RIYADH, July 12: With crude touching the $147 mark, the issue of access to the energy riches of the oil-rich states is back in headlines. At the World Petroleum Congress in Madrid, Tony Hayward, the chief executive of BP, insisted that fundamental issues such as a lack of investment and the rising intransigence of state-owned oil companies (in not allowing access to the IOCs) were behind the current oil price spike, warning that “the problems are above ground, not below it”.

Mr Hayward’s views were echoed by players from the industry. The likes of BP, Shell, and ExxonMobil are now getting vocal in pointing to the increasing difficulty they have in getting access to new reserves, owing to the hardening stance of state-owned oil companies, that remain unconvinced that they need the help of private groups to extract resource from beneath the surface.

With the tightening market, the issue is assuming extremely explosive proportions. Access to national, natural resources is a divisive issue. It evokes raw emotions. And the emotions turn explosive, take a deeply political tone, when under question are national energy resources.

Greater access to energy riches of Saudi Arabia has been a much discussed subject for decades now. It has been an avowed goal of successive Washington administrations. It has long been a dream of oil majors too.

In Oct 1998, the then Crown Prince and the current King Abdullah, during an unprecedented meeting in Washington with the CEOs of seven global IOCs, invited them for investments in the Saudi oil and gas sectors, many there thought as a prelude to involvement in the prized upstream Saudi oil and gas sector. The IOCs have been lobbying hard for long to gain access upstream.

At the invitation, many then thought that Saudi Arabia was eventually warming up to the idea. The euphoria though proved short-lived and ever since the oil majors have been insisting on that.

And thus when Mark Finley, the General Manager of Global Energy Markets for BP, conceded at the International Energy Forum secretariat in Riyadh earlier this week that Saudi Aramco had the capacity and the technical capability to meet challenges of the industry, and IOCs do not offer much added advantage in this case, for a change it was a welcome one. To some extent, he was overriding his boss’s statement.

The entire argument that the denial of access was the culprit for the current woes of the market thus seemed standing on rather shaky grounds – in real sense. Though indeed, if the reasons for the push for access are something else than what is being stated, then it’s a different debate altogether.

In the current scenario, when to those who matter in this unipolar world of ours, the concentration and not the availability of energy resources is the real issue; the question of access to these national, natural and indeed finite resources assumes explosive dimensions.

And how could it be different? Scepticism rules the world of energy and with real reasons. When President Mosaddeq of Iran decided to nationalise the Iranian energy assets in 1953, he was definitely within his own right to do so. Yet that was not acceptable to the powers that be. It is an open secret now that the grandson of President Roosevelt, Kermit Roosevelt, orchestrated the Aug 19, 1953, coup against Mosaddeq. Indeed the powers that be, could not have afforded a state, crucially important from energy point of view, to exercise independence in real sense.

It’s the same today. One doesn’t need to look that far into history to reach a conclusion. Most, including Washington insider Alan Greenspan, now admit the assault on Baghdad in March 2003 was all about oil. And even in recent months when pressure was being exerted on Baghdad to get on with the oil draft, rather in a hurry, most if not all in the region viewed it as another attempt at controlling the Iraq’s energy riches.

And in the process, rightly or wrongly, international oil companies are increasingly being perceived here by many as means for fulfilling the imperial designs. A section in the region now even views the energy riches of the region more of a curse rather than blessing, for getting too much of the unwarranted attention.

The issue of access to resources is definitely important, one cannot argue, yet this is not applicable in all the scenarios. Saudi Aramco is bringing on stream the 1.2 million bpd Al-Khurais on stream next year, entirely on its own. And in this case, the IOCs don’t have much added advantage to offer.

However, the fact remains other state oil companies may definitely be in such need.

And it is here that oil executives need to make the distinction. Rather than painting all the national oil companies with black, they need to be more specific. This may help them win at least the argument, making it more convincing, if not the access still – for obvious nationalistic reasons.

One needs to underline at this stage that the issue of national pride is involved in this entire debate. And after all the oil majors do not have a clean history to boast of and they are today paying a price for the perceptions they enjoy and the past faults of their own - let’s admit and move ahead into future.