Saudi Oil and Diplomacy

The price of brent crude oil is now at its lowest in over three years in an apparent move by the Saudi government to use their influence on the oil market as a tool of diplomacy. The precise intentions of the Saudis in encouraging the price of oil to fall are somewhat convoluted, however the falling price may have several results.



For one, the price drop will effectively provide a tax cut to American consumers, which will potentially stimulate the economy as a whole as well as benefit individual consumers. Also, the drop in price will put strain on the economies of Russia and Iran, which are already hurting from economic sanctions.

The move by the Saudis, according to some, is a carefully orchestrated plan to benefit diplomatically with the United States while also hurting their rivals in Iran and Russia. The relationship between Saudi Arabia and the United States has been somewhat stressed as of late due to the nuclear talks between the United States and Iran, a major rival to Saudi Arabia.

The Saudis would prefer to see the nuclear talks with Iran fail, however it is possible that the economic pressure on Iran from lower oil prices will encourage Tehran to be more agreeable at the talks in order to get relief from economic sanctions the country already faces.

There has been some speculation of direct collusion between the Saudis and the United States to cause the price of oil to drop as they did in the 1980s to put pressure on the Soviet Union. This does not appear to be the case this time, however, and the drop is not without consequences for the US economy. The drop in oil prices, in addition to hurting the Russian and Iranian economies, puts pressure on the American natural gas industry. The boom in natural gas in the United States has taken up a larger part of the global energy market in recent years and the Saudis intend to slow that growth with their influence on the oil market.

Image Source
Article Source

Water Diary

According to waterfootprint.org, I use 1,083 cubic meters of water in one year. This is significantly less than the national average for the United States, which is 2,842 cubic meters per year. According to nationalgeographic.com, I use 1,660 gallons of water each day. The U.S. average is 2,088 gallons per day.

The global average water footprint is 1,385 cubic meters per person per year, less than half the average in the United States. In the U.S., 20.2% of the water footprint falls outside of the country. In the Middle East, specifically in the Arabian Peninsula, the percentage of the water footprint falling outside of the states is much higher. In Yemen, 75.7% of the footprint falls outside; in the United Arab Emirates, 75.7% falls outside; in Saudi Arabia, 66.1% falls outside.

There are many implications that go along with having such large percentages of these water footprints falling outside of the states. This is an indication of the dependence on outside sources of water, food, and other goods that require large quantities of water to produce. Similar to the United States’ dependence on foreign oil, states in the Middle East are dependent on foreign water. This is a human rights issue, as well as an issue of economics and politics.

The average water footprint of an individual in Yemen is 901 cubic meters, while the average water footprint of someone in the United Arab Emirates is a whopping 3,136 cubic meters (more than twice the global average). Both have the same percentage of their footprint falling outside of the country. This disparity may be caused by the oil wealth enjoyed by the UAE and lacked by Yemen. People in poorer countries do not have the same access to fresh water as those in wealthier countries, which is a major reason for the water footprint being so much smaller.

States with larger percentages of their water footprints falling outside the country are subject to market fluctuations, potentially subjecting their economies to stress when food prices rise. States with smaller percentages of their water footprints falling outside the country are more self-sufficient and are not as subject to market fluctuations. Those countries that rely heavily on outside sources for water, food, and other goods are more interdependent, which is a bad thing from a realist’s perspective. According to liberalism, however, this interdependence is positive and fosters stability.