Monday, July 20, 2026

History of the Petrodollar Equation: Why US Wants To Control Oil Reserves Around The World

History of the Petrodollar Equation: Why US Wants To Control Oil Reserves Around The World

 Samannay Biswas, Jan 6, 2026, 11:08 IST

The petrodollar system, established in the 1970s, has been vital for US economic and geopolitical dominance by ensuring global oil trade is conducted in dollars.


The petrodollar system, a cornerstone of US economic power since the 1970s, refers to the global practice of pricing and trading oil in US dollars. This arrangement has ensured sustained global demand for the dollar, enabling the United States to finance large fiscal deficits, keep borrowing costs relatively low, and wield significant geopolitical influence.

However, as some nations have attempted to reduce reliance on the dollar, often by exploring alternative currencies for oil trade, the US response has ranged from diplomatic pressure and economic sanctions to covert action and military intervention.

Critics argue that challenges to the petrodollar have frequently been met with American aggression, while official narratives usually frame these actions around security, democracy, or counterterrorism. What follows is a structured account of the petrodollar’s origins, how it has been maintained, and the key countries that have faced pressure after attempting to bypass it.

Origins of the Petrodollar System (1970s)

The foundations of the petrodollar were laid after the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in 1971, when President Richard Nixon ended the dollar’s convertibility into gold. This triggered global currency volatility and inflationary pressures.

The 1973 Yom Kippur War and the subsequent OPEC oil embargo intensified these challenges. Oil prices quadrupled, generating massive surpluses for oil-exporting nations—particularly Saudi Arabia—creating what came to be known as “petrodollars.”

Between 1974 and 1975, the US struck a pivotal agreement with Saudi Arabia. In return for American military protection and large-scale arms sales, Riyadh agreed to price its oil exclusively in US dollars and invest surplus revenues in US Treasury bonds and American financial institutions. Soon after, the rest of OPEC adopted the same model.

This created a self-reinforcing cycle: countries needed dollars to buy oil, strengthening demand for the US currency and reinforcing Washington’s financial and military dominance. The system was not purely economic—it also tied oil-dependent nations to US-aligned financial networks, discouraging alternatives such as euro-denominated oil trade.

How the US Maintained Petrodollar Dominance (1980s–2000s)

Over the following decades, Washington employed multiple strategies to protect the system.

Diplomatically, the US deepened alliances with Gulf monarchies through long-term security guarantees and arms deals. Economically, global institutions such as the IMF and World Bank reinforced dollar-based financial norms, while sanctions punished countries that attempted to deviate.

Militarily, the US engaged in proxy conflicts and direct interventions in oil-rich regions, often justified on security grounds but aligned with broader energy and currency interests. Covert operations were also used to destabilise governments perceived as threats to dollar-denominated oil trade.

By the 1990s, with the Soviet Union gone, resource-rich states such as Iraq and Iran began exploring alternatives—prompting sharper US responses.

Countries That Challenged the Petrodollar

Several nations faced significant pressure after attempting to bypass dollar-based oil trade. While official US explanations cited weapons, terrorism, or human rights, critics argue that currency considerations played a parallel role.

Iraq: The Euro Switch and the 2003 Invasion

In 2000, Iraq under Saddam Hussein announced it would sell oil in euros rather than dollars under the UN’s Oil-for-Food Programme. This move, if replicated by other producers, risked weakening dollar dominance.

Three years later, the US invaded Iraq, citing weapons of mass destruction and terrorism links—claims later shown to be unfounded. Shortly after the invasion, Iraqi oil sales were reverted to US dollars.

Many analysts argue that preventing a euro-based oil precedent was a key, if unstated, objective of the war. Iraq’s oil sector was later rebuilt under US oversight, reinforcing petrodollar flows.

Libya: The Gold Dinar and NATO’s 2011 Intervention

Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi promoted a pan-African gold-backed currency—the “African dinar”—to be used for oil trade instead of dollars or euros. Backed by Libya’s oil reserves and gold holdings, the proposal threatened Western financial influence in Africa.

During the Arab Spring in 2011, unrest in Libya escalated into civil war. NATO intervened under the banner of civilian protection, ultimately leading to Gaddafi’s overthrow and death. Subsequent disclosures revealed Western concerns over Libya’s gold reserves and currency plans.

After the intervention, Libyan oil returned to dollar-based trade, but the country descended into prolonged instability.

Iran: Sanctions, Nuclear Claims, and Non-Dollar Oil Sales

Iran has long sought to reduce dependence on the dollar by accepting euros, yuan, gold, and barter arrangements for its oil. US sanctions, intensified from the mid-2000s onward, targeted Iran’s energy sector under the justification of nuclear non-proliferation.

At their peak, these sanctions slashed Iran’s oil exports dramatically. While framed around nuclear concerns, many analysts link the pressure to Iran’s efforts to bypass dollar-based systems and global financial infrastructure.

Though the US never launched a full-scale invasion, proxy conflicts, cyber operations, and economic warfare have been used to constrain Tehran.

Venezuela: Bolivarian Defiance and Recent Escalation

Under Hugo Chávez and later Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela pursued alternatives to dollar dominance, including oil trade with China and Russia and the launch of a state-backed cryptocurrency tied to oil reserves.

US sanctions intensified from 2017 onward, crippling Venezuela’s oil industry and economy. In January 2026, US forces captured President Maduro on narco-terrorism charges—an unprecedented escalation.

Critics argue that Venezuela’s attempts to sell oil outside the dollar system and promote alternative financial mechanisms made it a strategic target.

Emerging Challenges and the Future of the Petrodollar

In recent years, dedollarisation efforts by BRICS nations and growing interest in yuan-based oil trade have signalled potential long-term erosion of the petrodollar. While the dollar still dominates global oil transactions, geopolitical fragmentation and sanctions-driven workarounds are gradually reshaping the system.

US responses now include sanctions on major producers like Russia and renewed strategic alliances to counter China’s influence.

For over five decades, the United States has actively defended the petrodollar through diplomatic, economic, and military means. Interventions in Iraq, Libya, Iran, and Venezuela—though officially justified on other grounds—are widely viewed as linked to efforts to preserve dollar dominance in global energy markets.

As the world moves toward a more multipolar order, the petrodollar remains powerful but increasingly contested, setting the stage for future economic and geopolitical realignments.

Working as Copy Editor at the Business Desk of Times Now Digital. Dedicated towards crafting interesting financial stories. Previously covered financial and political stories with FE and Firstpost NW18. Holds a degree in Business & Financial Journalism from ACJ-Bloomberg. Loves reading, writing and watching films

-------------------------------------------- 

Source

https://www.timesnownews.com/business-economy/economy/history-of-the-petrodollar-equation-why-us-wants-to-control-oil-reserves-around-the-world-explained-article-153402640

Sunday, July 19, 2026

What Happened in 1971? Edward Snowden and Jack Dorsey Want to Know

What Happened in 1971? Edward Snowden and Jack Dorsey Want to Know

Something huge happened in 1971. And both Edward Snowden and Jack Dorsey are asking the same question.

In mid August, Twitter Founder and CEO Jack Dorsey tweeted a strange hashtag: #WTFHappenedin1971.

A few weeks later, Edward Snowden, the CIA subcontractor turned whistleblower who revealed the NSA’s unlawful mass surveillance program, shared a similar post.

It’s unclear if Dorsey and Snowden have similar ideological views, but it’s clear both men are seeking answers to the same question (or prompting others to look themselves): what in the world happened in 1971?

WTF Happened in 1971?

For those who aren’t aware, there is an entire website dedicated to that question: wtfhappenedin1971.com/.

The first thing that becomes apparent is that something happened in 1971. This fact is made clear by a series of charts, all based on government data, that show various odd economic trends began in that year.

Income inequality, for example, began to get much worse.

Wages, which had tracked closely with productivity and GDP growth for decades, began to lag productivity and economic growth (badly).

Inflation soared, growing at a faster rate than at any period in the previous century.

The income gap between black and white Americans, which had been closing rapidly since 1950, all but stopped closing.

These are just a few of the economic graphs one will find on wtfhappenedin1971.com. So the question remains: what the heck happened?

FDR, Nixon, and the Gold Standard

For years, I was always bored to death when I’d hear discussions about the gold standard. Monetary policy wasn’t just dull, but confusing. Some people blamed Nixon for taking the US off the gold standard; others would say, “No, no. It was FDR.”

So who was it? And what is “the gold standard,” anyway?

The gold standard is simply a monetary system that links the value of paper money to gold. The system, which was implemented in the US in 1834, set the price of gold at $20.67 per ounce, where it stayed until the early 1930s. In the 1870s, other countries followed suit, ushering in the Golden Age of gold (pardon the pun) and a period of great prosperity.

“The period from 1880 to 1914 is known as the classical gold standard. During that time, the majority of countries adhered (in varying degrees) to gold,” writes Michael D. Bordo at EconLib. “It was also a period of unprecedented economic growth with relatively free trade in goods, labor, and capital.”

The period’s end—1914—came with the beginning of World War I, when many nations turned to inflationary finance to pay for the bloodiest war in human history (at the time). From 1925 to 1931 a new gold era began with the Gold Exchange Standard, but it didn’t last long.

“This version broke down in 1931 following Britain’s departure from gold in the face of massive gold and capital outflows,” Bordo explains. “In 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt nationalized gold owned by private citizens and abrogated contracts in which payment was specified in gold.”

FDR’s order—Executive Order 6102—forbade “the hoarding of gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates within the continental United States.” Not only would individuals not be able to redeem their paper notes for gold under the order, but private ownership of gold coins and bullion was made illegal. (This unpopular law was repealed in 1974.)

So What about Nixon?

So it was FDR that moved the US off the gold standard? Not quite.

From 1946 to 1971, nations operated under a new monetary system: the Bretton Woods Agreement.

“The Bretton Woods system was designed by the Allied nations, led by the United States, near the end of World War II as a postwar international monetary order,” explains economist Jonathan Newman. “The US dollar would become the world’s reserve currency, which foreign governments could redeem for gold, even though US citizens could not.”

Did you catch that last part? Though citizens couldn’t exchange paper money for gold, foreign governments could. So the US dollar was still tethered to gold, which the US promised to redeem at an exchange rate of $35 per ounce. This meant the US couldn’t inflate the money supply without depleting its gold reserves.

Unfortunately, however, the US did inflate its currency, in large part to finance the escalating costs of the Vietnam War and LBJ’s Great Society. This is one reason, Newman explains, that the US depleted roughly 55 percent of its gold stock from the 1950s to 1971.

In that year—1971—facing depleted gold reserves and a dollar facing increasing inflationary pressure from government expenses, Nixon made a critical decision: he “temporarily” paused gold redemption.

Nixon’s move was not temporary, however.

That’s What Happened in 1971

So now you know what happened in 1971. The US became what is known as a fiat currency system, one in which paper is legal tender backed not by gold, silver or some other commodity, but by government decree.

The economist Thorsten Polleit described three things all fiat monies have in common:

  1. the government (or its central bank) has the monopoly on production.
  2. It is created by way of bank credit expansion (i.e. out of thin air).
  3. It has no inherent value, it is simply brightly colored paper (or digital bytes) that can be produced whenever those in power deem it politically expedient.

This is why those in control like a fiat money system. It allows them to finance all the programs and agendas they otherwise couldn’t afford, from the War in Afghanistan to the Affordable Care Act to really expensive weapons systems.

Unfortunately, all that spending comes at a cost. Sure, the federal debt ballooned from $398 billion in 1971 ($2.7 trillion 2021 dollars) to $28.8 trillion today. But as the graphics above show, those are hardly the only costs. It’s no accident the top 1 percent hold a record percentage of all wealth in the US. The fiat money system has allowed those in power to debauch the currency to enrich themselves at the expense of others (inflation is a tax)—all in the name of altruism.

Economist Murray Rothbard liked to use a thought experiment to demonstrate how it worked. Imagine if “Angel Gabriel” appeared and multiplied the amount of money everyone had tenfold. Would anyone be richer? Not one bit. But now imagine that the money supply is increased but not distributed evenly. The Angel Gabriel increases the money supply for some—starting with privileged bankers who decide how it is distributed—but not others. Who benefits then? You guessed it: the people who get it first.

Edward Snowden and Jack Dorsey are asking the right question: what the [heck] happened in 1971? We know what happened, the question is: what will we do about it?

Monetary policy may be confusing and some may find it dull—though I no longer do. But one thing is clear: it’s monumentally important.

Jonathan Miltimore is the former Senior Creative Strategist of FEE.org at the Foundation for Economic Education. 

-----------------------------------------

Source

 https://fee.org/articles/what-happened-in-1971-edward-snowden-and-jack-dorsey-want-to-know/


Friday, July 17, 2026

How the American Republic Became a Managerial State

How the American Republic Became a Managerial State

----------------------------------

Source

 https://brownstone.org/articles/how-the-american-republic-became-a-managerial-state/


Monday, July 13, 2026

The Deeply Troubling Case of Andrea Shaw and Her Twins

The Deeply Troubling Case of Andrea Shaw and Her Twins

History of the Petrodollar Equation: Why US Wants To Control Oil Reserves Around The World

History of the Petrodollar Equation: Why US Wants To Control Oil Reserves Around The World   Samannay Biswas ,  Jan 6, 2026, 11:08 IST The p...