Thread: Iraq/Dinar News until 5/23/07 Midnight CST

Truly I believe these guys have no clue.........I hate to say where they pull their info from but they ought to wash their hands before eating. so don't pay them any mind.

Originally Posted by wciappetta

Truly I believe these guys have no clue.........I hate to say where they pull their info from but they ought to wash their hands before eating. so don't pay them any mind.

Ditto, especially since we've seen over the years the flip flop articles that come out about rates.

Currency Conversion And Transfer Policies

The currency of Iraq is the Dinar (IQD - sometimes referred to as the New Iraqi Dinar). The Iraqi currency is fully convertible and can be exchanged freely with any other currency. The new investment law allows investors to bank and transfer capital inside or outside of Iraq, which provides considerable flexibility for foreign investors.

The Government of Iraq’s monetary policy since 2003 has focused on maintaining price stability and a stable exchange rate. Banks may engage in spot transactions in any currency, but are not allowed to engage in forward transactions in Iraqi Dinar for speculative purposes. The Central Bank of Iraq (CBI) can intervene, when necessary, in order to maintain stability in the foreign exchange market. There are no taxes or subsidies on purchases or sales of foreign exchange.

if I am reading this right, the CBI is only going to allow so much at a time to be cashed in............if there is a run on the dinar they can stop or hold off on exchange transactions, which only makes since so as not to BREAK THE BANK.....

Iraq

Iraqi government rejecting U.S.-funded projects

By Matt Kelley, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — The Iraqi government is refusing to accept most of the U.S.-funded reconstruction projects completed so far, a government investigator told Congress Thursday.
Iraqi officials had formally taken ownership of only 18% of finished projects when the inspector general's office reported on the issue in July. Joseph McDermott, the inspector general's top auditor, told a House Appropriations subcommittee that few projects have been accepted since then, although he didn't give specifics.

"One of the problems we're having is that the Iraqi government is not accepting the projects we're building for them," McDermott said.

Members of the House panel said they were stunned.

"You would think we would not pay for contracts unless we knew this was something the Iraqi government wanted and would maintain," said the panel's chairman, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa.

FIND MORE STORIES IN: Iraq | Congress | Iraqi government | United States | United States | Investigators | Mcdermott
McDermott said part of the problem is there are no formal agreements between the governments of Iraq and the United States on how to transfer control of completed projects. The July 2006 report on the issue from McDermott's office recommended that such agreements be drafted and signed.

Iraq's Finance Ministry is the lead agency for taking ownership of government facilities. Bayan Jabr, who took over as finance minister last year after a controversial term as interior minister, hasn't finalized any policy on receiving U.S.-funded infrastructure, McDermott said.

The July report found that Iraq had accepted only 579 of more than 3,200 completed projects by the middle of last year, with the rest being operated with U.S. or Iraqi funding. Projects include prisons, electrical generating stations, water treatment plants and hospitals paid for from nearly $21 billion in reconstruction funding Congress approved in 2003 and 2004.

McDermott testified his office had been told some completed projects are sitting idle but had not seen that firsthand.

The inspector general's office also found problems with maintaining and operating completed projects. Investigators found that Iraqi staff were using the wrong fuel in electricity generating stations and ignoring an oxygen delivery system in a new hospital, for example, McDermott said.

Several reports from the inspector general's office say the Iraqi government hasn't budgeted enough money to operate and maintain all of the new infrastructure. A lumbering bureaucracy, widespread corruption and inexperienced officials also threaten the successful operation of these projects, the office concluded in its latest quarterly report on April 30.

"The Iraqi government has not been willing, as far as we can tell, to maintain these projects," he said.

Iraqi government rejecting U.S.-funded projects - USATODAY.com

A Question Concerning Auctions

When the banks sell Dinar back to the CBI - what do they receive in return?
I know the banks are not receiving Green Backs in return.

Thanks !!!

Originally Posted by big Jim

A Question Concerning Auctions

When the banks sell Dinar back to the CBI - what do they receive in return?
I know the banks are not receiving Green Backs in return.

Thanks !!!

Yes, they do indeed receive good 'Ol US Dollars.....

And the reverse is true, when they "sell" US Dollars, they receive Dinars in return.

Hope this helps!

When the banks sell Dinar back to the CBI - what do they receive in return?
I know the banks are not receiving Green Backs in return.

Thanks !!!

Yes, they do indeed receive good 'Ol US Dollars.....

And the reverse is true, when they "sell" US Dollars, they receive Dinars in return.

Hope this helps!

Thanks for your answere - If the banks receive green backs in return, then wouldn't they have more green backs in their vaults then Dinars? If we have pulled 9 Trillion Dinars out since November, then thats alot of US Dollars to have in the bank vaults?

Iraq oil law will deter foreign investment
by Reuters on Friday, 11 May 2007
zoomIraq desperately needs foreign investment in its oil industry, but experts say the current law is standing in the way.Iraq's draft oil law has gaping holes that must be filled before multinationals will invest their capital or technology, one of its authors said on Friday.

Tariq Shafiq, together with two other oil experts, spent months last year drawing up the rules Baghdad hopes will lure major oil companies that have waited for years to tap the world's third-biggest oil reserves.

The law, which parliament could pass by the end of this month, has been threatened by Kurds in the north who say they are not getting their fair share.

Story continues below ↓
advertisement


"Technically, the law leaves much to be desired," said Shafiq, a founder of the Iraq National Oil Company (INOC) in 1964. He left Iraq a few years later and returned in 2003 after the U.S.-led invasion ousted Saddam Hussein.
"Why would a respectable major oil company go to Iraq? If they get a contract, what would they use it for? They can't operate under the current circumstances and this is neither in the interest of the companies nor the country."
The biggest problem is the federal versus the regional government of Kurdistan and, even after months of wrangling, the legislation before parliament can offer no protection to a company that has only secured a regional deal.
"There are many procedural things that can go wrong -- and that will cost time, effort and money," said Shafiq, who directs oil consultancy Petrolog & Associates.
Backed by Washington, the law is vital to securing the billions of dollars needed to boost Iraq's oil output -- now stuck at 2 million barrels a day -- and rebuild its economy.
But some of Iraq's law-makers still resent the British, U.S. and French companies that controlled their oil industry for half a century through the Iraq Petroleum Co (IPC).
From the time it struck oil at the huge Kirkuk field in 1927 until nationalism forced it out in 1972, IPC -- made up of BP, Exxon, Mobil, Shell, CFP (Total) and Partex -- was in charge.
Shafiq said Baghdad should not let foreign companies regain the upper hand.

"We learned our lessons from the concession era before nationalisation in the 1970s. We lost a lot of money and
The draft law calls for a newly-created INOC to control the country's coveted, already-producing oilfields and creates a federal oil and gas council, which will be the ultimate policy-setter.
Shafiq said the oil and gas council, which would draw representation from across the regions, would lack the required managerial competence to run an industry battered by years of chronic mismanagement, wars and sanctions.
"The decision-making process has got to be corrected," he said. "You can't ensure capable management and decision-making from them."
As for INOC, Kurdish officials say annexes in the draft are unconstitutional because they wrest oilfields from the regions and place them under a state firm.
Politics aside, Shafiq said some of the oil legislation was ambiguous. Its terminology and style of agreements lack clarity.
"We must be clear and honest about what type of contract we want," he said.
Major oil companies -- keen to get drilling, especially in southern oilfields such as Bin Umar, Majnoon and West Qurna -- could have their own reservations about the terms.
Shafiq said these already-producing fields earmarked for INOC should be awarded by the national company on terms similar to those on offer in neighbouring Iran.
"These are known, producing fields. The risk is gone. I strongly believe they should be service contracts," he said.
Oil companies regard this type of short-lived deal as too restrictive. They prefer production-sharing agreements that span 20 to 30 years and give them more control.
What Iraq desperately needs from the international oil companies is their technical expertise.
"That's the strongest card they have," Shafiq said. "Middle East producers today need technology, not capital."
When passed in February by Iraq's cabinet, Shi'ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki hailed the draft oil law as a pillar of Iraqi unity.

But Shafiq was doubtful. "It's very difficult to predict whether the oil law will pass or not. If I were to make a guess -- perhaps it will after an uproar," he said.

City could spell trouble for Baghdad; Fate of Kirkuk a time bomb
KIRKUK, Iraq (RTRS): Abdullah Jasim, a Shi’ite Arab, left his native Basra in southern Iraq more than 30 years ago in search of a better life in the oil-producing city of Kirkuk. He opened three businesses and married off six daughters born in Kirkuk. But in the eyes of many in this northern flashpoint city at the heart of a looming ethnic row, Jasim and his family are “wafedins”, or newcomers. “Most in my family have never seen Basra,” said Jasim, 67, drinking tea with friends one recent afternoon.
“No one forced us to come, but every time my sons and daughters apply for a job they are told: ‘This job is not for you. This is only for the people of Kirkuk’.”

Iraq is expected to settle the final status of multi-ethnic Kirkuk in a local referendum by the end of 2007. With Iraq’s government and Washington focused on saving Baghdad from civil war, a think-tank last month warned that ignoring Kirkuk could see conflict spread to the relatively peaceful north and even spill over the border into Turkey.
Kirkuk, an ancient city 250 km (155 miles) north of Baghdad, is claimed by ethnic Kurds, Arabs and Turkish-speaking Turkmen.

Once a melting pot of Kurds, Arabs, Assyrians, Turkmen and Armenians, the city’s woes are a recipe for bloodshed if a peaceful solution is not found, analysts said. Kurds see Kirkuk as their historical capital and want it included in their autonomous Kurdistan region. They want the referendum held by year-end as stated in the constitution. Arabs and Turkmen accuse Kurds of pushing them out of the city. Shi’ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, whose government includes Kurdish parties, last month agreed to give Arab families in Kirkuk $15,000 each and a piece of land if they voluntarily returned to their original towns.

Saddam Hussein expelled thousands of Kurds and Turkmen from Kirkuk and replaced them with Arabs under an Arabisation plan in the 1970s and 80s.
Arabs and Turkmen, who oppose a referendum for fear of becoming second-class citizens, said the relocation plan is a ploy to change the city’s demographics ahead of the vote.
“The referendum on Kirkuk is a red line,” said Mohammed Khalil, a Sunni Arab member of Kirkuk’s Provincial Council.
“Kurds are dreaming if they want to hold a referendum, but if there is a vote all Iraqis should be allowed to participate.”
Some local Kurdish leaders have warned that if the vote is delayed, Kurds could quit Maliki’s government.
Mohammed Ihsan, the Kurdish regional minister for “disputed territories,” said the referendum should go ahead as planned.
He blamed “Baathists” for causing bureaucratic obstacles that have delayed preparations for the vote, such as completing a census in Kirkuk by July 31.
“The Arabs who came here will not be forced out, but will not be allowed to vote in the referendum. They can live in peace there after the referendum,” he told Reuters.
Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari, a Kurd, said he believed the constitution should be followed.
“At the end of the day I believe there will be some compromises ... but I believe the constitutional procedure should be implemented,” Zebari told Reuters recently.
In negotiations ahead of the 2005 constitution, leaders from Iraq’s Shi’ite majority agreed with Kurds to include the Kirkuk referendum in exchange for language on federalism that would allow the creation of a Shi’ite “super region” in the south.
But not all Shi’ites now agree on giving Kirkuk away.
The parliamentary bloc of fiery Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr has announced a campaign to delay the vote. Washington, bogged down in Baghdad, has said little publicly about the issue.
But as the deadline nears, Kurdish nationalists have stirred passions over Kirkuk in speeches and in pro-government media.

“Kurds feel it’s their chance to get Kirkuk,” said Joost Hiltermann, from the International Crisis Group think tank. “They feel Bush is a lameduck president and that Washington won’t put pressure on them to let the deadline slip.” Hiltermann said Kirkuk threatened to further erode U.S. goals in Iraq and in the region. Turkey, wary that Iraqi Kurdish nationalism could ignite its own Kurdish community, has traded barbs in the past month with Iraqi Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani. Chinqeez Morat, a Turkman, blamed Kirkuk’s woes on its oil. “If there was no oil in Kirkuk, nobody would take care of this town,” Morat said.
Back

Al Maliki on shaky ground
By Basil Adas, Correspondent



Baghdad: The fate of Nouri Al Maliki's government has been the subject of many Iraqi rumours and possible scenarios.

Rumours differed on whether Al Maliki will continue as the prime minister or leave office. Described by observers, Baghdad is witnessing political momentum towards 'military coup' to overthrow the Shiite coalition government headed by Al Maliki.

In Baghdad, analysts believe coming July will be crucial and decisive and decide Al Maliki and Iraq's fate.

In Shiite circles there are speculations that the Shiite coalition leader Abdul Aziz Al Hakim, if Al Maliki failed in the security and reconciliation, will announce the Shiite autonomy territory in the south and middle of Iraq including nine provinces.

Double-edged sword

Mudhir Al Husaini, a Political researcher at Baghdad University, told Gulf News: "The new security plan for Baghdad, which started three months ago, is a double-edged sword. If Al Maliki succeeds in halting the decadent security situation then he will remain in his office but if he fails to do so then his position is increasingly shaky".

He added: "The Sharm Al Shaikh international covenant conference and the neighbouring countries meeting was considered as Al Maliki's last opportunity to prove his effectiveness in halting sectarian violence or he would lose the support provided by the conferees and have to leave his office".

One name that surfaces while discussing Al Maliki's successor is Eyad Allawi, Iraq's former interim prime minister who is Shiite and more secular than Al Maliki and not deeply tied to Iran. He seeks to exploit the recent prime minister's security and political failure in the light of Americans desire to form an Iraqi emergency government.

Allawi will most probably be the leading candidate for heading the next alternative government, and accordingly he is seeking to gain trust and support from political blocs like Kurds, the Sadr trend, the Fadhila party and some Sunni parties, beside moving towards obtaining vigorous backing of some regional states.

Mohammad Abdul Sahib, a senior official at the Iraqi National Dialogue Ministry, told Gulf News: "We have gone to lengthy rounds in contacting Iraqi opposition armed groups which have their own conditions."