This was affirmed inthe treaty ending the American revolution, Treaty of Paris. Rt to navigate the miss from mouth to head waters & Canada.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cliff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 23:55:37 -0000
Subject: [FairfieldLife] New Orleans from a geopolitical perspective

New Orleans: A Geopolitical Prize
By George Friedman

The American political system was founded in Philadelphia, but the American 
nation was 
built on the vast farmlands that stretch from the Alleghenies to the Rockies. 
That farmland 
produced the wealth that funded American industrialization: It permitted the 
formation of 
a class of small landholders who, amazingly, could produce more than they could 
consume. They could sell their excess crops in the east and in Europe and save 
that 
money, which eventually became the founding capital of American industry.

But it was not the extraordinary land nor the farmers and ranchers who alone set 
the 
process in motion. Rather, it was geography -- the extraordinary system of 
rivers that 
flowed through the Midwest and allowed them to ship their surplus to the rest of 
the 
world. All of the rivers flowed into one -- the Mississippi -- and the 
Mississippi flowed to 
the ports in and around one city: New Orleans. It was in New Orleans that the 
barges from 
upstream were unloaded and their cargos stored, sold and reloaded on ocean-going 

vessels. Until last Sunday, New Orleans was, in many ways, the pivot of the 
American 
economy.

For that reason, the Battle of New Orleans in January 1815 was a key moment in 
American 
history. Even though the battle occurred after the War of 1812 was over, had the 
British 
taken New Orleans, we suspect they wouldn't have given it back. Without New 
Orleans, the 
entire Louisiana Purchase would have been valueless to the United States. Or, to 
state it 
more precisely, the British would control the region because, at the end of the 
day, the 
value of the Purchase was the land and the rivers - which all converged on the 
Mississippi 
and the ultimate port of New Orleans. The hero of the battle was Andrew Jackson, 
and 
when he became president, his obsession with Texas had much to do with keeping 
the 
Mexicans away from New Orleans. 

During the Cold War, a macabre topic of discussion among bored graduate students 
who 
studied such things was this: If the Soviets could destroy one city with a large 
nuclear 
device, which would it be? The usual answers were Washington or New York. For 
me, the 
answer was simple: New Orleans. If the Mississippi River was shut to traffic, 
then the 
foundations of the economy would be shattered. The industrial minerals needed in 
the 
factories wouldn't come in, and the agricultural wealth wouldn't flow out. 
Alternative 
routes really weren't available. The Germans knew it too: A U-boat campaign 
occurred 
near the mouth of the Mississippi during World War II. Both the Germans and 
Stratfor have 
stood with Andy Jackson: New Orleans was the prize.

Last Sunday, nature took out New Orleans almost as surely as a nuclear strike. 
Hurricane 
Katrina's geopolitical effect was not, in many ways, distinguishable from a 
mushroom 
cloud. The key exit from North America was closed. The petrochemical industry, 
which has 
become an added value to the region since Jackson's days, was at risk. The 
navigability of 
the Mississippi south of New Orleans was a question mark. New Orleans as a city 
and as a 
port complex had ceased to exist, and it was not clear that it could recover.

The Ports of South Louisiana and New Orleans, which run north and south of the 
city, are 
as important today as at any point during the history of the republic. On its 
own merit, 
POSL is the largest port in the United States by tonnage and the fifth-largest 
in the world. 
It exports more than 52 million tons a year, of which more than half are 
agricultural 
products -- corn, soybeans and so on. A large proportion of U.S. agriculture 
flows out of 
the port. Almost as much cargo, nearly 17 million tons, comes in through the 
port -- 
including not only crude oil, but chemicals and fertilizers, coal, concrete and 
so on. 

A simple way to think about the New Orleans port complex is that it is where the 
bulk 
commodities of agriculture go out to the world and the bulk commodities of 
industrialism 
come in. The commodity chain of the global food industry starts here, as does 
that of 
American industrialism. If these facilities are gone, more than the price of 
goods shifts: 
The very physical structure of the global economy would have to be reshaped. 
Consider 
the impact to the U.S. auto industry if steel doesn't come up the river, or the 
effect on 
global food supplies if U.S. corn and soybeans don't get to the markets.

The problem is that there are no good shipping alternatives. River transport is 
cheap, and 
most of the commodities we are discussing have low value-to-weight ratios. The 
U.S. 
transport system was built on the assumption that these commodities would travel 
to and 
from New Orleans by barge, where they would be loaded on ships or offloaded. 
Apart from 
port capacity elsewhere in the United States, there aren't enough trucks or rail 
cars to 
handle the long-distance hauling of these enormous quantities -- assuming for 
the 
moment that the economics could be managed, which they can't be.

The focus in the media has been on the oil industry in Louisiana and 
Mississippi. This is 
not a trivial question, but in a certain sense, it is dwarfed by the shipping 
issue. First, 
Louisiana is the source of about 15 percent of U.S.-produced petroleum, much of 
it from 
the Gulf. The local refineries are critical to American infrastructure. Were all 
of these 
facilities to be lost, the effect on the price of oil worldwide would be 
extraordinarily 
painful. If the river itself became unnavigable or if the ports are no longer 
functioning, 
however, the impact to the wider economy would be significantly more severe. In 
a sense, 
there is more flexibility in oil than in the physical transport of these other 
commodities. 

There is clearly good news as information comes in. By all accounts, the 
Louisiana 
Offshore Oil Port, which services supertankers in the Gulf, is intact. Port 
Fourchon, which is 
the center of extraction operations in the Gulf, has sustained damage but is 
recoverable. 
The status of the oil platforms is unclear and it is not known what the 
underwater systems 
look like, but on the surface, the damage - though not trivial -- is manageable.

The news on the river is also far better than would have been expected on 
Sunday. The 
river has not changed its course. No major levees containing the river have 
burst. The 
Mississippi apparently has not silted up to such an extent that massive dredging 
would be 
required to render it navigable. Even the port facilities, although apparently 
damaged in 
many places and destroyed in few, are still there. The river, as transport 
corridor, has not 
been lost.

What has been lost is the city of New Orleans and many of the residential 
suburban areas 
around it. The population has fled, leaving behind a relatively small number of 
people in 
desperate straits. Some are dead, others are dying, and the magnitude of the 
situation 
dwarfs the resources required to ameliorate their condition. But it is not the 
population 
that is trapped in New Orleans that is of geopolitical significance: It is the 
population that 
has left and has nowhere to return to.

The oil fields, pipelines and ports required a skilled workforce in order to 
operate. That 
workforce requires homes. They require stores to buy food and other supplies. 
Hospitals 
and doctors. Schools for their children. In other words, in order to operate the 
facilities 
critical to the United States, you need a workforce to do it -- and that 
workforce is gone. 
Unlike in other disasters, that workforce cannot return to the region because 
they have no 
place to live. New Orleans is gone, and the metropolitan area surrounding New 
Orleans is 
either gone or so badly damaged that it will not be inhabitable for a long time. 


It is possible to jury-rig around this problem for a short time. But the fact is 
that those 
who have left the area have gone to live with relatives and friends. Those who 
had the 
ability to leave also had networks of relationships and resources to manage 
their exile. But 
those resources are not infinite -- and as it becomes apparent that these people 
will not 
be returning to New Orleans any time soon, they will be enrolling their children 
in new 
schools, finding new jobs, finding new accommodations. If they have any 
insurance money 
coming, they will collect it. If they have none, then -- whatever emotional 
connections 
they may have to their home -- their economic connection to it has been severed. 
In a very 
short time, these people will be making decisions that will start to reshape 
population and 
workforce patterns in the region.

A city is a complex and ongoing process - one that requires physical 
infrastructure to 
support the people who live in it and people to operate that physical 
infrastructure. We 
don't simply mean power plants or sewage treatment facilities, although they are 
critical. 
Someone has to be able to sell a bottle of milk or a new shirt. Someone has to 
be able to 
repair a car or do surgery. And the people who do those things, along with the 
infrastructure that supports them, are gone -- and they are not coming back 
anytime 
soon.

It is in this sense, then, that it seems almost as if a nuclear weapon went off 
in New 
Orleans. The people mostly have fled rather than died, but they are gone. Not 
all of the 
facilities are destroyed, but most are. It appears to us that New Orleans and 
its environs 
have passed the point of recoverability. The area can recover, to be sure, but 
only with the 
commitment of massive resources from outside -- and those resources would always 
be at 
risk to another Katrina.

The displacement of population is the crisis that New Orleans faces. It is also 
a national 
crisis, because the largest port in the United States cannot function without a 
city around 
it. The physical and business processes of a port cannot occur in a ghost town, 
and right 
now, that is what New Orleans is. It is not about the facilities, and it is not 
about the oil. It 
is about the loss of a city's population and the paralysis of the largest port 
in the United 
States.

Let's go back to the beginning. The United States historically has depended on 
the 
Mississippi and its tributaries for transport. Barges navigate the river. Ships 
go on the 
ocean. The barges must offload to the ships and vice versa. There must be a 
facility to 
empower this exchange. It is also the facility where goods are stored in 
transit. Without 
this port, the river can't be used. Protecting that port has been, from the time 
of the 
Louisiana Purchase, a fundamental national security issue for the United States.

Katrina has taken out the port -- not by destroying the facilities, but by 
rendering the area 
uninhabited and potentially uninhabitable. That means that even if the 
Mississippi remains 
navigable, the absence of a port near the mouth of the river makes the 
Mississippi 
enormously less useful than it was. For these reasons, the United States has 
lost not only 
its biggest port complex, but also the utility of its river transport system -- 
the foundation 
of the entire American transport system. There are some substitutes, but none 
with 
sufficient capacity to solve the problem.

It follows from this that the port will have to be revived and, one would 
assume, the city as 
well. The ports around New Orleans are located as far north as they can be and 
still be 
accessed by ocean-going vessels. The need for ships to be able to pass each 
other in the 
waterways, which narrow to the north, adds to the problem. Besides, the Highway 
190 
bridge in Baton Rouge blocks the river going north. New Orleans is where it is 
for a reason: 
The United States needs a city right there.

New Orleans is not optional for the United States' commercial infrastructure. It 
is a terrible 
place for a city to be located, but exactly the place where a city must exist. 
With that as a 
given, a city will return there because the alternatives are too devastating. 
The harvest is 
coming, and that means that the port will have to be opened soon. As in Iraq, 
premiums 
will be paid to people prepared to endure the hardships of working in New 
Orleans. But in 
the end, the city will return because it has to.

Geopolitics is the stuff of permanent geographical realities and the way they 
interact with 
political life. Geopolitics created New Orleans. Geopolitics caused American 
presidents to 
obsess over its safety. And geopolitics will force the city's resurrection, even 
if it is in the 
worst imaginable place. 




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
<FONT COLOR="#000099">Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make 
Yahoo! your home page
</FONT><A HREF=""http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM" target=_blank>http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM"><B>Click 
Here!</B></A>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'




SPONSORED LINKS
Iowa community credit union Transcendental meditation Maharishi university
Best of iowa community credit union Maharishi mahesh yogi


YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




Reply via email to