Oil conspiracy theories could be right, study showsStaff writer ▼ | January 28, 2015
Researchers have for the first time provided strong evidence for what conspiracy theorists have long thought - oil is often the reason for interfering in another country's war.
Research Oil is often the reason for interfering in another country
Researchers from the Universities of Portsmouth, Warwick and Essex modelled the decision-making process of third-party countries in interfering in civil wars and examined their economic motives.
They found that the decision to interfere was dominated by the interveners' need for oil over and above historical, geographical or ethnic ties.
Civil wars have made up more than 90 per cent of all armed conflicts since World War II and the research builds on a near-exhaustive sample of 69 countries which had a civil war between 1945 and 1999. About two thirds of civil wars during the period saw third party intervention either by another country or outside organisation.
Petros Sekeris, from the University Portsmouth, Vincenzo Bove, from the University of Warwick, and Kristian Skrede Gleditsch from the University of Essex, wanted to find out which factors made it more likely that a third party state would militarily intervene in an ongoing intrastate war.
Sekeris said: "We found clear evidence that countries with potential for oil production are more likely to be targeted by foreign intervention if civil wars erupt.
"Military intervention is expensive and risky. No country joins another country's civil war without balancing the cost against their own strategic interests and what possible benefits there are.
"We wanted to go beyond conspiracy theories and conduct a careful, nuanced analysis to see whether oil acts as an economic incentive in the decision on whether to intervene in an internal war in another country. The results show that outsiders are much more motivated to join a fight if they have a vested financial interest."
Among the findings, published in the Journal of Conflict Resolution, are the more oil a country has, the more likely a third party will intervene in their civil war; and the more oil a country imports, the greater the likelihood it will intervene in an oil-producing country's civil war.
"We don't claim that our findings can be applied to every decision made on whether to intervene in another country's war, but the results clearly demonstrate supply of and demand for oil motivates a significant number of decisions taken to intervene in civil wars in the post-World War II period." ■