Let's hear it for energy dependence...

I have blogged before about how we can't "replace Mideast oil with ethanol". We can replace oil with ethanol, to be sure, but there is no way to tell which supplier will be reduced. In fact, the most likely provider would be our own expensive domestic production.

But it could be that energy independence is not all what it's cracked up to be anyway.

Thus whatever other arguments there might be for boosting domestic oil production, national security is not one of them. While this might seem counter-intuitive, it is really part of the overall logic of trade: The mutual dependence that trade breeds fosters peace because it gives hostile trading partners an incentive to refrain from acting on their hostility. Energy independence would weaken that incentive. [More]

I am reminded of American agriculture's relationship with China as one of our largest export markets. Given the angst of that partnership, who is really the controller? We want to sell beans to China, and when we don't bad things happen to our soybean industry. Do we want other nations working to become grain or meat independent?

Free trade is good for both sides - even oil. Characterizing trade as dependency doesn't help us appreciate the benefits.