Review of Economics and Development Studies, Vol. 6 (2) 2020, 381-390 381 Energy Security: A National Security Paradigm Shift for US in Post 9/11 Epoch a Quratulain Abbas, b Khawaja Alqama a PhD Scholar, Department of Political Science, Bahaudin Zakriya University, Multan / Lecturer, GPP Department, National Defense University Islamabad, Pakistan b Dean Social Sciences and Humanities, Minhaj University, Lahore, Pakistan ARTICLE DETAILS ABSTRACT History: Accepted 17 May 2020 Available Online 15 June 2020 "Energy Security" is a safe and abrupt means of getting a secure supply of energy sources. In order to function smoothly, the modern economies need to have a secure and uninterrupted supply of energy resource. This importance has linked Energy Security with the National Security of Nation-States thus making energy primarily a significant resource for the powers around the globe. However, an uneven distribution of the resource has led to susceptibility amongst states thus leading to a situation of anxiety around the globe. Roots of this anxiety can be traced back in 1973, the oil embargo, which forced the giant economies to think seriously about the concept of Energy Security. This study thus aimed to explain that there exists a link between energy, economy and National Security. This linkage of energy with economy and national security has paved way for the National Security Paradigm shift. The study explains the factors related to political as well as economic global scenario that have ignited the concept of "Energy Security" and its link with "National Security". © 2020 The authors. Published by SPCRD Global Publishing. This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial 4.0 Keywords: CARs, Energy Security, National Security, Dollar Hegemony, Energy Security Trio JEL Classification: P28, P29, F52 DOI: 10.47067/reads.v6i2.216 Corresponding author’s email address: dralqama@hotmail.com 1. Introduction For an efficient performance of the global economies, a rapid and incessant supply of energy resource is important, this rapid and relentless supply is called as Energy Security. It can further be explained as, "enjoying supplies at sufficient and acceptable cost". An energy expert Daniel Yergin is of the view: ''The chief objective of this phenomenon is to promise acceptable, unswerving supplies at evenhanded costs that may not be considered a threat to the state, her values and her desired aims''. In other words, it is a term defined to describe a link between access to natural resources and political and economic security of Nation-States in the name of secure supplies and price stability (Yergin, 1990). Review of Economics and Development Studies, Vol. 6 (2) 2020, 381-390 382 The expression "Energy Security" can be traced back to 70s when the all Arab states cut off the oil supply to the western states in order to punish them on their support to Arab-Israel cause. This catastrophe hiked the oil prices three times in the international market. Later the prices were doubled in 1979-1980 as a consequence of the Shah's downfall. These series of episodes have placed energy at a fundamental position at global level. The growing economic interdependence has further intensified the significance of energy and has raised the concept as a global issue. Today, the concept has not been limited to supply and demand it has crossed the limitations of market, trade, economy and politics. Oil being the most significant source of energy is a non-renewable and it is the life line of economies and societies. The significance of energy in economics has been well portrayed by Hennery Kissinger in April 1986, "Understanding the relation between economy as well as energy is vital otherwise one cannot be a great politician or statesmen. Only knowledge related to foreign policy as well as security is not enough" (Mahdi, 2010). Similarly, Obama says, "In a time of such great challenge for America, our future has no single concern as fundamental as energy is. America's dependence on oil is one of the most serious threats that have been seen by our country. It bankrolls dictators, pays for the spread of nuclear weapons, and funds both sides of our fight against terrorism. It puts the American people at the mercy of shifting oil prices, stifles innovation and sets back our ability to compete" (Lansford, 2007). A U.S Marine corps, Gen. James Johns explained, "Our whole economy depends on the expectation that the energy will be abundant, available and will be payable. Nations such as Venezuela and Iran could use oil and gas as political and economic weapons by manipulating the market. Half of our trade deficit goes toward buying oil from abroad, and some of that money ends up in the hands of terrorists" (Gendzier, 2003). This significance of oil as a chief source of energy provides a link between energy, economy and security thus giving rise to an "Energy security Trio". This trio has thus paved way to a paradigm shift in the existing concept of "National Security". "Energy Security Trio" unfolding the relation between Energy, Economy and Security In order to maintain her position as a hagemon United States of America must free herself from the sway of this "Energy Security Trio". This link between "Trio" and National Security paradigm shift for USA has been further explained by President Bush, "States and USA can achieve real security when they will get rid of dependence on energy" (Siddiqui, 2003). In past a lot of research has been done on energy and its importance, in this respect Daniel Yergin in his book, "The Quest" describes significance of control over resources, "Whoever controls the world’s oil assets controls the world in a way that mere occupation of the territory cannot be harmonized." He auxiliary added, "Oil is scrupulously tangled with the tactful planning of the states and Energy Sources Secuirty Energy Security Economy Review of Economics and Development Studies, Vol. 6 (2) 2020, 381-390 383 politics, it is not just a commodity but a converging point for global economic policies and security of national and trade interests" (Yergin, 2011). A similar relation of economy with the resources has been provided by William, "Expansion in economy has now turned out to be a means and an end for the policy-makers of US. The economic expansion has been defined as an objective, as it is of vital significance for the efficient working of the domestic economic system; it was also regarded as a means to construct the empire of peace as well as prosperity which would make the world safe for constant expansion in the coming years and this is only possible with accessibility to economic resources"(Williams, 2005). In this respect America's growing dependence on imports of raw materials like oil, has been well defined by Kolko, the capacity of US to get hold of such essential raw materials and stability in its costs has been "one of the keystones of its economic supremacy", furthermore, in order to uphold her dominance in the international market structure these supplies has to be secured (Gabriel, 1971). Same view has been positively agreed upon by two political economists Naomi Klein along with Stephen Kinzer however they purposed a vicious change work as a brawny instrument for the promotion of trade and industrial interests of United States. Well suited examples in this respect are US invasions in Afghan territory in 2003, 1973 in Chile and Iraq (Zahid, 2010). Similarly, Svante Karlsson's view in one of his publications, "Oil and the World Order: American Foreign Oil Policy"," be in charge of oil is the chief principle of US dominating economic order, this principle gave her power over the international market and this domination has led her towards a closely interrelated domination of international economic order". In order to maintain her National security and her position as a sole hegemon it is important for her to be in charge of oil around the globe as mentioned by Noam Chomsky that in order to dominate the economies of whole EU and other economic giants it is necessary to be in charge of oil (Barsamian, 2005). Similarly another scholar Ian Rutledge portrays his view that "flitching Oil" is not the only US target however "controlling Oil" is the second part of his motive (Rutledge, 2005). A lot of research has already been done on issues like security, defense and military use in energy sector however focus over relation between military, defense, economy and energy has been least worked on. The theorists in past have worked over the economic motive as one of the main reason behind the US engagements in the energy rich regions around the globe however less focus has been given on other economic and political factors that has engaged US in energy game. Even so, the main purpose of the current research is not to fill the theoretical slit missed by scholars regarding the investigation of energy resources and its precincts. However it's an effort to find a link between the various components of the trio developed as a consequence of Energy, Economy and National Security. The purpose of the current research is to stumble on the energy factors responsible for the paradigm shift in the traditional concept of National Security. Although the transformation of the concept is a global issue however, the main focus will be United States of America. Keeping in view the gap left in the previous literature economically, the research further aims to put an effort to find out how securing Energy trade can be significant for US "Dollar Hegemony" or "Dollar Imperialism". Previously, much less focus has been given to the post 9/11 era as the scholar's center of attention have been post WWII and post Cold war era however, the present study has been framed with in the post 9/11 era. Review of Economics and Development Studies, Vol. 6 (2) 2020, 381-390 384 In contemplation to reach the ambition of the study the descriptive study research has been followed as it aimed at casting light on challenges posed for the relationship between energy and national security. Qualitative and interpretative research methods have been used to find out the various political and economic factors and their contribution in linking Economy, Energy Security and National Security. For this purpose secondary data collection techniques have been used. Books, scholarly articles, archival data and other internet resources along with the reports published by different related institutions have been used. The soundness of the concept is tested by scrutiny of data by implementing the Hegemonic Stability Theory. The theory explains that existence of a hagemon is critical for the smooth running of the global system. US being a hagemon is putting an effort to restore its political as well as economic stability in order to remain as the sole dominant player of the globe. In this respect the most vital for her is to secure her energy supplies that will directly make her existence safe as a Hagemon. Moreover the theory further helps to explain the stability of "Dollar Hegemony" or "Dollar Imperialism" in the Global Energy Market. The approach further helps to understand the transformation of "Power Struggle" to "Energy Struggle". The paradigm shift has altered the term "Power Struggle" to "Energy Struggle". The theory thus helps to analyze the "Energy Struggle" and its implications on National security. Similarly, the link between different forms of security like national, economic and political and energy will be better understood by keeping in view the realist concept of security (Waltz, 1979, pp. 102-128). In this respect, it can be considered that the struggle for resources and power play related to energy security can be well understood through the structural frame work of HST and its realist counterpart. 2. Importance of Energy for US Since its discovery oil has been a significant component in the global politics and economics. The significance of this component is also seen noteworthy in the US course of actions during her 3 episodes of political and economic supremacy. "The cold war era", "Post cold war" and "post 9/11 era". Although the global scenario changed in post 9/11 era, yet the main ingredient of the state interest is the secure supply of energy. The US engagements in various regions from time to time, like "Operation Desert Storm" to "Operation Liberation Iraq", "The rebellion movements in Middle East", "The Syrian issue", "The Yemen issue", "Internal strife" "Political instability", the armed incursion in Afghanistan, it is not less than the "Energy Security" purpose behind it. 3. National security Energy feeds the conflict and fierceness, it gives strength to the means of warfare and it lay down power play in politics and economy. Henry J in 2002 has well defined the same concept," US is highly dependent on energy sources and in case of any accident or any other reason disruption in supply line may cause a major threat to National security and if such interruption is caused by any unlikely group or state it can be rightly called as " Caucus Belli". Hence this issue is not just limited to economy it is a concern of National Security"(Hyde, 2003). "Pentagon" is a huge consumer of oil as explained by Michael Klare, "The Pentagon is itself one of the environment's largest oil consumers, overshadowing 134 million barrels of oil in 2005, and this consumption is equal to as much as the whole Swedish nation consumes. The Middle East and the Gulf have dominated the oil supplies, more and more dependence on oil is making the US more and more vulnerable to multiple hazards" (Klare, 2008). US oil consumption pattern along with the CIS and Middle East Reserve position is explained through the given graphs: Review of Economics and Development Studies, Vol. 6 (2) 2020, 381-390 385 US oil consumption pattern Thousand Barrels Per Day Source: BP Statistical Review 2019 Proven Oil Reserves (Thousand Million Barrels) Source: BP Statistical Review 2019 Keeping in view the above mentioned demand and supply pattern, the USA is meeting more then 1/4 of her energy requirements from Middle East. This demand and supply pattern has placed her National and economic security under threat. By obsessing for oil she is sustaining states massing up "Weapons of Mass Destruction", funding rogue states and making terrorist organizations more strength full (Tyler, 2010). In other words this obsession of oil is a major bursary to the extremists, who can use this funding to buy weapons that can be used against the western states particularly USA. The condition is thus declared as a concern for National Security of States (Luomi, 2011). Likewise, oil trade with the pro authoritarian unfriendly regimes shall also place the national security of state at stake. This link between energy and security has been openly admitted by Bush management in 2001, "In our current course, after 20years America will import nearly two or three barrels of oil, thus increasing dependence on foreign authorities that do not always are interests of America at heart, this can only direct us to increased military involvement in zones that delivers petroleum to USA" (Yergin, 2006). It can be said that energy security and national security are linked directly with each other. Any annoyance in Energy Security may lead to obliteration of National Security. North America 0 10000 20000 30000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 North America South+Central America 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1998 2008 2017 2018 Middle East Proven Oil Reserves CIS proven Oil RESERVES Review of Economics and Development Studies, Vol. 6 (2) 2020, 381-390 386 4. The Oil weapon During Arab Israel conflict (Yom-Kipper) west supported the Israel cause; repulsively in order to penalize the west the Arab oil producing states stopped the flow of oil to all the western states particularly in 1973. Although there was a political motive behind this embargo however it resulted in a price hike of oil (Rutledge, 1999). The devastating results of embargo were enough to prove the political as well as economic power of the natural resource they had in their hands. In 1973, the scenario gave birth to the idea that this natural resource is a dangerous "Weapon" that has the ability to shake the international market. These Oil impediments are painstaking issue as they produce over lapping impact; this phenomenon is well explained by the given stacked venn. Staked venn explaining over lapping impacts of Embargo The availability of "oil" is not an issue but its presence in unfriendly hands is a matter of unease for the states. The scenarios has acquired the shape of a haunting night mare for USA, the given Venn describes the factors behind this. Venn describes the Nightmare factors 5. The Price outburst Energy Security National Secuirty Extremists can use oil embargo to black mail west and USA Use of oil by the terrorist or extremist organisations . Price Explosion Supply cut off Oil Embargo Non availability of any suitable alternative Extreme dependace on oil from Rogue states Oil obsession has given rise to something equivalent to Economic Atomic Bomb Review of Economics and Development Studies, Vol. 6 (2) 2020, 381-390 387 Another impact of the oil embargo was a sudden price hike. Since the first price hike the international oil market failed to achieve in stability in price conservation. The impact of this instability in price is equally disastrous for global economies. The severity of such price hike episodes have resulted in economic death and even the vanishing of some states from the global map. Given Figure explains yearly Price instability in international Market (Schneider, 2004). Graph Indicating Price Hyke over years These uncertainties and price instability led to the accumulation of dollars from around the globe to the oil producing states making them more powerful and others more vulnerable (Tatom, 1993). The rising political instability in Middle East, fear of Iranian Nuclear program was thought to be a cause of international market oil supply disruption (Lee, 2002). The rise of fear of oil shortage in global market led to a concept of "fear premium" that consequently transferred further 3 trillion dollars to oil producer's banks. This scenario decreased the dollar's purchasing power. This situation slowed down the global trade and clients uphold their money in the global economic markets. It also led to increased prices in goods and services thus leading to a low growth rate in economy. Economically, when oil is the chief input of international market any sudden price amplification may lead to a disturbance in supply and demand of goods and services. Secondly elevated prices may show the way towards a cheaper business activity as soaring prices may lessen the retail ability of the buyer resulting in an induced suspicion regarding the future (Fernald, 2005). 6. Shielding Dollar dominance in Global Energy Market The Asian Times presents Henry Lieu's view, "World trade business is now a game in which the America is printing dollars and the remaining world is manufacturing stuff that dollars can pay for" (Liu, Yeung, 2008). WW2 led to a shaggy economic situation for Europe and Japan while on the other hand United States of America had a stable economy with highest manufacturing capacity. This rapidly mounting economy augmented her energy consumption that reached to its peak during 1970s and 80s that further resulted in a threefold increase during 2000s. As mentioned earlier most of her oil imports were coming from the Gulf States, amongst these oil producing states Saudi-Arabia was dominating the energy trade. She was the only state amongst OPEC nations who is not answerable for her production percentage. She can be called as "Swing Producer" means she has the ability to elevate or cut the oil production any time thus resulting in trembling of international oil market. The import pattern forced USA to secure her currency's position in international market. In this 0 100 200 2003 2004 2006 2008 Oil Price $ Per Barrels Oil Price $ Per Barrels https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/2005/november/why-the-jump-in-oil-prices-has-not-led-to-a-recession/ Review of Economics and Development Studies, Vol. 6 (2) 2020, 381-390 388 context, a furtive agreement was penned between these two states, the agreement states that Saudi- Arabia will trade oil in dollars and in return USA will protect her regime (Tracy, Kumar, 2004). This situation enhanced the significance of dollar in the international market consequencely states have to buy dollars first and then buy oil. In case if any state fails to earn desired amount of dollars they have to look to international institutions like IMF plus World Bank. Whereas the scenario for USA will be different she just has to produce $ and purchase oil. This state of affairs resulted in dollar's increased stipulation in the global market thus making it a "Fiat Currency" (Vasudevan, 2009). All these dollars are deposited in US banks, till 2012 around 8 trillion of assets in USA were held by foreigners. Moreover all loans and grants by international institutions are released in dollars. This situation gave strength to the dollar resulting in domination of international politics and economics by USA (Tracy, Kumar, 2004). It can be said that dollar is more an "oil-backed" than being "gold-backed". This state of affairs is known as "Dollar hegemony", "Dollar Imperialism"(Chinn, 2008). Although the "Dollar Hegemony" seems unchallenged however the trade of oil in any other currency may result in serious threats and challenges for USA. In last few decades such efforts have been seen in the oil market as few states have decided to transfer their currency reserves to "Euros". Iraq is the first drop of rain in this respect followed by Iran, Russia, Libya, Venezuela and China. In Iraq "Oil for Food Program" has also been dealt in Euros that is followed by conversion of 10,000,000,000 $ funds to Euros. The same step has been taken by Iran and China in 2003 and they started converting their forex reserves either to local currency, Gold or Euros. According to a report of Business Weak, "The tale is similar across the globe. Money traders say that institutes as diverse as Bank of Canada, People's Bank of China, and Central Bank of Taiwan are giving more weight to the European currency. They forecast, by the end of this year, the Euro could account for 20% of universal foreign currency reserves, which today amount to a $2.4 trillion. Currency specialists say the wide U.S existing account deficit and the euro still higher, in the coming two to four years" (Kirshner, 2008). Other factors that have contributed to the declining role of Dollar is the "USA patriot act" and the blame of financing the terrorist states and groups, Muslim financer states are transferring their reserves to Europe due to fear of seizure of their accounts. Similarly the US hostile policies towards Iran have also abandoned oil trade in dollars at the regional level. Europe and OPEC states own around 45% of global trade with each other as compared to US thus leading to a current account deficit for her (Kirshner, 2008). This high percentage of trade between EU and OPEC will definitely be preferred in Euros, Iran and Russia is the examples in this respect. (Kumar, Tracy 2004). Any shift of Petro-Trade from dollars to Euro may lead to death knell of US economic and political supremacy. In order to continue her existence as an economic and political hagemon it is significant for her to secure "Dollar Hagemony" over global Energy Trade. For this purpose domination over Energy resources is considerable otherwise US Economic and National Security will be under siege. 7. Conclusion The article has sketched the significance of energy for the modern economies and its link with the national security around the globe. From author's own perception the notion of Energy Security has altered the concept of National security particularly for United States being a hagemon. The emergence Review of Economics and Development Studies, Vol. 6 (2) 2020, 381-390 389 of concepts like Price explosion, oil as a weapon and the existence of Dollar imperialism in the international energy market has developed a global Energy Trio that can be considered as a major cause of paradigm shift in National security. The Trio is not only limited to economies or energy sources, it thus involves many transnational and national actors like Multinationals linked with the energy sectors, terrorist groups, Rogue or authoritarian states of Persian Gulf and other energy rich areas, disruptions in global energy markets, weapons of mass destruction, development of nuclear weapons by the alleged states like Iran, rivalry in Persian Gulf and the apprehensions of marine energy trade routes. This Trio is thus capable of exerting a direct influence on the economic growth thus capable of directly threatening the National Security. Through the lens of "Hegemonic Stability theory" it is analyzed that in order to maintain her position as a global economic and political hagemon it is important for United States to accept this National Security paradigm shift and its link with the Energy Security. Although she has already engaged herself in Middle East and Central Asia however, she still has challenges to face like origin of Thirsty dragon China as an economic giant, the instability in the Gulf, Domestic issues in Central Asia and the domination of Russia on major energy routes in Central Asia. Under this situation it is recommended for US that the National Security Council must administer in association with other US departments like foreign affairs, defense, and energy in order to achieve the desired objectives in the regions. She must try to maintain friendly relations with states like China in order to get rid of Russian oil passage sway. Soft policy will be more appreciable in the regional scenario, while on the other hand tackling CARs with the hard policy can create a mess for US. Similarly, she must need to show improvement in relations related to anti-terrorism and intelligence with the states in the area of concern. Law enforcement agencies have to be restructured and their performance has to be revised. Likewise, in order to maintain her "Dollar Hegemony" in the energy market she has to revise her sanction policy specifically against states like Iran. Such bans usually lead to secret trade with the rivals like Russia and China. Usually this secret trade of oil and other commodities is done in local currency or gold, a recent trio of India, China and Russia in this respect has already been seen. In order to secure her dominance she has to overcome her conflict and must uplift sanctions towards Iran as this new relation will be helpful in accessing the energy transportation routes that are not under Russian influence. Although the current research has touched upon few most important factors responsible for the National Security Paradigm shift however few areas still needs further research like the episode of 9/11 has given rise to many new concepts for example, origin of new ideological wars, it is a general conception that the notion of ideologies has vanished however the 9/11 episode has bought it back, the world is again moving towards Jihad and crusades however these are not over spread of religious ideologies its over economic resources. Secondly, another term has been originated following the 9/11 episode, "Imperial Crusades" as mentioned by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair. "Imperial Crusades" are wars fought for Oil resources an example in this scenario are the two Gulf wars. The term "Imperial Crusades" is directly linked with the notion to have power over energy resources. Much less work has been done in this respect in order to understand the paradigm shift in detail these concepts and the transformations in the 9/11 era needs further research. These new components of global order are an important factor in this National Security Paradigm Shift. References Yergin, D. (2011). The prize: The epic quest for oil, money & power. Simon and Schuster. Mahdi, A. (2010). US foreign policy and energy resources during the George W. Bush administration. Review of Economics and Development Studies, Vol. 6 (2) 2020, 381-390 390 University of Birmingham PhD thesis. Covarrubias, J., & Lansford, T. (Eds.). (2007). Strategic interests in the Middle East: opposition and support for US foreign policy. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Gendzier, I. (2003). Oil, Iraq and US foreign policy in the Middle East. Situation Analysis, 2, 18-28. Ahmed, A., & Siddique, M. J. (2017). Trump's Rush to the Middle East in the Prism of Offensive Realism. Defence Journal, 21(1), 65. Williams, W. A. (1988). The tragedy of American diplomacy. WW Norton & Company. Kolko, G. (1997). Vietnam: Anatomy of a peace. Psychology Press. Anwar, Z. (2010). Gwadar deep sea port's emergence as regional trade and transportation hub: Prospects and Problems. Journal of Political studies, 17(2), 97. Ali, T., & Barsamian, D. (2005). Speaking of empire and resistance: conversations with Tariq Ali. New Press. Rutledge, I. (2007). New Labour, energy policy and ‘competitive markets’. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 31(6), 901-925. Klare, M. T. (2008). The new geopolitics of energy. The Nation, 19, 1-8. Klare, M. T. (2008). The new geopolitics of energy. The Nation, 19, 1-8. Tyler, P. (2010). A World of Trouble: The White House and the Middle East--from the Cold War to the War on Terror. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Yergin, D., Stanislaw, J., & Eklof, D. (2006). The US Strategic Petroleum Reserve: Margin of Security. Cambridge Energy Research Associates. Rutledge, I. (2007). New Labour, energy policy and ‘competitive markets’. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 31(6), 901-925. Schneider-Mayerson, M. (2015). Peak oil: Apocalyptic environmentalism and libertarian political culture. University of Chicago Press. Lee, P. K. (2005). China's quest for oil security: oil (wars) in the pipeline?. The Pacific Review, 18(2), 265-301. Hunter, A., & Cheng, L. (2008). China and the New International Security Agenda. In Globalization and Environmental Challenges (pp. 839-854). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. Sharma, S., Tracy, S., & Kumar, S. (2004). The invasion of Iraq: Dollar vs Euro. Z Magazine, February, 2004, 53-6. Vasudevan, R. (2009). Dollar hegemony, financializationss, and the credit crisis. Review of Radical Political Economics, 41(3), 291-304. Chinn, M., & Frankel, J. A. (2008). Why the euro will rival the dollar. International Finance. Kirshner, J. (2008). Dollar primacy and American power: What's at stake?. Review of International Political Economy, 15(3), 418-438.