PARIS, Oct 21: Pierre Terzian, the international oil specialist and director of Paris-based Petrostrategies, says that as far as he’s concerned, a war with Iraq will have absolutely no impact on oil prices, with the “true impact” lying in a complete geostrategic reorganization of the region — into a triangle formed by Turkey, Israel and US-controlled Iraq — and its inevitable destabilization.

“The impact on oil prices, if any,” he says, “will be minimal, for Iraq presently produces fewer than 2 million barrels per day, whereas Opec’s unused production capacity, which would be rapidly mobilized in case of war, amounts to more than 5 million barrels.”

In an interview in this morning’s Le Figaro, Mr Terzian noted that what makes the prices of oil go up is... talk, the gesticulating over the possibility of war that has been going on the past few days. It is this, which, in his eyes, is largely responsible for the price of a barrel having recently risen by 5 dollars.

“It is each new declaration, whether it is truly menacing or not, that tends to have a repercussion, in one way or another, on the price of oil.”

If war is declared, however, and Iraq prevented from supplying its oil, he notes, “the 5 million barrels of oil that Opec can immediately count upon will more than make up for the stop of deliveries from Iraq. Which is why, he concludes, “the risk of war is much more political than petroleum-related.”

As for the reasons why, in his estimation, the US seems so keen to go to war against Iraq, Mr Terzian notes that “I have the clear impression that the United States is seeking not only to dominate Iraq, but also to take over the leadership of the entire region. And this because, if all the US wanted was to acquire a significant portion of Iraq’s oil, the Americans wouldn’t need to go to war. All they would have to do would be to lift the sanctions which presently weigh on Iraq, and then contribute to the renovation of its petroleum infrastructures, knowing full well that Iraq is much in need of investment in this sector, and notably that of the United States.”

“But,” he adds, “a total control over Iraq goes way beyond an economic tutelage over the country. It would give the United States a major geostrategic implantation, permitting them to have access from the rear of Iran (on its western flank), Syria (on its eastern frontier), and Saudi Arabia from the north. And, therefore, reinforce Israel’s position in the region. A new strategic triangle would, therefore, appear in the region with Turkey to the north, Israel in the west and an Americanized Iraq to the east.” Which would inevitably lead, he adds, to an important “destabilization” of the region, although he notes in an attempt to reassure his listener that “we haven’t reached that point yet.”