In the minds of most, an attack by the U.S. or its allies on Iran would be an
act of extreme foolishness. And that's putting it charitably.
Not that the U.S. would actually lose, at least not in
military terms. While the precarious position of the U.S. armada in the Persian
Gulf--the narrow shores of which are crowded with all manner of ship-killing
missiles, including the deadly Chinese C-802 with its 98% hit rate--all but
assure a loss of American life on a scale of Pearl Harbor, the Iranians, like
the Japanese in WWII, have no real chance of prevailing.
The U.S. might lose the battle for the Persian Gulf, but
it would certainly win the short conventional war that would follow.
But that assessment doesn't mean the U.S. would come out a
winner in the long run; as the minor-league skirmish in Iraq demonstrates on a
daily basis, boots on the ground--a prerequisite to proclaiming victory--are
boots that quickly become muck-bound.
In fact, the only real winner, should hostilities break
out, would be investors in precious metals and energy plays.
The True Cost of War
While the upside for oil in a shoot-out with Iran is clear, there are several
reasons why gold and silver will also rally, and strongly so.
One, of course, is the long and unblemished history of the
precious metals as a crisis hedge.
Another, less obvious, is that an expansion of the war in
the Middle East could very well be the load of straws that break the back of
the U.S. dollar. Or, less metaphorically, the direct and indirect costs
associated with the war would hurry along the monetary crisis that is already
You see, war is not cheap. The price tag on the Iraq War
alone is already credibly estimated to ring in at over $2 trillion by the time
the sand eventually settles.
The cost of expanding the war to Iran, a conflict that would invariably
boomerang back to the "new" Shi'ite-controlled Iraq--as well as Muslim
populations from Pakistan to Indonesia and everywhere in between--would put
immense pressure on the U.S. Treasury. The raging river of U.S. deficit spending
would, almost overnight, turn into a Niagara Falls.
Especially as the war--which, given its scope, could rationally be called
WWIII--would be accompanied by upward-spiraling oil prices.
As the chart below shows, gold tracks oil fairly closely.
The world runs on energy, and for the foreseeable future, most of that energy
comes from oil. As oil prices rise, therefore, so does price inflation... an
environment that decidedly favors gold.
War or No War?
Just because attacking Iran would be an invitation to disaster doesn't mean
that an attack won't happen. Governments are capable of the most egregious
blunders, blunders that in the 20/20 hindsight of history are viewed with
incredulity. Among the very long list, we could point to the decisions of both
Napoleon and Hitler to invade Russia. And Kennedy's choosing to step into the
boots abandoned by France in the rice paddies of Vietnam. And those are just the
palest of scratches on the surface.
In the case of Iran, our grandchildren may some day look back and identify
October of 2006, when the U.S. deployed a carrier battle group led by the U.S.S.
Dwight D. Eisenhower to the Persian Gulf, as being the first spark of the flame
that led to conflict. That carrier group has since been joined by the U.S.S.
John C. Stennis (March 27), and the French carrier Charles De Gaulle. On May 10,
the nuclear-powered U.S.S. Nimitz supercarrier, the lead ship of its class and
one of the largest warships in the world, moved into the gulf to relieve the
Eisenhower. This is only the second time in history that the U.S. has maintained
two carrier groups in the narrow and dangerous waters of the Persian Gulf: the
first was during the Iraq war in 2003.
And the saber rattling goes on. At a recent UN conference, the U.S. warned
that the Iranians may plan to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty, as North Korea did in 2003. The underlying message: "And look what the
Koreans have done since." At the same time, Iran's president is touring the
Persian Gulf states, doubtlessly trying to rally support for his cause.
Even if the U.S., or Israel, is not intending to strike,
who's to say the Iranians, feeling threatened, won't give themselves a fighting
chance by striking first? Or, that a terrorist cell won't unleash missiles from
the Iranian shores to get the ball rolling. Once the shooting starts, who fired
the first shot won't much matter. What will matter are the consequences.
And among the most immediate of those consequences will
be, according to the Iranians, a closing of the Strait of Hormuz, the only sea
route through which oil from Kuwait, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar and
most of the United Arab Emirates can be transported.
That means a halt in the shipment of the approximately 16
million barrels of oil that transit through the Strait every day, roughly 20%
of the world's daily oil production. By conservative estimates, this alone
could send oil to $100 per barrel.
As a preview, consider the oil crisis in the ?70s, when
members of the OPEC announced they would no longer ship petroleum to nations
supportive of Israel, i.e., the U.S. and its European allies... crude spiked
134.6% increase in a 30-day period. Simultaneously, gold rallied for a 72%
year-over-year increase in price.
But today, the situation is far more dire. That's because,
today, the U.S. dollar is already under extreme pressure due to decades of
prolific government spending, spending only made worse by the Iraqi war.
Today, there are over six trillion U.S. dollars in foreign hands, and worse,
those dollars now serve as the world's de-facto reserve currency, littering the
vaults of central bankers from Australia to Zanzibar and all the letters in
between. That is an unprecedented occurrence in the history of humankind. A
further loss of faith in the U.S. government, an inevitable reaction to an
expanding war, and sure knowledge of the extraordinary direct and indirect costs
of that war would only accelerate and exacerbate the monetary crisis now looming
on the horizon.
Bet on war? Despite the saber rattling, it's still a coin
toss. But it seems to us, a coin toss gold investors can't lose on.
That's because, on one side of the coin we have the status
quo--an inevitable monetary crisis--while on the other we have a war with Iran,
sending gold straight to the moon.
Either way, it seems extremely rational to be diversifying
into gold--and for the real upside, quality gold stocks--at this critical point
We are in uncharted waters, every bit as dangerous as the
overcrowded Persian Gulf.
The war in the Middle East drives the oil price, the oil
price drives the gold price--and by extension, gold stocks. That's why Doug Casey
recommends to buy gold, silver and undervalued precious metals stocks.
But what to do if you're one of the more risk-averse
investors? Casey Research's new BIG GOLD tells you month for
month how to get high returns with low risk--by investing in medium-size
producers or near-producers, precious metals mutual funds and gold ETFs. With BIG
GOLD, you can have your cake and eat it.
Learn more about BIG GOLD here.