“Royal oil families finance our debt,” Prof. John David in Charleston Gazette, Feb 5, 1991

Recent news said the Saudi royal family and the Al-Sabah family that ran Kuwait were donating $135 billion each to the allied war effcrt led by the United States. Family spokesman Sheik Nasir Al-Sabah called the amount "a small and insignificant sum. Since I am not familiar with any family that can make a $13.5 billion. I thought this subject deserved additional attention.

First of all, before we present a patriotic award for these magnificent contributions we must understand where the contributions came from. Basically, they came from gasoline users like you and me. Since Aug 2, a significant surcharge has been paid to oil brokers and the oil-producing family states.

As it turns out, seven families now control 34 percent of the world's oil reserves. These families, as you may guess, run monarchies in the Persian Gulf and do not relish the thought of losing their franchises, many of which were set up by European colonial powers. Clearly the family setups are very lucrative. In fact, the same seven families own about 30 percent of the U S. national debt.

According to the National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations, "the Gulf Cooperation Council countries (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates) as a group have been the single greatest underwriters of the American national deficit, annually investing billions of dollars in U.S. Treasury securities. ' Since it is presently popular to use the word "nations" instead of "families," all you need to do is make the word substitution to get a clear picture.

This economic relationship is central to a full understanding of what is at stake in the Persian Gulf. America has an enormous national debt hat is financed by borrowed money. On a regular basis a sizable portion of the debt comes due and has to be rolled over. For obvious reasons, the US. Treasury could ill afford to irritate or lose major investors.

There are two potential irritations that could prove troublesome. One would be for America to develop an energy policy and the use of alternate energy, thereby reducing the flow of petrodollars to the seven families. The second would be to allow their private kingdoms to be threatened or taken over, thereby reducing the flow of petrodollars to the seven families.

Clearly, the administration feels it is "in the national Interest" for America to reinstate the Al-Sabah family in Kuwait so that the family’s sizable stake in our national debt will be rolled over and perhaps Increased. In fact, our national interest might be better served with more democratic societies that dispersed wealth among people of the area, permitting the money to circulate freely and come back to other nations in the form of purchased consumer goods and services. Ironically, in order to achieve the administration's objective and finance a very expensive war, the national debt will have to go up.

The national debt connection is not the only economic irony in the Persian Gulf war. Another involves a major bank in the Atlanta area. Shortly before Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, this bank loaned $2 billion to Iraq. Recently, the chair of the House Banking Committee said it is clear that Iraq used this money to finance the invasion. Now, the bank is close to being belly-up, which means, that you may have to help pay to rescue a financial institution that loaned the money to finance a war in which our loved ones are fighting and dying.

Recently, state Sen. Robert Holliday, D-Fayette, courageously argued against the war resolution passed by the Legislature. He was right when he stated that the continuation of the U.S. role as an international policeman "would bankrupt the United States morally and economically." When you add "I the equation the savings and loan bailout costs one can clearly see that all of this is even more unaffordable. . .

Multinational corporations played a major role in preparing Iraq for war. While most people know of the Soviet-built Scud missiles, fewer know of corporate and government involvement from America. West Germany, France and several other Western nations in developing Iraq's radar, rocket factories. cannon forges, nuclear facilities and poison gas plants. Ironically, the poison gas plants were supplied by German firms.

Countries like Iraq that chose not to store petrodollars in US. and similar debt securities, multinational corporations were able to absorb petrodollars in the sale of weapons and related equipment.

Now many of these same firms score again in U.S. and European sales as these allied nations spend billions in new and replacement weapons to destroy these facilities. The firms and their subsidiaries will score once again when Iraq is rebuilt. The cycle is a profitable racket.

We now have a unique opportunity to break all traditional cycles and norms. That opportunity is for the United Nations to finally become something meaningful. The window caused by perhaps only a temporary thaw in the Cold War, could be a "new world order," although not the one led by America as envisioned by Bush. America could pay the United Nations its delinquent dues of nearly $1 billion incurred since 1980 and allow that body to have the authority and responsibility it ought to have. This is the only affordable long-run solution and is in 'our long-term national interest. There is no long-run future in a foreign policy that is hostage to those who control a significant portion of U S. Treasury IOUs.