It should not be difficult for anyone to connect the dots between our nation's energy policy and our nation's involvement in Iraq. If it were not for U.S. dependence on oil in the Middle East, would the U.S. have gotten involved in Iraq in the first place?

Those dots connect to BP's Whiting Refinery as well.

The nation needs to lessen its reliance on oil from the Middle East. This point has been driven home repeatedly by national security experts, including U.S. Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind.

"Energy is the underlying condition that exacerbates almost every foreign policy issue," Lugar said in a January speech on energy policy.

Lugar knows what he's talking about. He's the Republican leader on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Indiana's senior senator has been pushing for development of alternative energy sources and technology. He's right.

But in the meantime, lessening reliance on Middle Eastern oil means finding ways to produce gasoline from other sources. And that's precisely what BP plans to do with its $3.8 billion expansion of the Whiting Refinery.

BP plans to outfit the plant to produce gasoline and other fuels from shale found in western Canada. It is a monumental undertaking that promises to increase the supply of gasoline in the Midwest, which should ease prices at the pump.

Part of the expansion process calls for a new air pollution permit. An Indiana Department of Environmental Management hearing on the permit will be held today at the Hammond Civic Center. An information meeting is at 5:30 p.m.; public comments are invited at 6:30 p.m.

There has been a loud outcry over the air permit, but the bottom line is that BP is acting within the existing law and the existing permit process. Changing the rules this late in the game would be unfair to BP and other businesses expecting Indiana to uphold its reputation as the best state outside the South in which to do business.

Under the proposed permit, BP would reduce the emissions on four pollutants but would increase the amount of sulfur dioxide, particulate matter and lead released into the air. That's the result of processing heavy Canadian crude oil from shale instead of crude from the Middle East.

But even with the increased amounts of the three pollutants listed, overall emissions once the project is complete would go down 7 percent under the new permit while gas production would increase 15 percent from the refinery's 2006 figures.

Sure, the internal combustion engine needs to be replaced with something more environmentally friendly, more geopolitically friendly and more economical to operate. But even as that research continues, gasoline is still needed for the foreseeable future.

Blocking the air permit for BP not only would jeopardize the hundreds of jobs the massive plant expansion promises but also would continue to undermine the nation's energy security.

The permit must be approved, not blocked.