ENERGY: THE FAILURE OF DEFENSE AND RAPID REPAIR

The defense of energy infrastructure against well orchestrated systems sabotage will continue to be ineffective.  Even if plans for sensor grids, UAV (unmanned aerial vehicles) patrols, and dedicated guards are fully realized, it will likely prove insufficient to stop ongoing sabotage.  These defensive systems are extremely vulnerable to feints (false attacks) and counter-measures. Additionally, the very essence of systems sabotage works against effective defense:

• Maneuver.  Small attacks that are both simple and fast.  Prior warning is non-existent.  Existing public transportation infrastructure enable rapid movement to target locations.  See Swarming.
• Indirection.  Systems saboteurs will almost always select targets (in many cases there are tens of thousands of miles of vulnerable infrastructure) that are undefended.
• Leverage.  The network will extend the impact of attacks over great distances.  Cascades of failure can rapidly disable primary infrastructures miles from the site of the attack.  Prior network analysis can reveal the locations that will provide the maximum impact.

Rapid Repair

The only method demonstrated to work reliably over the last several years is rapid repair.  This capability can contain the economic damage and societal dislocation caused by induced infrastructure failures to 20-30% of its potential.  Unfortunately, global guerrillas are finding ways to trump this capability:

• Tactics of Delay.  Time of failure is key to maximizing damage for saboteurs.  A day of delay can mean hundreds of millions in additional damage.  Typical tactics that accomplish delays include anti-vehicle and anti-personnel mines (or remotely triggered IEDs) as well as assaults on the perimeter of an active repair site.  Both of these methods typically result in extensive security delays.
• Team attrition.  Ongoing assaults on repair teams prior to an attack have been successful.   The elimination of key personnel can radically slow repairs and impair team effectiveness.  Team members are particularly vulnerable while in transit to and from work and at home.  Assaults of this type have become commonplace in Iraq.  Additionally, teams on deployment for ongoing maintenance efforts are often extremely vulnerable to attack. 
• Supply interdiction.  Rapid repairs require specialized equipment (as the capability improves, the equipment used will likely become even more specialized).  This equipment is usually stored in centralized storage depots that are vulnerable to assault.  Assaults on this equipment have proven to be effective.

What This Means

The result of these innovations means that the quantity of damage that system saboteurs can accomplish will remain at unacceptable levels.  At the strategic level, this will dictate that:

• Iraqi oil exports will remain below prewar levels.
• Saudi energy systems, with its emphasis on defensive and repair capabilities, will continue to be vulnerable to system saboteurs.
• A shortage of supply will cause oil prices to climb to new heights in response to each future disruption effort.

Comments

[joe]

We have constructed systems and management methods optimized for maximum profit with minimum risk. The supply system is designed based on the "just enough, Just in time" model. Business-wise this makes sense in a system that is protected or deemed invulnerable to disruption.
The opposition understands this and has formed a strategy that leverages it. The dependence on systems that permit the production and deliverance of goods and materials based on that model offer a specific array of targets that can be attacked with impunity.

[Anonymouse]

Another interesting piece; thank you John.

Regarding rapid repair - I agree that this is the only workable solution. The key to making this effective is decentralizing or at least distributing the critical components so that they are readily deployed and cheap enough to be plentiful (read: backstock or reserves). A swarming supply of infrastructure band-aids to counter the guerrilla attacks.

For a look at other industry approaches the ATT disaster recovery program has been quite successful: att.com/ndr/team_equipment.html

They can rapidly recover from even catastrophic loss of multiple large central offices within hours.

Some key aspects of this approach (hinted at earlier) would be emphasis on mobile resources which can support multiple functions within the infrastructure and inexpensive enough that sufficient reserves are not cost prohibitive. The telecommunications arena is better suited for this type of preparation than other critical infrastructures.

Decentralizing power generation and fuel distribution is going to be much more difficult comparatively, though I think it is still possible to greatly improve existing systems (with an added cost).

[Valdis]

Yep joe, you are right... efficient systems are fragile systems.

With BPR and 're-engineering' we have remove redundancy from most business systems. Yet, redunancy is necessary for resilience.

After 9/11, efficiency is a dangerous goal...
[Actually it was dangerous before 9/11 also, but no one was paying attention].

[joe]

Valdis, They will pay attention in the coming months. This is where the 'Captains of Industry' begin exerting influence on the politicos. Thanks to J. Robb for the forum. Joe L

[Federalist X]

John: Do GG concentrate efforts on existing infrastructure only or will also new energy ventures?

[dialectic]

John Robb wrote :

“A shortage of supply will cause oil prices to climb to new heights in response to each future disruption effort.”

But always the assumption is that Global Guerilla’s constitute separate, ‘outside’ entities from the systems they attack. That assumption, however, is just too simplistic, in my view.

GG “attacks” on energy systems ought more accurately to be understood as aspects, or permutations, of those very systems. The attacks constitute inherent opposition ARISING FROM WITHIN the structure of those systems. GG activities, then, are integrated as components of the “normal,” on-going operation of those systems.

To put it succinctly (relative to the quote I took from Robb’s article, shown above) :

Climbing energy prices cause oil company executives to grin from ear to ear. To be sure, PUBLICALLY they express heartfelt “concern” about the impact of high energy costs on general economic activity. But after they retreat once again behind the doors of the corporate boardroom, and after they dry their crocodile tears with their fine silk hankies, they pop another bottle of Champaign at the terrific effect GG activity has on their stock prices.

As is by now well known (at least by all those who haven’t had their heads in the sand for too long), a major reason for the Iraq war was precisely NOT to have Iraqi oil flood the world energy markets, thus driving down per-barrel prices and stock valuations along with it. Already by 1998, current US Vice President Cheney and his cabal were scared s---less at the prospect that the UN would loosen its regime of sanctions against Saddam’s Iraq. MAINTAINING SCARCITY is the name of the game, with ancillary benefits accruing via control of energy supplies to erstwhile economic competitors (i.e., India, China).

Therefore, climbing oil prices resulting from “disruption” bring about major and discernible benefits to the dominant players in the energy sector. Disruption is a factor bringing those benefits about, NOT a problem that threatens them. Again, disruption can take various and sundry forms. Currently, GG activity is providing the needed amount of “controlled” disruption. If energy prices fail to climb fast enough, then the US Marines will be deployed somewhere to make it happen (e.g., Venezuela, Iran).

Various commentators on this site may be confused about such influences, but the top executive levels of the major oil companies are not confused for an instant. GG activity serves their interests.

dialectic

[joe]

Federalist X See this report: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/MAN203462.htm

Choking new or emerging energy sources is as important as disturbing old ones. The operational plan is quite sophisticated and considers the impact on multiple sectors based on their dependence on each other.

[dialectic]

The link sent in by joe is a good example of how GG activity – be it "real" or merely imputed – is utilized as a means by which to bolster oligarchic, nation-state control of the native population. The threat of GG activity becomes the excuse whereby increased militarization of the social order is justified. Thus, GG activity constitutes an INTEGRAL ELEMENT in the ongoing world-wide capitalist restructuring which requires huge increases in the intensity of repression targeted against subaltern peoples.

Already by the early 1950’s, a quip about the Cold War began making the rounds:

“If the Pentagon (meaning the Military-Industrial Complex) had not had the Soviet Union as its needed enemy, it would have had to invent it.”

The decades long Cold War was simply fantastically good for North American capitalist business.

But then the USSR went bye bye.

CRISIS!! What to replace it with?

Enter “Islamic Terrorism,” stage right.

Now every single act of resistance that any people, anywhere, make to capitalist predations on their nations and/or ways of life have become defined in certain quarters as being “terrorist” activity, or GG activity.

GREAT FOR BUSINESS!! Along with the top executives at the major oil companies, their fellow travelers in the armaments industry are also grinning from ear to ear. Profits simply have never been better. Accelerating slaughter of defenseless civilians in indigenous communities around the world proves that the American system works. Increasing stock valuations at Chevron, Halliburton, etc., constitute the empirical evidence of that fact.

dialectic

[Federalist X]

Joe: thanks for the link.. could help with a trade. Been watching a blog focused on oil, exclusively, take a look: http://theoildrum.blogspot.com

they seem fairly informed.

[joe]

FED X No problem, oil will climb but finished product is the issue in the US.

[The Oil Drum (profgoose)]

GG: that's a great piece. I will link this up right now. (thanks Fed X for the note...)

[The Oil Drum (profgoose)]

GG: that's a great piece. I will link this up right now. (thanks Fed X for the note...)

[Ryan]

'Enter “Islamic Terrorism,” stage right.

Now every single act of resistance that any people, anywhere, make to capitalist predations on their nations and/or ways of life have become defined in certain quarters as being “terrorist” activity, or GG activity.

GREAT FOR BUSINESS!! Along with the top executives at the major oil companies, their fellow travelers in the armaments industry are also grinning from ear to ear. Profits simply have never been better. Accelerating slaughter of defenseless civilians in indigenous communities around the world proves that the American system works. Increasing stock valuations at Chevron, Halliburton, etc., constitute the empirical evidence of that fact.'

Give me a break, the fact that one totalitarian ideology is broken doesn't mean all are, and that there isn't potent threats to the state anymore. To say the US simply manufactured Islamic terrorism is absurd and offensive to all those who've died in the hands of those murderous fanatics.

Oh and btw, the US after world war two invested heavily into European markets and created an economic boom, was that on all of the back of slaughtered defenceless Nazis?

[vox]

Well put, Ryan.

On another note, oil's dropped like a rock since this article was posted, falling every day but one.

When a guerrilla blows up a pipeline, it can be repaired. When a guerrilla gets blown up, he can't be.

[joe]

Dialectic, Your statements are cogent. You must recognize the other side of the coin. The opposition to capitalisim is strong and well thought. My only objection to your messages is that you ignore the coherency of the opponent. Joe L

[dialectic]

Ryan wrote :

“To say the US simply manufactured Islamic terrorism is absurd and offensive to all those who've died in the hands of those murderous fanatics.”

A clever misrepresentation on Ryan’s part, since I never said that “the US simply manufactured Islamic terrorism . . . .” Rather, the point I clearly made is simply that the US Capitalist State system INTEGRATES existing opposition as a component of its ongoing predations. The US Capitalist State did not manufacture the fact of Islamic Resistance, but it did seize the IMAGE of “terrorists,” re-fashioning that image as the new enemy, the feared object of “terror” which is subsequently APPLIED as the excuse, or matrix, of its campaign of conquest. So when Ryan said that in my post I averred the US manufactured Islamic terrorism, he either intentionally or unintentionally imputed a position that does not exist in the original post, and is not my position in fact.

So YOU give me a break, Ryan: Don’t misconstrue my posts, nor those of anyone else. If you want to ‘read-in’ implications which are not present, do it to someone else’s posts.

And by the way: Shall we be seeing any sympathy from you for the hundreds of thousands of innocents who have died at the hands of the murderous, neoCon fanatics in Washington DC?

The expropriation of the world’s wealth by the handfull of its elite rulers – the people Chomsky referred to as “the Masters of Mankind” – ultimately relies on the existence of a massive, coercive and aggressive (“preemptive”) military apparatus. The existence of “resistance,” then, isn’t a problem for the Global Capitalist State system, but is, rather, the solution of how to go about effecting resource expropriation within the context of world-integrated capitalist “logic” (also known as an international business climate most conducive to the generation of maximum profits).

Ryan wrote : “ . . . the fact that one totalitarian ideology is broken doesn't mean all are, . . . .”

I couldn’t agree more. And when we look around to find the most dynamic, vicious, predatory and murderous totalitarian and hyper-fanatic ideology currently in play on the world stage, we need look no further than the elegantly dressed, oh so suave and sophisticated Overlords of the Capitalist Financial Superstate inhabiting such environs as Wall Street and the City of London. Considering their “accomplishments” in such places as Iraq, Colombia, Chile, Vietnam, etc. etc. we observe mayhem and destruction having been perpetrated on a scale many, many hundreds of orders of magnitude greater than anything Osama could dream of doing.

Ryan wrote : “and that there isn't potent threats to the state anymore.”

In the community of critical political economy, this is where we laugh. For by far the most potent threats to the Capitalist State come not from “outside” – that is, from such grouplets as al Quaeda – but derive precisely as a result of the ongoing, “normal” functioning of the international, globalized capitalist project itself. Nothing more powerfully de-stabilizes the world capitalist economic system than unfettered, free-enterprise capitalism. Enron, WorldCom, AIG – these are the tip of the proverbial iceberg. The system is predicated upon rot at its core. It is precisely to manage, or better put, deflect, the internal consequences of such systemic fraud that the US seeks to export its irrationalities elsewhere, relying of theft of the wealth of other peoples to feed the voracious maw of power and privilege at home.

dialectic

[dialectic]

Joe L wrote :

“Dialectic, Your statements are cogent. You must recognize the other side of the coin. The opposition to capitalisim is strong and well thought. My only objection to your messages is that you ignore the coherency of the opponent.”

Glad you think so, Joe.

But also; I’m doing my part. Perhaps it’s time for you to do your part.

If you think “the coherency of the opponent” should not be ignored (whatever that means), then I invite you to limber up your fingers and start typing away.

In other words: since dealing with the “coherency of the opponent” is your idea, then YOU do it.

And I’m sure your post will be very cogent and erudite, so I thank you in advance for your soon-to-arrive contribution.

Sincerely, and with Respects.

dialectic

[dialectic]

Ryan wrote :

“Oh and btw, the US after world war two invested heavily into European markets and created an economic boom, was that on all of the back of slaughtered defenceless Nazis?”

You just provided a beautiful confirmation of my basic thesis. Because, the US “investment” in Europe after WWII was effected PRIMARILY to re-establish capitalist hegemony in the Central European sphere, and as a bulwark against Soviet expansion. The core element in US investment protocols was US military occupation. The existence of the Soviet Union provided the matrix which supported the logic of that hegemony. Western European recovery after WWII, that is to say, was crucially dependent upon US military spending in that region. And American businesses in the military-industrial complex made out like bandits. As I said in my first post, it was all GREAT FOR BUSINESS (i.e., profits).

It is a plain and simply hallucinatory fantasy to think that the US government (via the Marshall Plan) invested in Europe out of the goodness of its heart. For decades after WWII, the US enjoyed an enormous competitive advantage over its erstwhile European capitalist rivals as a result of its “investments.” Only after decades of long struggle have European capitalists managed to (partly) overcome the effects of post-war US investment.

dialectic

[vox]

I always enjoy reading anti-American diatribes posted on the internet that was *ahem* invented by the American military. That would be the same military that was ranked #19 in the world before the Old World decided to shoot itself to pieces by the tens of millions of corpses last century.

Did you use a phone today? Fly on a plane? Vaccinate your child against polio? Enjoy a refreshing carbonated beverage? Thank you America.

It's easy for people to blame America when somebody gets shot by an American soldier. It's harder to know how many other bullets and catastrophes they dodged thanks to the American security umbrella and all the other wonderful things Americans do at America's expense to make the global civil society a positive sum experience.

As for American business, American brands account for more than 60% of the top global brands. No other country or confederation of countries even comes close. When it's time for other people to pay for what they want, they prefer to buy American. Even the Soviets drank a lot of Pepsi. People choose to do this of their own free will, not because they're coerced at riflepoint.

[vox]

BTW, while celebrating America I forgot to point out that this month is the 75th anniversary of the Twinkie. But will global guerrillas leave that little bite of American sweetness alone? Hell no! O the humanity!

"Twinkiejackings: In the late 1970s, reports of Twinkie hijackings began surfacing. In 1975, a Kennett Square, PA house twice was broken into and robbed of its Twinkies. That same year, AWOL marines from a California base were stopped on a freeway driving a truck full of "hot" Twinkies. In 1976, someone stole a bakery truck containing 1800 Twinkies. The truck was found; the Twinkies were not. In 1978, two Albuquerque men held up a delivery truck and made off with two large boxes of Twinkies, which at the time were valued
at $16. Nothing else was taken and no one was injured."

[joe]

Dialectic, Coherency: "Marked by an orderly, logical, and aesthetically consistent relation of parts"
Is something that is required for a successful assault on an institution.

The opposition to 'democracy'(capitalism) has demonstrated a coherent front. I deal in events, effects and strategy. This world is competive by nature. The terrorist tag is not relevant. The opponents are far from the term terrorist. They are a unified, coherent force. At this moment they are in disarray but their vision remains.
Respectfully Joe

[Ryan]

"So YOU give me a break, Ryan: Don’t misconstrue my posts, nor those of anyone else. If you want to ‘read-in’ implications which are not present, do it to someone else’s posts."

You said that every attack is actually terrorism, or in a way businesses, in the evilness that they are, profit from this. I don't see a problem with this, people making a quick buck will do it anyway they can, if this was closed to them, then it would be something else.

However, in your post, you implicated that Islamic terrorism was the perfect excuse for the business world to run riot on 'defenceless civilians' as any business would *rolleyes*

I implicated that Islamic terrorism wasn't a manufactured excuse for them to run riot, and was a legitimate threat which has been growing ever since the early 80's.

"And by the way: Shall we be seeing any sympathy from you for the hundreds of thousands of innocents who have died at the hands of the murderous, neoCon fanatics in Washington DC?"

A liberated Iraq is better than an unliberated Baa'thist paradise you so clearly envision. The hundreds of thousands remark? I'd like to see a cite please.

Besides, lets get it through your head shall we?

Captialism = good, more benefit for Human kind than Communism ever did. And thats EVER.

"The expropriation of the world’s wealth by the handfull of its elite rulers – the people Chomsky referred to as “the Masters of Mankind” – ultimately relies on the existence of a massive, coercive and aggressive (“preemptive”) military apparatus. The existence of “resistance,” then, isn’t a problem for the Global Capitalist State system, but is, rather, the solution of how to go about effecting resource expropriation within the context of world-integrated capitalist “logic” (also known as an international business climate most conducive to the generation of maximum profits)"

*Rolleyes* this isn't star wars, and the US isn't the Evil Empire headed by Darth Vader, its a freemarket state in which it allows companies to work to what goals they want to achieve, the US Gov sets the rules on business and then just leaves it alone, anything else is a by product of that and not part of some inconsistent NEO-Con agenda.

Oh and about a military apparatus, you're right, but its to defend the environment in which business can run, not to enforce it moron. Otherwise uncertanty brings down the stockmarket. Hence the need for a military.

"I couldn’t agree more. And when we look around to find the most dynamic, vicious, predatory and murderous totalitarian and hyper-fanatic ideology currently in play on the world stage, we need look no further than the elegantly dressed, oh so suave and sophisticated Overlords of the Capitalist Financial Superstate inhabiting such environs as Wall Street and the City of London. Considering their “accomplishments” in such places as Iraq, Colombia, Chile, Vietnam, etc. etc. we observe mayhem and destruction having been perpetrated on a scale many, many hundreds of orders of magnitude greater than anything Osama could dream of doing."

Rollseyes again, turns something I say about a genuine Ideology (islamism) which would inheirently make everyones lives so miserable.

Yes, I can see where you're coming from the leftist FARC terrorist group makes everyones lives better, along with the North Vietnamese butchers, who after Saigon created so many wonderful boat people fleeing their liberation, or Iraq, where if you were a Kurd or Shia it equalled second class citizen, or a mass grave. Yes, I can see how we the free world, can sometimes be stopped in doing something about it by people such as yourself.

Islamism is a great threat to Muslim society the most,because it warps and destroys a religions core values and beliefs for political gain.

"In the community of critical political economy, this is where we laugh. For by far the most potent threats to the Capitalist State come not from “outside” – that is, from such grouplets as al Quaeda – but derive precisely as a result of the ongoing, “normal” functioning of the international, globalized capitalist project itself. Nothing more powerfully de-stabilizes the world capitalist economic system than unfettered, free-enterprise capitalism. Enron, WorldCom, AIG – these are the tip of the proverbial iceberg. The system is predicated upon rot at its core. It is precisely to manage, or better put, deflect, the internal consequences of such systemic fraud that the US seeks to export its irrationalities elsewhere, relying of theft of the wealth of other peoples to feed the voracious maw of power and privilege at home."

Thats hillarious, the core of Capitalism is = risk and uncertanty and has been successful for many generations. Communism however is morally bankcrupt as an ideology all within 70 years. Enjoy.

Captialism isn't a threat, and the losses of Enron and big corporate scandals happen, but thats it, things move on, and we strive to make sure it doesn't happen again, you ever heard of human nature?

"You just provided a beautiful confirmation of my basic thesis. Because, the US “investment” in Europe after WWII was effected PRIMARILY to re-establish capitalist hegemony in the Central European sphere, and as a bulwark against Soviet expansion. The core element in US investment protocols was US military occupation. The existence of the Soviet Union provided the matrix which supported the logic of that hegemony. Western European recovery after WWII, that is to say, was crucially dependent upon US military spending in that region. And American businesses in the military-industrial complex made out like bandits. As I said in my first post, it was all GREAT FOR BUSINESS (i.e., profits)."

Yes, but you also will find out it was good for EUROPEAN BUSINESS AS WELL, as in it reinvigorated the Western European economy, and I see it as no problem as an economic bulwark against the Soviet Union (Might I remind you was offered the loan the same as with the Eastern bloc countries) Do you have an idea that a world war happened? Do you have any idea the amount of plant and machinery which was shipped over greately improved and enhanced the lives of the people who suffered?

LMAO US military spending? The biggest contributors were General Electric and Ford Motors, they saw it as an investment much larger than one they'd get in the US market. Besides the rest were loans from the US GOVERNMENT.

"It is a plain and simply hallucinatory fantasy to think that the US government (via the Marshall Plan) invested in Europe out of the goodness of its heart. For decades after WWII, the US enjoyed an enormous competitive advantage over its erstwhile European capitalist rivals as a result of its “investments.” Only after decades of long struggle have European capitalists managed to (partly) overcome the effects of post-war US investment."

Is this why they wrote off the post war debts? I don't see why you think US investment is a bad thing. You're so fundamentally biased against the US Administration, military that you've gone out on a limb to shoot yourself in the foot.

Besides, if thats true what you're saying, why is my countries economy the fourth largest in the world? and why is Western Europe have the trillion dollar economies?

Does this make any sense to you?

P.S I think this guys just out to get a rise.

[joe]

The problem with good blogs is infestation Joe