Energy Security: Total or Banal Security
FELIX CIUTA
The author tries to invoke the discussion of energy as one of the security issues. Given the description, traditional debates or theories did not include energy in the agenda. The primarily focusing went to state, war and peace and other higher hierarchical topic other than energy. According to Ciuta, energy is everything and everything is inter-linked to energy. Without energy, things seem under insecurity – economic growth, societal prosperity and political power would be highly likely down. Thus, the totality of energy has potential impact on security of states and international. It thus says ‘energy’ security should be the subject of discussion among high politics.
The author even goes to stress that energy (as sometime called oil) as a weapon or a tool to ignite a conflictual war between groups or states. Moreover, as superpowers is hunger for natural resources yet natural resources are scarce fighting for it is very likely especially between those energy-hunger countries such as the US, China, India, Russia and many EU members. Through whatever mean, the energy supplier states (especially among OPEC) are confronting hard decision whether how much to produce and how much to set price in international market. On the other hand, to certain extend the logic of war in the Middle East and in Ukraine lately is the result of energy barging or exploitation. Interests of greater powers in the region pose tricky political situation. For sometimes, because energy is one key to prosperity and hegemony states tend to grasp the chance to take full control or dominate energy-rich countries or regions and this often result instability and fragile atmosphere.
Thus, the author comes to say energy security is the security of everything and everywhere. It covers from production to consumption and from social to economic and from a tiny to powerful states and from politics to war etc.
However, above argument does not sound in total at all. Energy is not everything and everything is not always about energy. Energy is just something. Because to say energy is everything, it may lead to the problem of all and none which can be easily attacked by the opponents. Although energy is applicably used for almost all areas and that everywhere needs energy, that does not necessary to be security of everything. Perhaps it would apply to oil or petroleum supply but this does not mean oil is the only source of energy. There are countless sources of energy and one renewable, long-term energy resources is solar power. One does not need to fight for solar energy, for example, since they could get it everywhere with friendly tools and reasonable price. War or violent conflicts would exist in consequence of the petroleum-energy bargaining since oil is non-renewable resource. Yet, there are different types of energy resources and that can be extracted from everywhere. To some extent, (oil) energy is a security issue for major industrial countries such as the U.S, the EU, China, Japan, Russia, and India and only them. Oil demand in a small state tends to be fairly equilibrium with the ability it can produce. Energy is not a big concern in Nordic countries or in North America (if the U.S begins to extract energy resources in their own territory).
Energy, thus, is an issue for healthy growth of the country. It may account for smooth growth of production, the more energy the better. However, it is not necessary that energy determines wholly survival of states and people. Of course, it is one small part of development of states, yet it is a secondary issue in international relations. In the coming years, the world probably finds an alternative ways of effectively less consuming of energy and that energy will never be a major concern anymore.
Personally, energy security means different things to different states and people. Also, its essentials owe to states that are advance and very heavily industrialized since any disruption could lose billions of dollars and may lead to global market failure. But it may owe much little to less developing ones. Energy is therefore security of part of states, part of people, part of place and part of time. Historically, energy was not a major issue in international relations and even during 1970s oil crisis was a major problem to the U.S and some of its allies. Very recently, energy is not the big problem or it might be due to war in the Middle East. However, contemporary violent conflicts are not just about energy alone but it’s about identity, democratic spring (Arab Spring) or nuclear deal between the U.S. and Iran.
Given history of war, what kinds of war were waged for purposively for energy security?
To what extent one state achieves so call assurance of energy supplies given definition in the text? When until a state’s national economy to fully realize and function?
Is energy security is a primary or secondary issue?
Is energy security is a primary or secondary issue?