eaver(1991), “the availability and cost of conventional energysources; national security concerns; the technical, legal,and economic uncertainties related to synthetic fuels; andthe emergence of large oil companies as major forces inshaping energy policy. These issues that became salient inthe 1920s remain relevant to the 1990s” (Beaver, 1991, p.241). Both the Wilson and Harding administrations tookproactive foreign policy actions in order to ensure adequatesupplies of oil for the booming economy. Bothadministrations assisted major U.S. companies in theirattempts to secure foreign oil agreements. For example, thegovernment tried to persuade Great Britain and theNetherlands to allow U.S. oil companies into the Middle Eastand Pacific regions where they controlled most of the oilreserves. The U.S. government hoped to gain an open doorpolicy in oil exploration. However, U.S. diplomacy failed tosecure this from either the British or the Dutch. Accordingto Beaver, “Such failures frustrated U.S. officials. FrankG. Lane, secretary of the interior, called British controlof Middle Eastern oil "a menace." In fact, anti-Britishsentiments prompted Congress to pass retaliatory legislationbarring foreigners from acquiring oil leases on publiclands” (Beaver, 1991, p. 241).The postwar initiatives to secure foreign oil set aprecedent that was to become more important in laterdecades. Namely, when oil was in short supply, majorcompanies, with the support of the U.S. government lookedto Latin America and the Middle East rather thanconcentrating on domestic solutions. As a result, “Theseinitiatives reduced any sense of urgency to exploresynthetic fuels; as long as foreign oil could be obtained atreasonable prices, the difficult task of developingsynthetics could be averted” (Beaver, 1991, p. 241). Thus, the U.S. found itself dependent upon oil from theMiddle East. The Middle East, except for the constantstruggle betwe...
