New Orleans Arising Phoenixlike from Ashes
#1
http://www.stratfor.com/news/archiv...ics_katrina.php

I could not have framed this much better, so I will merely offer up Mr Friedman's essay.

Occhi

New Orleans: A Geopolitical Prize

By George Friedman

September 01, 2005 22 30 GMT -- The American political system was founded in Philadelphia, but the American nation was built on the vast farmlands that stretch from the Alleghenies to the Rockies. That farmland produced the wealth that funded American industrialization: It permitted the formation of a class of small landholders who, amazingly, could produce more than they could consume. They could sell their excess crops in the east and in Europe and save that money, which eventually became the founding capital of American industry.

But it was not the extraordinary land nor the farmers and ranchers who alone set the process in motion. Rather, it was geography -- the extraordinary system of rivers that flowed through the Midwest and allowed them to ship their surplus to the rest of the world. All of the rivers flowed into one -- the Mississippi -- and the Mississippi flowed to the ports in and around one city: New Orleans. It was in New Orleans that the barges from upstream were unloaded and their cargos stored, sold and reloaded on ocean-going vessels. Until last Sunday, New Orleans was, in many ways, the pivot of the American economy.

For that reason, the Battle of New Orleans in January 1815 was a key moment in American history. Even though the battle occurred after the War of 1812 was over, had the British taken New Orleans, we suspect they wouldn't have given it back. Without New Orleans, the entire Louisiana Purchase would have been valueless to the United States. Or, to state it more precisely, the British would control the region because, at the end of the day, the value of the Purchase was the land and the rivers - which all converged on the Mississippi and the ultimate port of New Orleans. The hero of the battle was Andrew Jackson, and when he became president, his obsession with Texas had much to do with keeping the Mexicans away from New Orleans.

During the Cold War, a macabre topic of discussion among bored graduate students who studied such things was this: If the Soviets could destroy one city with a large nuclear device, which would it be? The usual answers were Washington or New York. For me, the answer was simple: New Orleans. If the Mississippi River was shut to traffic, then the foundations of the economy would be shattered. The industrial minerals needed in the factories wouldn't come in, and the agricultural wealth wouldn't flow out. Alternative routes really weren't available. The Germans knew it too: A U-boat campaign occurred near the mouth of the Mississippi during World War II. Both the Germans and Stratfor have stood with Andy Jackson: New Orleans was the prize.

Last Sunday, nature took out New Orleans almost as surely as a nuclear strike. Hurricane Katrina's geopolitical effect was not, in many ways, distinguishable from a mushroom cloud. The key exit from North America was closed. The petrochemical industry, which has become an added value to the region since Jackson's days, was at risk. The navigability of the Mississippi south of New Orleans was a question mark. New Orleans as a city and as a port complex had ceased to exist, and it was not clear that it could recover.

The ports of South Louisiana and New Orleans, which run north and south of the city, are as important today as at any point during the history of the republic. On its own merit, the Port of South Louisiana is the largest port in the United States by tonnage and the fifth-largest in the world. It exports more than 52 million tons a year, of which more than half are agricultural products -- corn, soybeans and so on. A larger proportion of U.S. agriculture flows out of the port. Almost as much cargo, nearly 57 million tons, comes in through the port -- including not only crude oil, but chemicals and fertilizers, coal, concrete and so on.

A simple way to think about the New Orleans port complex is that it is where the bulk commodities of agriculture go out to the world and the bulk commodities of industrialism come in. The commodity chain of the global food industry starts here, as does that of American industrialism. If these facilities are gone, more than the price of goods shifts: The very physical structure of the global economy would have to be reshaped. Consider the impact to the U.S. auto industry if steel doesn't come up the river, or the effect on global food supplies if U.S. corn and soybeans don't get to the markets.

The problem is that there are no good shipping alternatives. River transport is cheap, and most of the commodities we are discussing have low value-to-weight ratios. The U.S. transport system was built on the assumption that these commodities would travel to and from New Orleans by barge, where they would be loaded on ships or offloaded. Apart from port capacity elsewhere in the United States, there aren't enough trucks or rail cars to handle the long-distance hauling of these enormous quantities -- assuming for the moment that the economics could be managed, which they can't be.

The focus in the media has been on the oil industry in Louisiana and Mississippi. This is not a trivial question, but in a certain sense, it is dwarfed by the shipping issue. First, Louisiana is the source of about 15 percent of U.S.-produced petroleum, much of it from the Gulf. The local refineries are critical to American infrastructure. Were all of these facilities to be lost, the effect on the price of oil worldwide would be extraordinarily painful. If the river itself became unnavigable or if the ports are no longer functioning, however, the impact to the wider economy would be significantly more severe. In a sense, there is more flexibility in oil than in the physical transport of these other commodities.

There is clearly good news as information comes in. By all accounts, the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port, which services supertankers in the Gulf, is intact. Port Fourchon, which is the center of extraction operations in the Gulf, has sustained damage but is recoverable. The status of the oil platforms is unclear and it is not known what the underwater systems look like, but on the surface, the damage - though not trivial -- is manageable.

The news on the river is also far better than would have been expected on Sunday. The river has not changed its course. No major levees containing the river have burst. The Mississippi apparently has not silted up to such an extent that massive dredging would be required to render it navigable. Even the port facilities, although apparently damaged in many places and destroyed in few, are still there. The river, as transport corridor, has not been lost.

What has been lost is the city of New Orleans and many of the residential suburban areas around it. The population has fled, leaving behind a relatively small number of people in desperate straits. Some are dead, others are dying, and the magnitude of the situation dwarfs the resources required to ameliorate their condition. But it is not the population that is trapped in New Orleans that is of geopolitical significance: It is the population that has left and has nowhere to return to.

The oil fields, pipelines and ports required a skilled workforce in order to operate. That workforce requires homes. They require stores to buy food and other supplies. Hospitals and doctors. Schools for their children. In other words, in order to operate the facilities critical to the United States, you need a workforce to do it -- and that workforce is gone. Unlike in other disasters, that workforce cannot return to the region because they have no place to live. New Orleans is gone, and the metropolitan area surrounding New Orleans is either gone or so badly damaged that it will not be inhabitable for a long time.

It is possible to jury-rig around this problem for a short time. But the fact is that those who have left the area have gone to live with relatives and friends. Those who had the ability to leave also had networks of relationships and resources to manage their exile. But those resources are not infinite -- and as it becomes apparent that these people will not be returning to New Orleans any time soon, they will be enrolling their children in new schools, finding new jobs, finding new accommodations. If they have any insurance money coming, they will collect it. If they have none, then -- whatever emotional connections they may have to their home -- their economic connection to it has been severed. In a very short time, these people will be making decisions that will start to reshape population and workforce patterns in the region.

A city is a complex and ongoing process - one that requires physical infrastructure to support the people who live in it and people to operate that physical infrastructure. We don't simply mean power plants or sewage treatment facilities, although they are critical. Someone has to be able to sell a bottle of milk or a new shirt. Someone has to be able to repair a car or do surgery. And the people who do those things, along with the infrastructure that supports them, are gone -- and they are not coming back anytime soon.

It is in this sense, then, that it seems almost as if a nuclear weapon went off in New Orleans. The people mostly have fled rather than died, but they are gone. Not all of the facilities are destroyed, but most are. It appears to us that New Orleans and its environs have passed the point of recoverability. The area can recover, to be sure, but only with the commitment of massive resources from outside -- and those resources would always be at risk to another Katrina.

The displacement of population is the crisis that New Orleans faces. It is also a national crisis, because the largest port in the United States cannot function without a city around it. The physical and business processes of a port cannot occur in a ghost town, and right now, that is what New Orleans is. It is not about the facilities, and it is not about the oil. It is about the loss of a city's population and the paralysis of the largest port in the United States.

Let's go back to the beginning. The United States historically has depended on the Mississippi and its tributaries for transport. Barges navigate the river. Ships go on the ocean. The barges must offload to the ships and vice versa. There must be a facility to empower this exchange. It is also the facility where goods are stored in transit. Without this port, the river can't be used. Protecting that port has been, from the time of the Louisiana Purchase, a fundamental national security issue for the United States.

Katrina has taken out the port -- not by destroying the facilities, but by rendering the area uninhabited and potentially uninhabitable. That means that even if the Mississippi remains navigable, the absence of a port near the mouth of the river makes the Mississippi enormously less useful than it was. For these reasons, the United States has lost not only its biggest port complex, but also the utility of its river transport system -- the foundation of the entire American transport system. There are some substitutes, but none with sufficient capacity to solve the problem.

It follows from this that the port will have to be revived and, one would assume, the city as well. The ports around New Orleans are located as far north as they can be and still be accessed by ocean-going vessels. The need for ships to be able to pass each other in the waterways, which narrow to the north, adds to the problem. Besides, the Highway 190 bridge in Baton Rouge blocks the river going north. New Orleans is where it is for a reason: The United States needs a city right there.

New Orleans is not optional for the United States' commercial infrastructure. It is a terrible place for a city to be located, but exactly the place where a city must exist. With that as a given, a city will return there because the alternatives are too devastating. The harvest is coming, and that means that the port will have to be opened soon. As in Iraq, premiums will be paid to people prepared to endure the hardships of working in New Orleans. But in the end, the city will return because it has to.

Geopolitics is the stuff of permanent geographical realities and the way they interact with political life. Geopolitics created New Orleans. Geopolitics caused American presidents to obsess over its safety. And geopolitics will force the city's resurrection, even if it is in the worst imaginable place.
=====================================================

So, says Occhi, maybe we should consider how the Dutch approach sucn an imperative and build a better dike system, hmmm?? <_<


Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
Reply
#2
To mine eyes, the destruction of New Orleans isn't quite as dire to the national economy as the essay proclaims. The machinery of America isn't going to sputter to a stop because the mouth of the Mississippi is temporarily closed, and surely not as bad as it would have been should the Redcoats have taken it in 1815.

We live in the 21st Century, with nifty things called 'railroads' and 'interstate highways'. We have rivers made of stone and steel now.

Sure, the barge traffic on the river is cheaper and easier, but it isn't the only horse in the town anymore.
Political Correctness is the idea that you can foster tolerance in a diverse world through the intolerance of anything that strays from a clinical standard.
Reply
#3
I'm not a topographical expert but perhaps relocating New-New Orleans to nearby higher ground that is easier protected from Lake Ponchatrain (sp?) and the Gulf waters? Then install a mass transit system to get the workers to and from these critical port facilities and resore the neccesary road and railways that are required to move materials to and from the port.

EDIT: Rhydderch Hael's points reminds me that the Great Lakes weren't as navigable in the 1800's as they are today. Costs may go up but we will adapt and reroute (with much whining and gnashing of teeth along the way. ;) ).
The Bill of No Rights
The United States has become a place where entertainers and professional athletes are mistaken for people of importance. Robert A. Heinlein
Reply
#4
Occhidiangela,Sep 10 2005, 07:37 AM Wrote:[right][snapback]88700[/snapback][/right]
Very interesting.

Our four main cities here are all at sea level. Two are on major earthquake faultlines, and one on a field of 27 (so far) dormant volcanos :P
Reply
#5
whyBish,Sep 11 2005, 10:42 PM Wrote:Very interesting.

Our four main cities here are all at sea level.  Two are on major earthquake faultlines, and one on a field of 27 (so far) dormant volcanos  :P
[right][snapback]88845[/snapback][/right]
Most major cites are ports. Speaks of the importance of maritime and naval power on human society. But most such cities actually slope up from the sea.

People mention why did we build a city like New Orleans there in the first place, and I have to roll my eyes at their ignorance at the geopolitical importance of a seaport at the mouth of a large, extensive river system that runs deep into the interior of North America. When they profess wonder at why the French though it was a good idea, that's when I have to chime in and say that the French Quarter, the oldest part of the city, was built on the high ground. Modern New Orleans expanded into the low-lying muck.
Political Correctness is the idea that you can foster tolerance in a diverse world through the intolerance of anything that strays from a clinical standard.
Reply
#6
Yes.

Settlements are are started almost everywhere. Many fail. The ones that grow to major cities are rarely specifically chosen, its ussually an accident of geography.

On the other hand you have to qustion the wisdom of rebuilding building a whole city in a bad spot when many of the residents are unemployed/underemplyed.

Maybe we need less city.
Reply
#7
Ghostiger,Sep 12 2005, 11:58 AM Wrote:Yes.

Settlements are are started almost everywhere. Many fail. The ones that grow to major cities are rarely specifically chosen, its ussually an accident of geography.

On the other hand you have to qustion the wisdom of rebuilding building a whole city in a bad spot when many of the residents are unemployed/underemplyed.

Maybe we need less city.
[right][snapback]88873[/snapback][/right]

With all these reasonable things you have been saying lately, I must point out that the quantity and the quality of your trolling has gone right out the bloody window. Do something quick before somebody mistakes you for a productive forum member!

:P
All alone, or in twos,
The ones who really love you
Walk up and down outside the wall.
Some hand in hand
And some gathered together in bands.
The bleeding hearts and artists
Make their stand.

And when they've given you their all
Some stagger and fall, after all it's not easy
Banging your heart against some mad buggers wall.

"Isn't this where...."
Reply
#8
Trolling comments are directly proportional to how strongly one disagrees with a poster(me) - in my experience.

Im sure i could be called a troll quickly if I voiced my opinions on lesbians, "black american culture", Islam or abortions as well as less obvious hot buttons.



The only real difference in my posting is that I stopped calling people "idiots" when they were intelectually dishonest(or maybe they were just dumb) and instead pointed out their flaws.(By the way I dont mean to say thist is the case in all my disagreements - most of them are just matters of opinion.)
Reply
#9
Ghostiger,Sep 12 2005, 12:25 PM Wrote:Trolling comments are directly proportional to how strongly one disagrees with a poster(me) - in my experience.

Im sure i could be called a troll quickly if I voiced my opinions on lesbians, "black american culture", Islam or abortions as well as less obvious hot buttons.
The only real difference in my posting is that I stopped calling people "idiots" when they were intelectually dishonest(or maybe they were just dumb) and instead pointed out their flaws.(By the way I dont mean to say thist is the case in all my disagreements - most of them are just matters of opinion.)
[right][snapback]88877[/snapback][/right]

Yes, but what about Islamic Black American Lesbians that have abortions culture? What's your take on that?
All alone, or in twos,
The ones who really love you
Walk up and down outside the wall.
Some hand in hand
And some gathered together in bands.
The bleeding hearts and artists
Make their stand.

And when they've given you their all
Some stagger and fall, after all it's not easy
Banging your heart against some mad buggers wall.

"Isn't this where...."
Reply
#10
I bet they dont have many friends.
Reply
#11
Doc,Sep 12 2005, 11:32 AM Wrote:Yes, but what about Islamic Black American Lesbians that have abortions culture? What's your take on that?
[right][snapback]88878[/snapback][/right]

David Crosby must have been hooked up to a milking machine, that is my take on that. :blink:

Occhi
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
Reply
#12
Doc,Sep 12 2005, 01:32 PM Wrote:Yes, but what about Islamic Black American Lesbians that have abortions culture? What's your take on that?
[right][snapback]88878[/snapback][/right]
If Jerry Falwell saw that post, his head would explode. Which may not be a bad thing.
Creator of "The Corrupted Wish Game": Rules revised 06/15/05
"It was a quiet day...the kind of quiet that happens just before the entire Sioux nation comes up over the ridge."
[Image: cobalt-60.jpg] Click here for a free iPod!
Reply
#13
Ghostiger,Sep 12 2005, 04:58 PM Wrote:Yes.

Settlements are are started almost everywhere. Many fail. The ones that grow to major cities are rarely specifically chosen, its ussually an accident of geography.

On the other hand you have to qustion the wisdom of rebuilding building a whole city in a bad spot when many of the residents are unemployed/underemplyed.

Maybe we need less city.
[right][snapback]88873[/snapback][/right]


I'm sure upon rebuilding the city they will "prune" some of the "undesirable" neighborhoods. They'll condemn the houses and building as contaminated and unsafe. After tearing them down, they'll rebuild new housing/shops/offices in their place and price the former occupants completely out. Can anyone say "Urban Renewal"?!
Signature? What do you mean?
Reply
#14
Ironic sacrasm loses its coolness when you are only fighting your own speculation.

Its rather contrived.
Reply
#15
Ghostiger,Sep 12 2005, 08:53 PM Wrote:Ironic sacrasm loses its coolness when you are only fighting your own speculation.

Its rather contrived.
[right][snapback]88946[/snapback][/right]

The sad thing is he's got a pretty good shot at being right. Take a look at the condo market in California and where some of the land is coming from... And there wasn't even a catastrophe to force people out and ruin what's there.
The Bill of No Rights
The United States has become a place where entertainers and professional athletes are mistaken for people of importance. Robert A. Heinlein
Reply
#16
Ghostiger,Sep 12 2005, 09:53 PM Wrote:Ironic sacrasm loses its coolness when you are only fighting your own speculation.
[right][snapback]88946[/snapback][/right]

Heh, I rather like that. I think I'll go ahead and add it to my list of FUTURE POSSIBLE FORUM SIGNATURES if you don't mind. As of now, that list is about 7-sayings long and I have only two currently in my profile, however I don't want more than two, nor do I want to swap out for a new one quite yet.
"The true value of a human being is determined primarily by the measure and the sense in which he has attained liberation from the self." -Albert Einsetin
Reply
#17
Any1,Sep 12 2005, 10:42 PM Wrote:I'm sure upon rebuilding the city they will "prune" some of the "undesirable" neighborhoods.&nbsp; They'll condemn the houses and building as contaminated and unsafe. After tearing them down, they'll rebuild new housing/shops/offices in their place and price the former occupants completely out.&nbsp; Can anyone say "Urban Renewal"?!
[right][snapback]88937[/snapback][/right]
And what happens if the former residents of those "undesireable" neighborhoods are disinclined to remain in Houston or Baton Rouge or wherever they were shipped off to? They'll end up settling into the areas that were most heavily damaged by the hurricane and abandoned by "respectable" people as being too dangerous. The most vulnerable areas will become shantytowns just right for washing away.
Creator of "The Corrupted Wish Game": Rules revised 06/15/05
"It was a quiet day...the kind of quiet that happens just before the entire Sioux nation comes up over the ridge."
[Image: cobalt-60.jpg] Click here for a free iPod!
Reply
#18
Any1,Sep 12 2005, 08:42 PM Wrote:I'm sure upon rebuilding the city they will "prune" some of the "undesirable" neighborhoods.&nbsp; They'll condemn the houses and building as contaminated and unsafe. After tearing them down, they'll rebuild new housing/shops/offices in their place and price the former occupants completely out.&nbsp; Can anyone say "Urban Renewal"?!
[right][snapback]88937[/snapback][/right]

Who is "they?"

There are a number of very prominent black politicians and public personages (Jesse Jackson, for instance) who are agitating massively. There is small likelihood that those folk will back down from their efforts to prevent Katrina from being the catalyst for "ethnic cleansing" in New Orleans.

Like them or not, believe their line of BS or not, they will keep this issue in the public eye for as long as they can. Which -- as much as I find Jesse Jackson a despicable, lying, jerk -- is a good thing. Regardless of motive, I am not comfortable with the idea of "I'm gonna wash that black right out of my city" as public policy, nor do I find any warmth in my heart for predatory financers and developers who will doubtless try to exploit this "business opportunity."

Occhi

PS: James Earl Ray was a lousy shot. He hit the wrong guy.
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
Reply
#19
Occhidiangela,Sep 13 2005, 08:59 AM Wrote:PS:&nbsp; James Earl Ray was a lousy shot.&nbsp; He hit the wrong guy.
[right][snapback]88971[/snapback][/right]

He didn't do it. Even King's widow doesn't believe he did it. To many things in that case that make no sense and do not pan out.

Jesse Jackson can suck, oh my the Lounge is PG13 aint it? Lots of unknown people do all the work and make all the effort and he rides in to town like he's hero of the day and takes all the credit saying it was through his hard work and effort that this moment was achieved.

He's a corksnorkler.
All alone, or in twos,
The ones who really love you
Walk up and down outside the wall.
Some hand in hand
And some gathered together in bands.
The bleeding hearts and artists
Make their stand.

And when they've given you their all
Some stagger and fall, after all it's not easy
Banging your heart against some mad buggers wall.

"Isn't this where...."
Reply
#20
Doc,Sep 13 2005, 08:20 AM Wrote:He didn't do it. Even King's widow doesn't believe he did it. To many things in that case that make no sense and do not pan out.

Jesse Jackson can suck, oh my the Lounge is PG13 aint it? Lots of unknown people do all the work and make all the effort and he rides in to town like he's hero of the day and takes all the credit saying it was through his hard work and effort that this moment was achieved.

He's a corksnorkler.
[right][snapback]88977[/snapback][/right]

?????? Didn't the forensics match the bullet to his rifle????

Occhi
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 31 Guest(s)