It has been in vogue — in one form or the other — for decades.

Interestingly the idea doesn’t fancy, the romanticists among the Arabs only.

The virus afflicts even the realists, the strategists, in the West too. None are shielded. None are protected.

This desire to use oil as a weapon continues to linger, despite the cost that any such move would extract from the energy world and its disastrous impact on the overall global energy balance.

Indeed energy and politics go hand in hand.

They remain virtually inseparable. Realpolitik reigns supreme, over all other considerations. Whosoever is in the position, in the driving seat, loves to deploy it — as a weapon.

It’s just an issue of being in the position to be able to use it. Indeed all is fair in love and war.

And then why to raise hue and cry and blame the Arabs — far off from the reality of the day — of fantasizing the very idea, of using the crude assets for achieving political objectives and strategic heights? And one can’t deny the desire lingers, despite the brute fact that it is neither viable in the current scenario nor possible for the Arabs, at least in the near future, to embark on any such misadventure - for a host of reasons.

The clock, in the meantime, has turned a full cycle.

It now seems to be the west’s turn to simulate the path, the Arabs took some 38 years back.

In a move to contain Iran’s alleged nuclear advances, Washington, hand in hand with Europe, is endeavoring to twist Tehran’s financial arm — its life and blood — its oil exports.

The west is now attempting and planning to cut Iran’s ability to sell oil on world markets, contemplating more sanctions to dissuade international customers from buying from Iran — the world’s fourth-largest oil exporter.

Tehran needs to be brought to knees — at any cost — practitioners of realpolitik are asserting.

Oil is definitely the lifeline of Iran and any squeeze on its exports would simply cripple Tehran — the regime and nation.

Attempts are hence on — to use oil as a weapon — against a producer by the consumers this time.

Consequences could be disastrous. A high-stake game is likely!

Tehran produces almost 3.5 million bpd and is a significant contributor to the global energy balance.

Any disturbance in this outflow could put in jeopardy the overall global demand — supply scenario.

Tehran — yet — is not too impressed. Oil Minister Rostam Qasemi says there is little alternative to Iran’s oil in terms of quality and quantity.

“It would not be a wise decision to impose sanctions on Iran’s oil and if this happens, global oil markets will have to pay a heavy price for it,’ he asserted. None can deny it.”

A number of issues are at hand. In case of a real conflagration, the possibility of Iran blocking the Straits of Hormuz cannot be written off altogether.

Senior leaders in Tehran have been alluding to this possibility and if it really happens, it would mean a major blow to the global crude balance.

Almost 20 percent of the global crude passes through Hormuz each day and is crucial for maintaining stability in the market.

And then there is still the possibility that, despite western pressure, not necessarily everyone would be on board.

Markets would enforce its, own dictates and some would still continue buying Iranian crude.

Striking a rare note of divergence with the US, during a visit to Washington, Japan’s foreign minister said his country would not stop imports of Iranian oil.

Now this is significant. China and Russia also appear to have their reservations on the issue.

It is understandably difficult for them to severe their deep ties with Tehran.

The success of any such western move, if it at all takes place, is still to be gauged. 

Although one has to concede, the move is definite to have some impact, one can’t deny.

India, under Premier Manmohan Singh, much different from the idealistic, utopian Nehruvian days, is already contemplating, or at least preparing, to give in to the pressure from Washington.

Indian companies have reportedly begun talks with alternative suppliers to slowly replace Iranian oil, also fearing their current mechanism for payments to Tehran for some 350,000 barrels a day (bpd) via Turkey could soon succumb to sanctions, industry sources said.

India, which a year ago lost one conduit for payments, is already looking for alternatives as Halkbank, the Turkish bank handling some transfers, refused to open an account for Indian refinery Bharat Petroleum.

And then there is the issue of the psychological impact on the markets too.

Crude markets are known to react violently to any possible disruption.

In case of a western embargo, the psychological, fear premium would definitely go up.

Earlier the month, Iran warned the West that any move to block its oil exports would more than double crude prices with devastating consequences on a fragile global economy.

“As soon as such an issue is raised seriously the oil price would soar to above $250 a barrel,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast then said in a newspaper interview.

Markets will definitely have to cough up the added tariff. Embargoing Iran is not an easy option and indeed may lead to serious consequences.

Yet the fact remains that the existing sanctions are already impacting Tehran’s ability to produce and export, rather adversely.

This is not a good omen for the industry.

While IEA continues to clamor for increasing the OPEC output, it should also not stay away from advising the adverse impacts of western moves on the industry.

Tehran’s output is already constrained due to western measures.

Iran’s deputy oil minister, Ahmad Qalebani, recently conceded that Iran’s crude oil production in 2011 had declined from the year before, “due to lack of investment in oil field development.”

Iran produced about 4 million barrels a day of oil in 2010 and is producing about 3.5 million barrels this year. Foreign minister Ali Akbar Salehi also agreed: “We cannot pretend the sanctions are not having an effect.”

Using oil as a weapon for achieving political and strategic objectives, until recently appeared only a matter of past. Not any more. It is staring at the energy world again. And as before, this would distort — rather artificially — the market dynamics.

Free market pundits need to speak up — now or never!