The recent conflict over the capture of 15 British sailors in the Shatt al-Arab has drawn worldwide media coverage. Unfortunately, much of the reporting dedicated to this event seems to be shortsighted, neglecting possible reasons for Iran's actions.
While mainstream media coverage has characterized Iran's kidnapping of the 15 sailors as an attempt to provoke a political conflict with the West, it is far more likely that the government's actions were motivated by a desire to alleviate growing domestic pressures.
By inciting a low-grade conflict with the West, the Iranian leadership hoped to raise oil prices, closing a widening budget gap and avert a decline in its popularity.
Recently, Iran's leadership has been faced with a litany of concerns that center on a growing budgetary shortfall. Spending has grown exponentially since President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected on a populist platform in 2005. Through generous government subsidies on key products such as oil and foodstuffs, Ahmadinejad has tried to support those in the lower classes who were instrumental in his election.
Governmental spending has also increased in other areas, as Iran spent lavishly on a nuclear power program while simultaneously funding international proxies to further its agenda in the greater Middle East. In order to fund this ambitious set of policies, the government has grown increasingly dependent on maintaining the high price of oil.
As oil prices fell throughout the fall of 2006, the leadership in Tehran began to realize that its budget had been stretched thin. Many subsidies were targeted for cuts - including those on fuel, even though cheap gas is seen as an Iranian right. The prospect of such a drastic change in course threatened to drag Ahmadinejad's approval ratings lower and anger many of those who had carried him to victory in 2005.
Iran's desire to have global oil prices intensified due to the prevailing market conditions of late 2006 and early 2007. An unusually warm winter in Europe and the United States led to a rapid sell-off in oil futures.
Compounding this were abnormally high levels of oil reserves throughout the industrial world. Given these circumstances, Iran hoped to cut oil production at the March meeting of OPEC.
However, it ran into a roadblock, as the Sunni Arab members of the cartel refused to capitulate. Hoping to curb the growing influence of Tehran, the Sunni membership decided to maintain the status quo - forcing Iran to consider other ways to control oil prices.
Given the fact that any conflict in the Middle East is sure to raise oil prices, it seems that the quickest way for Iran to obtain its objectives was by provoking a minor crisis with the West.
Through the capture of 15 British sailors in disputed waters, the country's leadership was able to spurn a diplomatic firestorm. Its actions catalyzed sensational media coverage that rattled the underpinnings of the global energy market. By inciting a crisis, Iran drove the price of oil past $69 a barrel, and temporarily alleviated its budgetary concerns.
The decision by Iran's leadership to capture the 15 British sailors on March 23 was a well-orchestrated charade that aimed to manipulate oil prices through the reactions of Western leaders and the media that cover them. With the knowledge that their cause would be aided by this overly dramatic coverage, Iran leveraged the crisis it had incited into a short-term remedy for its fiscal ills.
The success of this well-laid trap makes it likely that such behavior will occur in the future. And once again the Iranian leadership will be laughing all the way to the bank.
Matt Gallagher is a senior majoring in political science and Kelli Harrison is a senior majoring in Middle Eastern studies.
