The Geopolitics of Oil and Russia’s Knowledge Economy

Writes the Institutional Investor at the Minyanville

All it would take for Russian President Vladimir Putin’s regime to begin to crumble would be for the price of oil to slump to the $70-a-barrel range, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told an audience last week.

Speaking at Everest Capital’s Emerging Markets Forum in Miami, Rice said that if the price of oil remains above the $100-a-barrel mark during the next few years, Putin’s Kremlin would have the means to continue paying off cronies and keeping the current regime — which she described as an “oil syndicate” — intact. With crude currently hovering around $110 a barrel, she said, there is no incentive for Russians to change the nature of their economy.

But the days of a Russia fueled exclusively by petrodollars is waning, especially if the price of crude begins to fall, she said. Ready to replace Putin’s petrostate is a knowledge-based economy crying to break free, said Rice, also a former national security adviser to President George W. Bush and an expert on the Russian political economy. “Wouldn’t it be refreshing to see that the basis of Russian power is the knowledge and creativity of its people? They could be a very big part of the 21st century,” she said.

Rice told the audience at the emerging markets summit a story about how the former president, Dimitri Medvedev, once boasted to her that Russia produced the world’s finest mathematicians. Her response: What if they were actually working in Moscow instead of in Palo Alto and Tel Aviv? She said that Medvedev acknowledged that Russia needed to provide an ecosystem in which its homegrown talent would remain at home and help the country flourish. “The arts and sciences in Russia have been legendary even in the worst of times. Can you imagine how remarkable their economy could be if their leading scientists weren’t leaving for Silicon Valley?” she said.

Besides being extraordinarily dependent on oil, Putin’s regime has done little to censor or monitor the Internet compared to, say, China, according to Rice. The former KGB agent focuses his attention on producing state television broadcasts reminiscent of the Cold War Era — an old-line communist activity that matters little to a younger generation of Russians who receive their news over the Internet, she said.

There are two things of note here:

1. The geopolitics of oil simply posits that the survival of many of the resource dependent welfare states have been moored to high oil prices. That’s because the political leadership uses revenues from resources to buy off the public’s support to maintain their privileges (usually known as the resource curse).

The same desire to use revenues to finance pet projects of politicians also serves at the main incentive for the political leadership around the world, including the Philippines, to engage in resource nationalism during commodity booms

Yet take away the lofty price oil, say by allowing free markets to work and all these autocratic regimes, such as Iran, Venezuela and etc…, collapses. So war will never be necessary for any regime changes. Just allow free markets to clear and despots and tyrants will subsequently vanish.

But the problem is that many western friendly autocratic welfare states are also dependent on elevated oil prices like the GULF states.

Also Obama’s green energy/jobs policies depends on high oil prices too.

The Investor’s Business Daily recently noted that

Energy Secretary Steven Chu admits the administration has no interest in bringing them down…At a hearing this week, Rep. Alan Nunnelee, R-Miss., specifically asked Chu if "the overall goal" of the administration is to "get our price down." Chu's answer was no.

Since this implies that deeply entrenched vested interest groups are in command of the political environment—whose survival again greatly depends on lofty oil prices—the geopolitical imperatives will focus on the manipulation of oil supply and demand, war mongering and importantly inflationist policies. In short, oil politics greatly influence, not only national welfare politics, but also foreign policies.

So while governments may pretend to express care about consumers affected by high oil prices (say by imposing subsidies, cash giving out cash transfers and etc.) and subsequently pin the blame on private companies for greed, in reality, the geopolitics of oil is about the preservation of political entitlements through redistribution of resources from consumers to the political clients (mostly oil producers and allied industries) and their political leadership patrons.

Only free markets will undo such political economic inequality.

2. Russia’s growing knowledge economy is a demonstration of how the internet has been functioning as a pivotal force in reshaping the world’s political economy.

The internet helps spur the development of commercial activities that operates in circumvention of stifling regulations that fosters more underground economy.

Chart from pyramid research

Underground or informal or shadow economies are symptoms of arbitrary and unenforceable laws, lack of property rights, byzantine red tape, high tax regimes, choking bureaucratic regulations, corruption, weak institutions and other political impediments to commerce.

The share of informal economy to Russia’s economy is one of the highest in the world. So as with the Philippines.

I recently quoted the investment guru Doug Casey which I find relevant in the discussion of informal economies,

If you're going to have a ridiculous number of impossible laws, corruption is a good thing. Increasingly, what matters is not the number or even nature of laws on the books in the place you live, but the amount of actual control the state has over private individuals. Corruption subverts idiotic laws; it's the next best thing to abolishing them.

Aside from corruption, big informal economies are to paraphrase Mr. Casey, symptomatic of the subversion of “idiotic” laws. The other way to say this is that anarchy emerges, as expressed by the existence of informal economies, out of the abject failure of the incumbent political order for these political economies.