form an $80 billion mining giant.
United Press International reports that yellow cedars – indigenous to Alaska and British Columbia – have been dying off due to climate change.

Natural Security News

Will Rogers — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 12:04:42 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

Chinese residents at the center of a protest over land rights casted votes on Wednesday to determine their local leadership, The New York Times reports.

According to The Washington Post, Brazilian oilmen are exploring for fossil fuels in the Amazon, a region dominated by foreign oil companies.

Iraqi Kurds are making moves to strengthen their control over oil-rich lands, The Wall Street Journal reports.

Philippine officials claim that climate change is responsible for nearly 49 tons of dead fish floating in a local lake, United Press International reports.

A record cold snap has caused some disruptions in South Korea, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Navigating the Icy Arctic is No Ordinary Mission

Will Rogers — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 12:24:15 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

Last Friday I pointed out that the U.S. Coast Guard Healy helped the Russian tanker Renda deliver 1.3 million gallons of fuel to Nome, Alaska.

It may sound like a normal mission for the Coast Guard, but I’m assured there’s nothing normal about traveling through the ice-covered Arctic in the middle of winter. I think there is a tendency to forget that icebreakers perform a crucial mission in the Arctic, during relatively ice-free summers or in the dead of winter. In this particular instance, the Coast Guard was helping assure delivery of fuel to the Alaskan town. According to a U.S. Coast Guard news release, “The [fuel] delivery was necessary due to an early winter storm that prevented a scheduled fuel resupply to the city [Nome].”

In a meeting I had last week, an official painted a vivid picture for me about the importance of an icebreaker and what this niche capability actually gives the United States. The USCG Healy began escorting the Renda out of Nome on January 20, 2012 for the nearly 400 mile journey across the frozen Bering Sea. According to this official, as the Healy was breaking through the ice, the Bering Sea continued to freeze over, extending its frozen reach. I thought this was an interesting point and one that certainty points to the importance of icebreakers in helping commercial vessels plow through the ice, if for nothing else but to avoid a Sisyphusian-like situation that traps commercial vessels in an endless sea of ice. On Monday, after 10 days of icebreaking, both the Healy and Renda reached ice-free waters and have parted ways. The Healy has returned to its homeport, Seattle.

Icebreakers perform a critical function. U.S. policymakers need to have an honest conversation about what the U.S. mission needs to be in the Arctic and then decide what resources it needs to support that mission. Having an understanding about the role U.S. icebreakers perform in the Arctic should help get the conversation going.

Photo: The Healy breaks through ice on its journey to Nome, Alaska. Courtesy of the U.S. Coast Guard.

Natural Security News

Will Rogers — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 12:03:28 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

The IAEA has backed new stress tests for Japanese nuclear reactors, according to The New York Times.

The Washington Post reports that the Chinese village that experienced mass protests over land rights issues prepares for local elections.

A cadmium spill threatens the water supply in China’s Pearl River Delta, The Wall Street Journal reports.

The Department of Defense announced $18 million in awards for programs to improve operational energy.

United Press International reports that New York City will measure energy in some buildings for use by urban planners and policymakers.

Events from Around Town: Offshore Oil & Gas in the Arctic - The Next Five Years

Commander Shannon Gilreath, USCG — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:55:39 +0000

Author:

Commander Shannon Gilreath, USCG

Last Thursday the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) hosted a panel on “Offshore Oil & Gas in the Arctic: The Next Five Years.” The event was focused on planned lease sales by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) for the Chuckchi and Beaufort Seas in the coming five years. BOEM is one of three new agencies created within the Department of Interior to replace the former Minerals Management Service. BOEM is responsible for developing and managing the nation’s offshore energy resources, including the leasing of oil and gas blocks on the outer continental shelf. In November 2011, BOEM published its Draft 2012-2017 Oil and Gas Leasing Program requesting comments from the public. Read the notice here. The comment period closes February 8, 2012. Though the ELI program focused on the Arctic - the area likely to draw the most intense comments - the draft covers all proposed U.S. offshore lease sales through 2017. The proposed lease sale dates off Alaska’s coast are 2013 for the Cook Inlet, 2015 for the Beaufort Sea and 2016 for the Chukchi Sea. You can view the draft in its entirety as well several other related documents here.

Among the key thoughts I took away were that the later dates for the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas locations reflect a desire to continue to study the region as well as to afford the opportunity to learn from the drilling slated to occur in these areas in 2012. These leases present significant challenges such as the remoteness of the locations, the lack of supporting infrastructure close by and challenges in conducting spill response in this harsh environment. However, the leases are located in much shallower water than the deepwater drilling currently occurring in the Gulf of Mexico.

Natural Security News

Will Rogers — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:30:57 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

The World Trade Organization has ruled against China’s effort to limit exports of industrial materials, The Wall Street Journal reports.

Severe drought is exacerbating a food crisis in Mexico, The New York Times reports.

China lodged a protest over Japan’s plan to name uninhabited islets in the East China Sea, according to xinhuanet.com

The Washington Post reports on an effort in California to reduce the carbon footprint of fuel sold in the state.

United Press International reports that the United Nations has started an online database to share successful climate change adaptation strategies.

This Weekend’s News: Chinese Economic Coercion in the South China Sea

Will Rogers — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:37:50 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

Yesterday, China’s nationalist newspaper Global Times published a report arguing that Beijing should make the Philippines pay for increased cooperation with the United States, what Chinese officials perceive as a balancing act unfolding in the region. According to the Global Times:

Given the recent active maneuvers of the US military in China's neighboring area, the lack of a response from China would be inappropriate, though it is also impossible to react strongly toward every move by the US. It is thus necessary to single out a few cases and apply due punishment.

The Philippines is a suitable target to impose such a punishment. A reasonable yet powerful enough sanction can be considered. It should show China's neighboring area that balancing China by siding with the US is not a good choice.

The report adds that Beijing should use economic coercion to compel the Philippines into suspending its ongoing activities with the United States: “China may consider cooling down its business ties with the Philippines. One step forward in military collaboration with the US means a step backward in economic cooperation with China. In the long run, China may also use its economic leverage to cut economic activities between ASEAN countries and the Philippines.”

The call from the Chinese national newspaper comes on the heels of increased military cooperation between the United States and the Philippines. In November 2011, the United States agreed to transfer a second Hamilton-class cutter to the Philippines to provide additional resources for the Philippine Navy to conduct maritime security activities, including in the South China Sea where China and the Philippines have ongoing territorial disputes. Earlier this month, the United States announced that its annual exercise with the Philippine marines will be conducted off of Palawan island instead of the main island Luzon. (Increased Chinese oil and natural gas exploration 50 miles off the island of Palawan has exacerbated tensions between the Philippines and China in recent months.) Most recently, the United States and the Philippines agreed last week to closer military cooperation moving forward. According to The Washington Post on Sunday, “The Philippines said it is considering more joint military exercises and a greater presence by American troops.”

Photo of the Week: Because No One Should Read Too Much on Fridays

Will Rogers — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 11:27:24 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

Over the last several weeks, my colleagues and I have been trying to make the case for a national-level dialogue on the Arctic (see CDR Gilreath’s post from Wednesday and my National Journal piece from the first week in January). Our call for a national dialogue is in part driven by the need to build awareness among a larger audience about what the United States is currently doing in the Arctic, and then to have a conversation about what our national objectives are in the High North. Simply put, what do we want to achieve there? How much of a presence do we want to have? Are we willing to forfeit our leadership role to Canada, Russia or other Arctic (or non-Arctic?) states?

This photo – I think – helps get the conversation going. In this photo taken on January 16, 2012 in Nome, Alaska, a fuel tanker docks after being escorted through the ice by the U.S. Coast Guard Healy (the only operational polar icebreaker in the fleet), so that it can deliver more than 1.3 million gallons of fuel to the local community. Is this a priority mission for the Coast Guard, and, if so, is it resourced to continue executing this mission? Let’s have that conversation.

U.S. Policy Shift on Nuclear Energy and the Impact on Proliferation Concerns

Will Rogers — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 13:43:58 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

Yesterday, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Obama administration has decided to withdraw its demand for countries pursuing nuclear energy development to relinquish their right to produce nuclear fuel domestically. This is a significant shift from a 2009 agreement between the United States and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) that prohibits the UAE from enriching uranium domestically or reprocessing spent nuclear fuel.

According to The Wall Street Journal report, administration officials cited concerns that U.S. nuclear plant developers could lose a share of the market with a stringent requirement attached to nuclear-cooperation agreements that bound countries from developing domestic sources of nuclear fuel. “U.S. companies once controlled at least 50% of the world market for building nuclear reactors,” The Wall Street Journal reported. “This share has dwindled to around 20%, U.S. officials say, with Russian, French and South Korean companies gaining dominance,” and officials have cautioned that “Washington risked losing business for American companies seeking to build nuclear reactors overseas” if the United States continued to push the nuclear-cooperation agreement requirement.

Moreover, U.S. officials cited concerns that losing nuclear plant development to non-U.S. developers could weaken U.S. efforts to encourage countries to promote stronger nonproliferation safeguards and policies. “To the extent we lose market share, we lose nonproliferation controls and hurt national security,” a senior U.S. official told The Wall Street Journal.

Natural Security News

Will Rogers — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 13:43:49 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

The Washington Post reports that the Philippines may allow a greater U.S. military presence in response to China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea.

The UK tops the list of countries most vulnerable to climate change, according to The Washington Post.

China has criticized the EU over its decision to ban imports on Iranian oil, The Wall Street Journal reports.

A new study reports that geoengineering is not a cure to the world’s climate woes, according to United Press International.

The Boston Globe reports that communities around Japan’s nuclear facilities remain divided on the future of nuclear energy.

Time for a National Dialogue on the Arctic

Commander Shannon Gilreath, USCG — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 13:04:30 +0000

Author:

Commander Shannon Gilreath, USCG

Last week, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) released its report, “A New Security Architecture for the Arctic: An American Perspective." The report provides concise summaries of the existing governance regimes for the Arctic and touches on many of the reasons the United States and other nations should care about the Arctic. It reprises the role of the Law of the Sea Convention, Arctic Council and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The authors also argue for creation of an Arctic Coast Guard Forum to address security concerns with membership comprised of the eight Arctic Council countries, plus other countries willing to contribute resources to the region.

Two of the key takeaways for me were the emphasis on the failure of the United States to create a comprehensive “large scale economic development plan for the region” and the lack of existing military assets suited to operate in this complex environment to protect, enforce and ensure our interests. From my perspective, the lack of a serious national discussion and investment in Arctic resources, coupled with the continued failure to ratify the Law of the Sea Convention, signals to other nations that we are willing to forfeit our leadership role in the Arctic. The longer we wait to engage in a national dialogue and set a firm course to implement a strategy, the more options we foreclose in the future. As we delay implementation and investment, others gain leverage through the development of critical infrastructure or assets needed to exploit resources in the region, including shipping ports to take advantage of potentially shorter trade routes, ice breakers to keep open sea lanes or allow development of oil and gas fields and patrol vessels to protect fish stocks.

Ideally, we should enter critical international negotiations over governance, use and protection of resources within the Arctic from a position of strength rather than weakness. That is not to suggest that partnerships are bad, or that the United States must have enough government assets to go it alone. Partnerships can be incredibly productive when they are mutually beneficial. Partnerships that are completely one sided in nature have little appeal and are difficult to sustain. Perhaps if we could afford to continue to build assets and infrastructure with nominal concern for costs we could make up for the lack of a comprehensive development strategy through sheer numbers of assets or breadth of capabilities. Yet in a time of financial austerity it would seem far better to invest in assets or partnerships that support a well developed national strategy.

Natural Security News

Will Rogers — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 13:02:39 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

The New York Times reports on the collapse of fish stocks and growing competition for scarce resources among fishermen.
According to The Washington Post, the Japanese government did not release the findings from a worst-case scenario report after last year’s Fukushima crisis for fear of widespread panic.
A new report says that New Delhi is vulnerable to a major earthquake, The Washington Post reports.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the Obama administration will not demand Jordan and Vietnam to forgo their rights to produce nuclear fuel domestically.
The National Journal reports that President Obama continues to push forward on clean energy without Congress.

On the State of the Union Address

Will Rogers — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 13:53:01 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

President Obama will deliver his third State of the Union Address tonight. With the focus on the economy and jobs creation, we’re not likely to hear much from the president on the need for the United States to get serious about the Arctic or for Congress to ratify the Law of the Sea Convention. But there are some issues I think the president has an opportunity to address, and I expect we’ll hear much from him tonight on his vision for a clean energy future as it relates to economic security.

In particular, I think President Obama has an opportunity to make the case for doubling down on clean energy investments, despite recent criticisms of the administration’s handling of Solyndra. President Obama has many success cases to point to in making the case for why these investments are good for the U.S. economy and long-term prosperity. For example, last year the administration announced that the Departments of Agriculture, Energy and Navy would match up to $510 million dollars in private sector investments in renewable biofuel projects. This initiative has already helped develop a larger market for alternative fuels and infused confidence in investors.

I don’t believe the president should have much trouble explaining why investing in alternative fuels and renewable energy projects are good for the United States. Most Americans have fresh memories of $5 a gallon gasoline and the toll it took on the U.S. economy in 2008. Moreover, there’s a larger vision that can be achieved through investments in renewable energy and non-petroleum fuels, and the president should press this message: that these government investments will help spur continued private sector investments in alternative liquid fuels, help move the United States away from its outsized dependence on petroleum and provide the foundation for a more resilient economy. Indeed, this is especially important at a time when ratcheting tensions in the Persian Gulf and instability in Nigeria are generating some uncertainty in the global oil market - and the United States certainly cannot endure another shock to the global oil market. The faster we move away from petroleum dependence, the more resilient our economy will be.

Natural Security News

Will Rogers — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 13:13:02 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

The New York Times reports that Japan’s food supply is threatened by radioactive contamination.
Chevron is still trying to contain a weeklong oil rig fire off Nigeria’s coast, according to The Washington Post.
The EU issues a ban on Iranian oil imports, The Wall Street Journal reports.
Also from The Wall Street Journal, Japan reviews its disaster relief plans in the wake of concerns that Tokyo could face a magnitude-7 earthquake within the next four years.
President Obama should defend environmental regulations in tonight’s State of the Union Address, according to The Guardian.

This Weekend’s News: Eyes on Nigeria

Will Rogers — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 14:30:13 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

As I wrote in last weekend’s roundup, there is a lot of uncertainty looming in Nigeria that could impact the global oil market. A weeklong row between the government and labor unions over the government’s fuel subsidy cost Nigeria about $1.3 billion dollars. Labor unions suspended the strike early last week after Nigerian President Goodluck Johnson agreed to partially reinstate his government’s fuel subsidy.

Despite the brief respite from political turmoil, the country was rocked by a series of bombings throughout the week that reportedly left 256 dead. “The militant Muslim group Boko Haram, which is fighting for rule by Islamic law in the north, said it was responsible for blasts at eight government buildings in Kano on Jan. 20,” according to Businessweek. The same report said that:

The attacks by Boko Haram haven’t affected oil from Nigeria’s Atlantic coast, where companies including Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp., Total SA and Eni SpA pump more than 90 percent of the country’s crude output. Similarly, the financial markets in the southwestern commercial capital, Lagos, haven’t been disrupted by the violence.

Nevertheless, Nigeria’s instability may have long-term implications for the global oil market if violence affects the country’s oil sector. Already, “Brent oil for March settlement advanced as much as 59 cents, or 0.5 percent, to $110.45 a barrel on the London-based ICE Futures Europe exchange,” according to Businessweek.

Energy analysts will need to be watchful of developments in Nigeria as the government continues to grapple with unrest. Moreover, the fuel subsidy issue may again surface as a point of tension if fuel prices rise. According to a report from The Wall Street Journal, “Analysts worry that the [fuel] subsidy cut played into Boko Haram's antigovernment stance, helping it to channel the anger of Nigeria's young disaffected Muslims.” Thus, the issue could continue to affect stability in Nigeria.

Photo of the Week: Because No One Should Read Too Much on Fridays

Will Rogers — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:24:52 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

Last week, the Center for a New American Security launched its new Flashpoints feature, an online web portal for those studying security in the East and South China Seas. My colleagues in the Asia-Pacific Security Program deserve major kudos for pulling this together. It’s a tremendous resource that will enhance peoples’ understanding of the challenges in the region.

Natural Security News

Will Rogers — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:07:54 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

An interesting story in The New York Times describes the tensions between states and the federal government over nuclear regulatory authority.

The New York Times Green blog revisits the issue of agriculture and climate change.

According to Reuters, Turkey is working to reduce its dependence on Iranian oil.

Beijing makes a rare concession on pollution, The Washington Post reports.

Also from The Washington Post, French President Sarkozy urges much tougher sanctions against Iran, including an oil embargo.

For China, Economic Leverage in the Arctic May Be Part of the Long Game

Will Rogers — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 13:40:15 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

A new post by Andrew Erickson and Gabe Collins in The Wall Street Journal’s China Real Time Report blog paints a great picture of how economic opportunities in the Arctic may redraw geopolitical relationships.

Erickson and Collins write that “Denmark has made a strategic decision to prioritize its economic relationship with China and is now becoming the key gateway for Beijing’s commercial and strategic entrée into the Arctic,” including being an advocate for China to have permanent membership on the eight-seat Arctic Council. In particular, Denmark seeks to use Greenland’s mineral wealth (including coveted materials like rare earths, uranium and iron ore) as a means of fostering stronger economic ties with China (Erickson and Collins note that exports have been steadily increasing between both countries over the last several years).

While both may gain in the near term (Greenland in particular will benefit from Chinese investments in infrastructure that the island is thin on, including more power lines and power stations), it is not hard to see that China benefits more from this new arrangement over the long term. As Erickson and Collins describe, “From Beijing’s perspective, having Chinese companies buy several billion dollars per year worth of pharmaceuticals and machinery and doing container shipping business with Maersk is well worth it to gain access to Arctic negotiating tables and Greenland’s minerals.”

Natural Security News

Will Rogers — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 13:38:32 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

President Obama rejected the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline on Wednesday, The New York Times reports.
Antinuclear protest disrupt a panel in Japan as the government approves plans to extend nuclear plant operations up to 20 years, The Wall Street Journal reports.
According to The Washington Post, the United States and the Philippines are planning combat drills at an oil rig in the South China Sea.
United Press International reports that the La Nina weather event is increasing the odds of U.S. drought.
Also from UPI, cleanup efforts at a closed Washington state nuclear site have run into technical problems.

Read This Now: USAID Climate Change and Development Strategy

Will Rogers — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 13:28:25 +0000

Author:

Will Rogers

Last week, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) released its new climate change and development strategy. The document, according to USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah, provides a roadmap for promoting sustainable global growth that leverages USAID’s long history of development activities, including disaster risk reduction, natural resources management and energy sector reform.

According to the strategy, USAID’s goal is to “enable countries to accelerate their transition to climate-resilient low emission sustainable economic development.” To achieve this goal, the strategy delineates three strategic objectives:

Accelerate the transition to low emission development through investments in clean energy and sustainable landscapes;

Increase resilience of people, places, and livelihoods through investments in adaptation; and

Strengthen development outcomes by integrating climate change in Agency programming, learning, policy dialogues and operations.

What is noteworthy is that the strategy explicitly addresses the budget-constrained environment that USAID must adapt to. “In order to effectively use these resources in a budget-constrained environment, USAID is committed to focusing and concentrating climate change investments for maximum impact,” the strategy reads, recognizing that USAID cannot operate in every developing country that is at risk from global climate change. Indeed, USAID – as we’re seeing with many federal agencies now – must make hard choices about where it will operate. To make those choices, USAID lays out three criteria it will consider when deciding which countries to dedicate dollars to for climate change and development activities: