I (FNC) am increasingly focusing on debt as an indicator of economic health
(or, mostly, the lack thereof!).

Within an article on debt, by someone named Bill Bonner,  I found stuff like the following: 
"In America, debt has become an art form."


But I also found the following in the Bonner article, and I kind of felt like the scales were falling from my eyes, with respect to the Iranian nuclear threat.

"And now Iran says it will introduce a new oil market, calibrated in euros rather than dollars. Some people think this marks the beginning of the end for the dollar. Others think it marks the beginning of the end of civilization; the United States will use nuclear weapons if necessary, they say, to prevent Iran from selling oil in euros.

The U.S. invaded Iraq not to turn the desert tribes into Democrats, the argument goes, but to stop Saddam Hussein from pricing oil in euros. Oil is quoted in dollars. Since the entire world is forced to buy oil, it must exchange local currencies for dollars to do so. This is the real source of America’s imperial finance: it exchanges dollars at par, and then gradually devalues them by diluting the world’s supply with more."

Having read the above, I dropped this search into google.

Within the hundreds of thousands of hits is an extensive literature on the business of
pricing oil in dollars, or not. Actually, if you use this more restricted search involving stuff only on one site, you still get about 100 hits.

A few assertions from this literature are quoted below.

And, as usual, it was only a little later that I found this, perhaps the best, essay on the proposed Iranian Oil Bourse.  It begins: 
"A nation-state taxes its own citizens, while an empire taxes other nation-states......." 

It concludes that, should use of the Iranian Oil Bourse accelerate the US will use one or more of the following strategies to halt or hobble the exchange:

Sabotage the exchange
Foment an Iranian coup d'état
Negotiate limitations on the exchange
Get the U.N. to declare war on Iran
Strike Iran unilaterally with nukes, probably via Israel
Initiate a unilateral total war



So, can we predict that either the US will do one or more of the above, or that there will be a major flight from the dollar?

      -Fred

====================================================================
http://www.rferl.org/features/2000/11/01112000160846.asp

Prague, 1 November 2000 (RFE/RL) -- Iraq is going ahead with its plans to stop using the U.S. dollar in its oil business in spite of warnings the move makes no financial sense.

Baghdad this week [November 2000] insisted on and received UN approval to sell oil through the oil-for-food program for euros only after 6 November. Iraq had threatened to suspend all oil exports -- about 5 percent of the world's total -- if the body turned down the request.

The move comes despite repeated cautions that Baghdad's departure from the oil industry standard of the dollar will cost the country millions in currency conversion fees. UN officials have said Iraq will have to reduce the price of its crude oil by about 10 cents a barrel in order to compensate buyers for the additional costs.

And the UN has said moving to the euro will mean Iraq earns less interest on its oil revenues, which are held in a UN- monitored escrow account in New York.

[A quarter-year after the approval to sell oil in euros, on Feb 16, 2001, U.S. and British warplanes attacked 5 anti-aircraft radars, starting the second war against Iraq.  A Financial Times article dated June 5, 2003, by Carol Hoyos and Kevin Morrison and titled "Iraq returns to the international oil market" reportedly said "The tender, for which bids are due by June 10, switches the transaction back to dollars ............ Saddam Hussein in 2000 insisted Iraq's oil be sold for euros, a political move, but one that improved Iraq's recent earnings thanks to the rise in the value of the euro against the dollar."]



From http://www.energybulletin.net/7707.html

Petrodollar Warfare: Dollars, Euros and the Upcoming Iranian Oil Bourse

by William Clark


Similar to the Iraq war, military operations against Iran relate to the macroeconomics of ‘petrodollar recycling’ and the unpublicized but real challenge to U.S. dollar supremacy from the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency.

It is now obvious the invasion of Iraq had less to do with any threat from Saddam’s long-gone WMD program and certainly less to do to do with fighting International terrorism than it has to do with gaining strategic control over Iraq’s hydrocarbon reserves and in doing so maintain the U.S. dollar as the monopoly currency for the critical international oil market. Throughout 2004 information provided by former administration insiders revealed the Bush/Cheney administration entered into office with the intention of toppling Saddam Hussein.[1][2]

.....................................

Concerning Iran, recent articles have revealed active Pentagon planning for operations against its suspected nuclear facilities. While the publicly stated reasons for any such overt action will be premised as a consequence of Iran's nuclear ambitions, there are again unspoken macroeconomic drivers [I guess the reason these 'drivers' are never mentioned in the mainstream press would be an implicit (or in a few cases explicit) understanding that if we admit we're attacking Iraq and Iran to defend the dollar and our empire, that admission itself could hasten or cause the collapse of the dollar.] underlying the second stage of petrodollar warfare – Iran's upcoming oil bourse. (The word bourse refers to a stock exchange for securities trading, and is derived from the French stock exchange in Paris, the Federation Internationale des Bourses de Valeurs.)

In essence, Iran is about to commit a far greater “offense” than Saddam Hussein's conversion to the euro for Iraq’s oil exports in the fall of 2000. Beginning in March 2006, the Tehran government has plans to begin competing with New York's NYMEX and London's IPE with respect to international oil trades – using a euro-based international oil-trading mechanism.[7]

The proposed Iranian oil bourse signifies that without some sort of US intervention, the euro is going to establish a firm foothold in the international oil trade. Given U.S. debt levels..................



The below was reprinted in Al Jazeera.


 
Iran continues to push its weight around. Now it proposes to begin pricing oil in euros. Unfortunately, just about everyone would benefit—except the United States.

For half a century, the American dollar has been the reserve currency of the world. Seventy percent of all currency reserves are in American dollars.

This has a lot to do with the fact that oil, the most important commodity traded in the world, is mostly priced in U.S. dollars. The majority of countries, being oil importers, have to buy their oil in U.S. dollars. This, together with related economic considerations, encourages them keep most of their foreign currency in dollars.

The debt-burdened U.S. economy is dependent upon this high demand for its currency in order to remain afloat. The day this demand comes to end will portend disaster for the American economy.

There is a move underway, however, to effect just such a reversal of the dollar’s fortunes. In particular, the world’s second-largest producer of crude oil—and declared enemy of the United States—Iran, seeks to end the predominance of America’s currency.

Several weeks ago, Tehran reconfirmed that it plans to create a euro-based exchange in oil—to compete with the London and New York dollar-denominated oil exchanges, both American-owned.

The proposed March 2006 launch of the Iranian oil bourse (IOB), if successful, would give the euro a foothold in the international oil trade, solidifying its status as an alternative oil transaction currency. This, in turn, could be a catalyst for a major currency flight from the dollar to the euro—and a disaster for America.

The
IOB will see crude oil, petrochemicals and other commodities of the same kind traded in euros.

Iran no doubt has multiple motives for making this move.

For one, it makes sense economically, especially since the European Union is Iran’s biggest trading partner. But more importantly, it would strike a blow to Iran’s archenemy America—and, by hoping to make Iran the main hub for oil deals in the region, help drive the Islamic Republic forward in its quest for regional supremacy.

George Perkovich, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, stated it frankly: “It’s part of a very intelligent, creative Iranian strategy—to go on the offense in every way possible and mobilize other actors against the U.S.” (Christian Science Monitor,
August 30).

Iran is eager to eliminate American influence. For Iran, which foresees a “clash of civilizations” between Islam and America—which holds the banner for the West—undermining the dollar could prove to be its best and most effective strike against a more capable military foe.

Asia Times reported that only one major actor stands to lose if oil-trading in euros takes hold: the U.S. By contrast, “Oil in euros would benefit millions … in the EU and its trading partners …. And it would loosen the grip the U.S. has on opec members” (
August 26).

One of the Federal Reserve’s nightmares may begin to unfold in the spring of 2006,” one expert on the subject stated, “when it appears that international buyers will have a choice of buying a barrel of oil for $60 on the nymex [New York Mercantile Exchange] and ipe [London’s International Petroleum Exchange] or purchase a barrel of oil for €45 to €50 via the Iranian bourse” (Global Politician,
September 2).

If oil-trading in euros were to get going, the already-existent global trend of foreign currency reserves being shifted from dollars to euros would rapidly accelerate. In turn, “countries switching to euro reserves from dollar reserves would bring down the value of the U.S. currency.  Imports would start to cost Americans a lot more …. As countries and businesses converted their dollar assets into euro assets, the U.S. property and stock market bubbles would, without doubt, burst” (The Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability,
Nov. 15, 2004).

The snowballing effect of a reserve currency switch would be catastrophic for the U.S., according to the Global Politician. The U.S. “would simply have to stop importing” (op. cit.).

Considering America’s industrial and agricultural heartland has been gutted over the last half century, this possibility could be grave. As one commentator put it, the impact of the Iran oil bourse on the U.S. dollar—and the follow-on effect on the U.S. economy—could be worse than Iran launching a “direct nuclear attack.”

Should Iran’s planned euro-based oil-trading mechanism get off the ground and gain international popularity, the U.S. dollar will weaken and the euro strengthen—helping to hasten the economic decline of the U.S. and propelling the European Union into dominance.

Though many economists consider the chances of Iran’s ambitions being successful as remote, we can know from Bible prophecy that the U.S. financial system will be brought down—along with the U.S. dollar as the reserve currency.




This article lays out the the (strawman) notion the United States undertook the Iraq war over its concern with the consequences of Saddam Hussein denominating Iraq's oil sales in euros. It builds a pretty creditable strawman, and it gives references.

Then it knocks down its strawman, concluding that the notion is little more than another web-based conspiracy theory.

It was written before the Iran issue became front-burner.



From Petrodollars to Petroeuros: Are the Dollar's Days as an International Reserve Currency Drawing to an End?

Strategic Insights, Volume II, Issue 11 (November 2003)

by Robert Looney

Strategic Insights is a monthly electronic journal produced by the Center for Contemporary Conflict at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. The views expressed here are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of NPS, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.

Click here for a PDF version of this article.


.........................................