I've been wondering why the GOP has been so belligerent in talking about the Iranian nuclear situation, especially the GOP candidates.
It seems to me there are 3 possible explanations. First, we might accept that the GOP is sincere in viewing the Iranian nuclear program as a threat to peace, security, and stability (OK -- maybe not the last one, since there's hardly any stability left in the Mideast these days). We might also accept that they sincerely believe military action is capable of solving the problem, and that they believe yet another war now would be better than the alternative of allowing an Iran to gain the bomb.
Second, we might see it as part of the usual pandering to the pro-Israel vote and money and/or part of the usual, more general fear-mongering that's been a hallmark of Republicanism since Nixon was in the House. When mega-rich casino owner Jack Abelson is writing $10,000,000 checks to Newt Gingrich because the billionaire thinks Newt's the candidate most supportive of the Likud gov't., trying to seem arm-in-arm with Netanyahu is a significant calculation. It's also true that there's always votes in making Americans afraid and then claiming only the GOP can fight the new bogeyman. Furthermore, talking about a new threat helps them make the case to voters that we can't afford the defense cuts Pres. Obama would make.
So, it's good politics for candidates and the party in terms of fundraising and maybe at the ballot box in this respect. I'm wondering if there isn't another aspect to this saber-rattling and fear-mongering -- a more subtle tactic that's not aimed directly at appealing for votes (or even money) based on fears of Iran.
It's this third possibility which I want to explore in this diary. I propose that the the GOP chest-pounding about the Iranian threat is all about politics, but it has little or nothing to do with foreign policy. Rather, it's about economics and domestic policy...and how to gain an advantage on domestic matters in our upcoming elections. It's an idea that occurred to me last night when I was watching the Rachel Maddow Show, and it also ties in neatly with the GOP's sudden focus on energy policy and gas prices. Have you guessed at my brainstorm yet? Follow me below the squiggle and find out.
There's no doubt that the all the drumbeating about Iran is having an impact on voters. Witness this exchange earlier today, where the President was heckled by a woman who seems to fear such a war, and the President responded that she's "jumping the gun" and getting ahead of herself.
Any number of analysts have discussed how disastrous a strike on Iran could be for the political fortunes of President Obama and Democrats this November. The thinking being that if hostilities break out, oil supplies will be threatened, causing oil and gas prices to skyrocket. This, in turn, could sink the economic recovery and the President's reelection prospects. No doubt, the President is well aware of these political risks as he prepares for talks with the Israeli leadership about the Iranian dilemma.
Surely, the GOP understands this calculus, too, But, what if the GOP doesn't have to go so far as kicking off a war in order to sink the recovery?
On last night's the Rachel Maddow Show last night, she examined the GOP's electoral strategy, which has them abandoning nay previous support for alternative energy and focusing on a strategy that calls for massive expansion of oil (and gas) extraction -- ignoring the reality that oil production has already been increasing in the Obama Presidency, reversing a downward production trend that marked the years of the Bush Administration.
Rachel Maddow on the the GOP's Drill, Baby, Drill, election strategy
Rachel's guest was Dan Dicker, who closed out the segment by explaining that the oil market is not governed solely by the rules of supply and demand. Rather, prices are driven by speculators who are gambling that instability in the Middle East will drive up prices.According to Dicker, almost half the price of a barrel of oil is attributable to speculation on future shortages. So far, those bets are paying off handsomely. Oil prices are higher than they have ever been at this time of the year. Not surprisingly, the commodity futures price spike is now being reflected in rapidly rising prices at the gas pump. According to Dicker, the President understands the reasons why the oil market is so volatile and why increasing production will not drive down gas prices -- and Dicker notes the President has been saying as much.
Presumably, Republican politicians understand this reality. So, I'm wondering if they might be deliberately exploiting the oil market to their political advantage. Perhaps, the reason they're talking so tough on Iran is to drive up the cost of oil and gasoline. The GOP spent 3 years trying to thwart the Obama Administration's efforts to jumpstart the economy presumably operating on the premise that their own political fortunes depended on ensuring the failure of the Obama Presidency. With the GOP now facing enormous pressure to cooperate with the President on some very modest proposals to boost the job market, perhaps they're taking another approach to slowing down the economic recovery.
In other words, the GOP may be deliberately scaring the oil market, fueling speculation that will spike oil futures prices, even without any hostilities with Iran. If that's so, we can expect even more bellicose rhetoric from the GOP -- from the Presidential candidates and those in Congress (and even those running for seats in the H0use or Senate). They may or may not want a war with Iran, but they know that the more they talk about the prospect, the higher oil prices will go, and they may hope that their poll numbers will start climbing as well. If gas hits $5 a gallon this summer, Republicans may be dancing in the streets.
There's an election in Iran today. Not much chance of any change in the leadership, but we can hope the leadership itself will change its approach to negotiating on this issue. They've been following the North Korean model -- relying on a nuclear weapons program to fend off any possibility of being attacked. however, it seems the North Koreans have seen the folly of that strategy -- that it has only left the country in a weakened position. We can hope that Iran will also the wisdom of this approach -- that they have more to gain than lose by cooperation. As progressives Americans though, we must also hope that they see some mutuality of interest with the President in dialing down tensions. The only ones being helped by the war talk are oil speculators and conservatives in the USA (and maybe in Israel, too) who hope to benefit politically because of the shockwaves from their beating of the war drums.