Many More "Resource Wars" in our future?

John Robb at Global Guerrillas has an interesting short take on recent violence in Indonesia against mining operations in remote areas. When I worked for Amoco, the firm had a mine in New Guinea which it sold. The areas where resource extraction takes place are exceeding vulnerable to attack along the export routes.

Robb predicts that there is a globalization of guerrilla movements:

Unlike the earlier relatively unsuccessful attacks on Bali (and the planned attack on Goa in India), it aligns with global guerrilla theory in the following ways:
Environmental damage. Companies like Freemont-McMoRan and Newmont Mining Corp have caused (like Shell, Chevron, Total, and Agip in Nigeria) massive environmental damage. This aligns local interests with those of the global guerrillas. As a result, numerous allies will be found (from a variety of different sources) to populate the open source insurgency.
Kleptocracy. Payments from the mining industry flow to a combination of corrupt government/military officials (that are paid money to protect mining interests) and private interests. The result is that local people get nearly nothing for the use of their land (as seen in Balochistan, Iraq, and Nigeria). Attacks are therefore seen as a means of economic justice (which is yet another source of recruitment). It will only be a matter of time before armed theft from these mining companies becomes a bazaar (an economic system that aligns transnational crime with local guerrillas).
Corporate weakness. Attacks on corporate psychology (see Halliburton targeting for more) have worked effectively in Iraq and Nigeria. It takes very little to force companies to withdraw personnel and investment as well as shutter operations if done correctly. The reason is that today's corporate market-based moral center is relatively is adverse to uncertainty or high levels of risk. While mining and oil companies have used corporate security in the past (and even private military companies) to protect their interests, this is a entirely new level of threat (as Shell found out in Nigeria). This points to the development of a new type of corporation (that has high levels of private military capability), on the Halliburton model, that can assume high risks and get compensation for it. These new armed companies will actually become active participants, in alliance with governments, in counter-insurgency campaigns. Model: British East India Company.

I can just imagine some of the Mission Statements of the future. "Onward Capitalist Soldiers, Marching Off to Counter-Insurgency Activities!"