Download Oil in the American Century: A Study of US Foreign Oil Policy and Corporatism (1941-1950) and more Study notes World History in PDF only on Docsity! Dr. Buzzanco HIST 6393 Book Review – Oil in the American Century by David Painter Jason P. Theriot 18 October 2006 In Oil in the American Century, author David Painter provides an analysis of the development of the political economy in the United States through its foreign oil policy from the eve of World War II until to end of the Iranian Oil Crisis in the mid-1950s. Imbedded in this research is the study of “corporatism”: the partnership between the U.S. government and major U.S. oil companies in their combined effort to find new oil reserves throughout the world. Painter’s monograph focuses on the difficulties of this public/private partnership, alluding to divisions with the U.S. government and the complexity of the oil industry as the major causes of strife within the American political ideology. The difficulties which evolved from this unlikely marriage, however, did not curtail either the U.S. government or oil companies from reaching their long-term goals: control of the world’s vast oil reserves. The partnership begins before World War II, when the U.S. Navy converted from coal to petroleum. The new mechanized armored warfare doctrine, which now used tanks, large aircraft carriers, and four-engine bombers, absorbed a large share of the already decreased amount of U.S. domestic oil reserves. Something had to be done to secure oil for U.S. domestic needs and for its fuel-driven military. In 1941, meetings between newly created government agencies and the oil companies laid plans for developing this “corporatism” for penetrating foreign oil markets. The U.S. government needed the experienced and savvy oil companies to provide the military with a ready reserve of oil and the companies themselves needed diplomacy to open the door to foreign lands. Painter quotes Ralph Davies, manager of the Office of Petroleum Coordinator, as saying “petroleum resources of Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, and other Caribbean countries [including the Middle East] must be considered to be reserves for the United States…[It is] more vital to the life of the consumer than to the producer.” Painter argues that the partnership found criticism at nearly every stop. The State Department, politicians, and even the companies themselves all grabbled with control and compromises over how to make the operation work. Nationalism of foreign oil posed the greatest threat to the U.S. partnership. Beginning with Bolivia and sweeping through Mexico, the threat of nationalism of Latin American oil forced the U.S. to re-strategize its plans and move more aggressively to keep that door open in other areas. Throughout this process, there were some noted successes in U.S. foreign oil policy, particularly in Venezuela and Saudi Arabia. Here, the partnership work with the host nations to secure for them a equal share of the profits, while preserving for the oil companies and U.S. government long-term concessions to oil reserves and production controls. Post-war domestic petroleum increases, the Marshall Plan in Europe, and the threat of communism provided more pressing needs for more markets and more reserves overseas, while preserving the U.S. reserves at home. The oil companies became, “the vehicles of national interest” to penetrate and exploit the oil-rich Middle East. Here, the U.S. government came to recognize its inferiorority to its oil partners and the difficulties of pleasing congressional opposition with failed attempts at purchasing shares of a company, building and funding a pipeline from Persia to the Mediterranean, and
