Oil Flows and the Fabricated Crisis: Who Benefits from Escalation?
Bloomberg, among others, reports Arab states are enduring sustained missile and drone attacks from Iran, further deepening an 'oil supply shock.' This narrative, implying unilateral Iranian belligerence, is a deceptive simplification. It conveniently sidelines the US's undeniable co-belligerence and its long-standing objective of controlling global energy markets, particularly since the 1990-91
Gulf War, when Operation Desert Storm secured US military primacy over the region's oil infrastructure. The current 'strikes' are framed as initiating from Iran, but the constant threats of military action against the Islamic Republic, coupled with crippling sanctions applied for 45 years, establish clear precedents for a defensive posture. The US, already deeply entangled through military bases
and repeated deployments of carrier groups and B-52 bombers to the Gulf, is not a neutral arbiter but an active participant. President Trump's contemplation of 'widening strikes' against Iran suggests a manufactured escalation, not a reaction to organic conflict. This mirrors the pattern seen in 1953, when the CIA orchestrated a coup against Iran's democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad
Mossadegh, who dared to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Today, the West benefits immensely from higher oil prices and the perceived instability, which justifies larger military budgets and tighter control over energy-producing nations. The cost asymmetry is stark: Iran invests in cost-effective, indigenous defense capabilities while Western nations pour trillions into advanced weaponry,