Thread: Iraq/Dinar News. (before Jan.20,2007)

A little old...but gives insight.

Iraqi Regime Set To Hand Over Oil Reserves To US Energy Giants
12/01/2007
Source: Counter Currents
As the Bush administration prepares to escalate military violence against the Iraqi people the US-installed regime in Baghdad is set to approve a new hydrocarbon law that will hand unprecedented control of the country’s vast oil reserves to US and British energy conglomerates. The new law, the terms of which were detailed by the British newspaper the Independent on January 7, makes a mockery of any claims of Iraqi sovereignty and underscores that the real aim of the bloody enterprise by US imperialism has been to colonize the country and seize some of the largest untapped oil resources left on the globe.

The language of the new law—which is expected to be approved by the Iraqi parliament any day and put into place by March—was written by a US consulting firm hired by the Bush administration and presented to the major oil companies and the International Monetary Fund during the summer. As of December, many if not most Iraqi parliamentary members had still not seen the legislation.

The Independent, which obtained a leaked version of the law, reported Sunday, “The Iraqi Council of Ministers is expected to approve, as early as today, a controversial new hydrocarbon law, heavily pushed by the US and UK governments, that will radically redraw the Iraqi oil industry and throw open the doors to the third-largest oil reserves in the world. It would allow the first large-scale operation of foreign oil companies in the country since the industry was nationalised in 1972.” The newspaper added that the new law would be “radical departure from the norm for developing countries” and would be the first of its kind for any major oil producer in the Middle East, where Saudi Arabia and Iran, the world’s number one and two largest producers, “both tightly control their industries through state-owned companies with no appreciable foreign collaboration,” as do most members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).

The most significant legal aspect of the pending legislation is the introduction of so-called production-sharing agreements (PSAs), in which the state maintains formal ownership of oil reserves but pours out billions in compensation to foreign oil companies for their investment in the infrastructure and operation of drills, pipelines and refineries.

According to the draft of the legislation, the PSAs in Iraq would be fixed for 30 years or more, allowing foreign oil companies to maintain favorable arrangements no matter what a future government might do to regulate their profits, tax rates or production levels. One provision in an earlier draft of the new law—which may or may not be retained in the latest version—insists that any disputes with a foreign company must ultimately be settled by international, rather than Iraqi, arbitration.

The terms granted under the new law guarantee will guarantee massive profits to ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP and other energy conglomerates. While recovering the costs of their initial investment to develop an oil field, foreign companies will be able to retain 60 to 70 percent of oil revenue. After recouping their initial outlay, the companies can take up to 20 percent of the profit.

By contrast, the French oil company Total signed a deal with Saddam Hussein before the second Iraq war to develop a huge field that would have allowed the company to retain only 40 percent of the profits while it was recovering its costs and 10 percent afterwards, according to Dr. Muhammed-Ali Zainy, a senior economist at the Centre for Global Energy Studies.

Energy experts say the terms about to be accepted by the Iraqi government are only comparable to the production-sharing agreements Russia signed with Shell in the 1990s, following the liquidation of the USSR and the economic “shock therapy” that accompanied the dismantling of the nationalized economy.

In the first half of the twentieth century, under the system of concession agreements, foreign oil companies controlled the petroleum underneath the ground in their colonies and paid nominal royalty fees to the so-called national governments. In the face of the anti-colonial upsurge following World War II, the multinational energy companies began to promote the system of production-sharing agreements in opposition to the growing tide of oil industry nationalizations in the Middle East and elsewhere. First introduced in Indonesia following the US-backed overthrow of the nationalist Sukarno regime in 1965, such arrangements allowed foreign companies to extract oil and vast profits while maintaining the fiction of national sovereignty.

According to International Energy Agency figures, PSAs are used in connection to only 12 percent of world oil reserves, in countries were exploration prospects are uncertain and production costs are high. None of this applies to Iraq, where the cost-per-barrel of extracting oil is among the lowest in the world because the reserves are relatively close to the surface, and many fields have already been discovered but not developed due to years of war and economic sanctions. Most of Iraq’s giant oil fields have already been mapped and therefore there are no exploration costs and risks, unlike the North Sea, the Amazon or from tar sands in Canada, where huge outlays are required.

The agreement signed by the US-backed regime in Baghdad harkens back to the concessions system in British-controlled Iraq. The Independent notes, “Under the chapter entitled, ‘Fiscal Regime,’ the draft spells out that foreign companies have no restrictions on taking their profits out of the country, and are not subject to any tax when doing this.” The draft law states, “A Foreign Person may repatriate its exports proceeds [in accordance with the foreign exchange regulations in force at the time].” Shares in oil projects can also be sold to other foreign companies: “It may freely transfer shares pertaining to any non-Iraqi partners.”


A war for oil

Iraq has 115 billion barrels of known oil reserves—10 percent of the world’s total—and it is estimated that a fully functioning industry could generate $100 billion in annual revenue. The most important resources are in the Majnoon and West Qurna fields, close to Basra in the south of the country, which contain nearly a quarter of Iraq’s proven reserves. On top of this, Iraq is estimated to have between 100 and 200 billion barrels of possible reserves, including in the western desert.

These vast untapped reserves of easily reachable and low-cost oil, not to mention natural gas, have long been a crucial target of the US and British energy conglomerates, particularly as the discovery of new oil deposits elsewhere in the world have drastically slowed and existing reserves have declined. With demand increasing, particularly from rapidly developing countries such as China and India, control of Middle East oil, and control of the Iraq’s vast reserves in particular, became a vital geo-strategic goal for American imperialism.

As early as the mid-1990s, there was growing concern that the unraveling of the United Nations sanctions imposed after the first Gulf War would enable Saddam Hussein to establish lucrative agreements with French, Russian, Chinese and other oil companies that would leave the US and Britain out and realign the global energy industry. Political writer Kevin Phillips noted in his book American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil and Borrow Money in the 21st Century, “So long as the United States and Britain could keep these sanctions in place, using allegations concerning weapons of mass destruction, Saddam could not implement his own plan to extend large-scale oil concessions (estimated to be worth $1.1 trillion)” to their economic rivals in Europe and Asia.

Months after the US invasion of Iraq—and after a long legal battle with the White House—it was revealed that control of Iraq’s oil fields was one of the chief issues discussed in Vice President Dick Cheney’s Energy Task Force meeting with oil executives in 2001. Among the items released under court order were maps of Iraq’s oil fields, pipelines and refineries, with a supporting list of “Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts,” naming more than 60 firms from 30 countries, most prominently France, Russia and China, that had projects either agreed upon or under discussion with Baghdad. The French giant, Total, for example, was to get the 25-billion barrel Majnoon oil field, while Russia’s Lukoil had deals to develop the West Qurna fields.

The Independent article on the new hydrocarbon law noted that it was doubtful that these contracts would be considered valid by the Iraqi government, and that “ExxonMobil is now seen by insiders as the frontrunner to nab the rights to the Majnoon field.”

The actions of the puppet regime in Baghdad have confirmed the fact—suspected by millions of people throughout the world—that that an entire country has been shattered and hundreds
...gives insight, take a look.

New law-draft on oil distribution

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

19 January 2007 (MENAFN)
Print article Send to friend
A spokesman at the Iraqi Oil Ministry announced that Iraqi officials have approved a final draft of a law that will set rules for distributing Iraq's oil wealth and for attracting foreign investments to the war-torn country, Gulf Daily News reported.

The spokesman added that the draft, which will be presented to the cabinet soon, calls for a federal committee headed by the prime minister to manage future contracts and to review deals signed under the former regime or by the Kurdish regional government.

The US has been strongly urging the Iraqi government to pass a law that sets up clear rules for sharing the oil wealth among Iraq's ethnic and sectarian groups in order to pacify the unstable conditions in the country.

The law, if approved by the cabinet and the parliament, will establish a national oil company that ensures centralizing the oil revenues before distributing them over Iraq's regions.

Dollar bids lower, exchange rates keep falling in Iraqi auction
By Dergham Mohammed Ali

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Baghdad, 19 January 2007 (Voices of Iraq)
Print article Send to friend
Dollar demand was sharply lower on Thursday, the last trading session this week, reaching $65.770 million compared to $113 million on Wednesday in Iraq’s central bank daily auction.

Wednesday’s session saw the biggest demand rise recorded in one session as bids jumped $90 million.

In its daily statement on Thursday the bank said it covered all bids which were $33.690 million in cash and $32.80 million in foreign transfers at an exchange rate of 1,300 dinars per dollar, five dinars lower than Wednesday’s rate.

Fourteen banks participated in Thursday’s auction and offered to sell $207,000 which the central bank bought all at 1,298 dinars per dollar rate.

Economist Abdul-Razzaq Sadeq al-Abaiji told the independent news agency Voices of Iraq (VOI) the demand was lower at the last session of the trading week, but it was still within a good range considering the continuous fall in exchange rates which reflects market flexibility.

Maliki chastises Americans over level of backing

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

19 January 2007 (The Daily Star)
Print article Send to friend
Iraq's prime minister said Thursday that security forces would have better control over their country if the United States had equipped them with more and better weapons - but he also announced what he said was the arrest of some 400 members and supporters of the Mehdi Army militia with the current arsenal.

Maliki's remarks to foreign newspapers came as six car bombs killed at least 19 people across Baghdad.

Speaking during an interview in which he was deeply critical of Washington, Maliki told foreign correspondents that the situation in Iraq would not be so dire if the Americans had moved faster. The newspapers included the Times of London, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times and Italy's Corriere della Sera. If we had moved faster!!!???

"If we succeed in implementing the agreement between us to speed up the equipping and providing weapons to our military forces, I think that within three to six months our need for American troops will dramatically go down," Maliki was quoted as saying.

"That is on condition that there are real, strong efforts to support our military forces and equipping and arming them," he added.

Maliki also criticized Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for saying the Iraqi premier was on "borrowed time."

"Certain officials are going through a crisis. Secretary Rice is expressing her own point of view if she thinks that the government is on borrowed time," the Times quoted him as saying. "Such statements give moral boosts to the terrorists and push them toward making an extra effort and making them believe that they have defeated the American administration, but I can tell you that they haven't defeated the Iraqi government."

But in Baghdad, an Iraqi government spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, denied that Maliki made the comments.

"The news circulated by the media about the Iraqi prime minister's declaration regarding relations with American administration are baseless."

The United States also downplayed Maliki's remarks, denying that they amounted to sharp criticism of Bush.

"I dispute the characterization that he was very critical of the president," White House spokesman Tony Snow said when asked whether Washington was bristling at Maliki's comments. "What you have is that one statement, which he's said before. And we've said that it's important to make sure that there's more money, training and equipment for the Iraqi forces."

The Iraqi government is preparing to launch US-backed security crackdown in Baghdad aimed at crushing the Mehdi Army of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and other militias.

Maliki told the newspaper reporters that 400 Mehdi Army supporters had been arrested in recent days in several southern, Shiite cities.

"We will not allow any politicians to interfere with this Baghdad security plan ... whether they are Sunnis or Shiites, Arabs or Kurds, militias or parties, insurgents or terrorists," Maliki was quoted as saying.

A Baghdad Mehdi Army commander said US and Iraqi troops launched a major campaign Tuesday in Umm al-Maalef, a Shiite neighborhood in southern Baghdad.

"They detained every man who was able to carry weapons. We heard from our people in the area that about 400 people were detained," the commander said on condition of anonymity.

He said that in December US troops had killed one of the Mehdi Army's top commanders, known as Abou al-Sudour, in Sadr City.

Corriere quoted Maliki as saying US President George W. Bush had capitulated to domestic pressure when he criticized the hanging of former leader Saddam Hussein.

"It seems to me that Bush is capitulating under the weight of internal pressure; he is overwhelmed by the media and by the politicians. Maybe he has lost control of the situation," he said.

On Tuesday, Bush said Saddam's execution looked like "kind of a revenge killing" and said it showed that Maliki's government "has still got some maturation to do."

In Thursday's deadliest attack, three bombs in quick succession killed at least 10 people and wounded 30 at a wholesale market in the violent southern district of Dora, police said.

"There is no mercy any more, the people here just want to work," Mohammad Ali Kazim, a vegetable seller, shouted angrily. "They have followed us to this poor place. People here are Sunnis, Shiites and Christians and they just want to live."

Earlier, a car bomb in Saadoun Street, a main commercial thoroughfare, killed four people and wounded 10. Two other blasts killed two and three people respectively in the mainly Shiite east of the city, one of them going off near a police station.

The law regarding oil has not been approved, Kurdish official

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

London, 19 January 2007 (KurdishMedia)
Print article Send to friend
Arif Tayfur, the deputy speaker of the Iraqi Assembly, stated that the Kurdistan bloc in the Assembly has not agreed with the new law regarding oil resources in Iraq. Tayfur was interviewed by Kurdish website peyamner.com on Thursday.

Tayfur implied that the law is not approved yet. Our stance would be same as that of the Kurdistan regional government on this law, Tayfur added.

Tayfur’s statement is contrary to that of the Iraqi central government’s.

Tayfur is an MP on the Kurdistani preliminary bloc and a high ranking member of the KDP, led by the Barzani.

Few days ago, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stated that the Kurds do not have the right over the oil in their areas.

"Even though the Kurds might have been expected ... to insist that they will simply control all the resources themselves, that's not what the oil law does," Rice said.

Sunni allies give 'qualified support' for Bush's Iraq strategy
By Andrew England

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cairo, 19 January 2007 (Financial Times)
Print article Send to friend
When Condoleezza Rice, US secretary of state, flew out of the Middle East on Wednesday after a tour of the region intended to mobilise support for the White House's new Iraq strategy, Arab diplomats were left hoping, rather than expecting, that the plan might actually achieve something.

Two of the US's most important Sunni allies in the region - Egypt and Saudi Arabia - gave cautious backing to the initiative, while a third, Jordan, reiterated the need for Iraq's Sunni to be given a greater role in their country's political processes.

However, the support came with a clear message to Ms Rice - who last night met UK prime minister Tony Blair to discuss her trip - in the hope that Washington might finally be ready to listen to its Arab allies: a military solution is not enough.

Sunni Arab states have a deep mistrust of Iraq's Shia-dominated regime and are sceptical about its willingness to tackle key issues - including disarming Shia militias and reaching out to Sunni - which they argue are crucial to the future.

Saud al-Feisal, the Saudi foreign minister, said while other countries could help, the main responsibility "rests on the Iraqis". Kuwait stressed the importance of Washington attempting dialogue with Syria and Iran, which was recommended by the Iraq Study Group, but rejected by the White House.

Still, given the dire situation in Iraq, as well as concerns about Shia Iran's growing influence in the region, Arab diplomats also accepted they had little option but to give the US strategy "qualified support".

They had argued against an abrupt US withdrawal, fearing the inevitable Iraqi violence would destabilise the region, and the core of the plan is deployment of an additional 21,500 US troops.

"We all feel that we are in the same boat so if America fails it is not our success," Hesham Youssef, a senior official at the Arab League told the Financial Times. "If we do not address all the issues we will fail because even if you put an extra 20,000 soldiers on the streets today, and people do not see a political horizon, then it [may well] be making it more difficult for the insurgents and those advocating violence, but [it will] not deal with the root causes of the conflict."

When Amr Moussa, the league's secretary-general, met Ms Rice in Egypt he told her there were five fundamental points that needed addressing - ensuring the territorial integrity of Iraq; reconciliation; working with Iraqis on a basis of citizenship rather than as Shia, Sunni or Kurd; dealing with the militias; and political issues, including amendments to the constitution to give Sunnis - marginalised since the fall of Saddam Hussein - a greater role.

According to Mr Youssef, Mr Moussa's cabinet chief, Ms Rice agreed the issues would receive the US's attention. Asked whether Washington would take note, he said: "We hope they will follow these elements with vigour. It's more than hope, it's an expectation."

Another Arab diplomat said Ms Rice accepted the fact military action alone would not halt the bitter sectarian conflict. However, he said there was caution about whether the words would be translated into action.

Very very interesting. Let's wait and see what will happen ......

Originally Posted by frathousemicrowave

Don't know if this was brought up yet or not but why do we think the CBI is putting this on the Arabic side of the exchange rate page the last 2 weeks?

"3. The Iraqi Central Bank announced the adoption of buying and selling rates for the dollar on Thursday, January 18, 2007 until the end of office hours on Sunday, which falls on January 21, 2007 and pledged to meet the demand for foreign currency without limit and regardless of the quantities required and all its customers."

Iraq: New law-draft on oil distribution
1/19/2007 menafn.com
(MENAFN) A spokesman at the Iraqi Oil Ministry announced that Iraqi officials have approved a final draft of a law that will set rules for distributing Iraq's oil wealth and for attracting foreign investments to the war-torn country, Gulf Daily News reported.

The spokesman added that the draft, which will be presented to the cabinet soon, calls for a federal committee headed by the prime minister to manage future contracts and to review deals signed under the former regime or by the Kurdish regional government.

The US has been strongly urging the Iraqi government to pass a law that sets up clear rules for sharing the oil wealth among Iraq's ethnic and sectarian groups in order to pacify the unstable conditions in the country.

The law, if approved by the cabinet and the parliament, will establish a national oil company that ensures centralizing the oil revenues before distributing them over Iraq's regions.

Iraq: New law-draft on oil distribution

Quote:
Originally Posted by shotgunsusie
for those members who respect and admire adster i wanted to make mention of the fact that some of our members went to ignorant investors fighting and he was slammin this forum BAD. said the good posters here needed to wake up, i.e. like the ones who are good at posting need to be leavin here. said rol is a joke.

makes me reconsider my personal views moreso than i already had.

yeah yeah, i know its in the wrong place but it will get seen and i think everyone should be aware of wolves among the herd.

Originally Posted by Cdn Scrooge

I noticed that as well. What came to my mind was one of his favourite sayings..."things that make you go hmmmmmmmmm". I'm not about to step in and take sides, or anything like that, since I personally have no knowledge of what went on or was said in pms. However, I am sitting back and reading everything with a little more cautious (for lack of a better word) perspective. I really don't know why he felt it necessary to post that info on another site anyway. It has nothing whatsoever to do with them. If he wants to air his greivances in public then it should have been done here, where the problems occurred. Although, in his defence, he may have felt that he wouldn't have been allowed to express them here.

Please note that comment is not a slam against him because I think he is wrong in his opinion ( as I said I don't know whether he is or isn't) it is merely an expression of my disappointment in him for the way he went about airing it.

I really do not want to see this forum fall apart over family type petty bickering. I have noticed that there are a lot of people who were regular posters on here prior to all the ddos crap that appear to be missing for some reason. I really wish that we could, as a group, get back to where we were about 3 weeks ago. I don't want to have to visit 3 or 4 different forums to get info and updates. We had it all right here and it would be nice if we could get it back.

I don't want to get into a major mud slinging contest either. But I do want to make known my personal observation. There appears to me to a lot of immaturity going on in all directions. We need a Rodney King moment "Can't we all just get along?"

worf

Originally Posted by frathousemicrowave
Don't know if this was brought up yet or not but why do we think the CBI is putting this on the Arabic side of the exchange rate page the last 2 weeks?

"3. The Iraqi Central Bank announced the adoption of buying and selling rates for the dollar on Thursday, January 18, 2007 until the end of office hours on Sunday, which falls on January 21, 2007 and pledged to meet the demand for foreign currency without limit and regardless of the quantities required and all its customers."

Originally Posted by chouchou

Very very interesting. Let's wait and see what will happen ......

Originally Posted by Treater
Look at the difference between the English Exchange rate page and the arabic one:

Exchange Rates
ÇÓÚÇÑ ÇáÕÑÝ æ ÇáãÒÇÏ

I translated the middle part of the arabic page, and got this (the english page doesn't have this) :

- Note that :-

1. The sale price of remittances dinars (1323) / $.
2. The sale price cash dinars (1336) / $.
3. The cash purchase price (1334) dinars / $.
2-quantity sold in cash "in the amount of $ (5.925.000) and the amount of remittances (730.000) dollars.

3-declare the Iraqi Central Bank made buying and selling rates for the dollar on Wednesday, which falls on 27 / 12 / 2006 in the days subsequent to the end of office hours on Sunday, which falls on January 7, 2007 and pledged to meet the demand for foreign currency without limit and regardless of the quantities required and all its customers and is committed to purchase all the quantities offered by banks for the same prices posted above "and maintained without change for subsequent days.



Maybe something or can I say "we've seen this before."