Thread: Iraq/Dinar News. 09/05 to 01/14/07

Reuters
Nov 18 2006 10:23

By Arshad Mohammed

HANOI, Nov 18 (Reuters) - Iraqis "don't have a future" if they give in to the sectarian tensions tearing at their society, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Saturday.

"They (only) have one future and that is a future together. They don't have a future if they try to stay apart," Rice said in a speech on the sidelines of an Asia Pacific summit.

Iraq has been riven by sectarian violence for months and its prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, has been unable to disband militias and death squads who appear to operate with impunity.

While acknowledging the bloodshed, Rice said she believed the Iraqis were headed toward a better future and disputed that the United States was stuck in a "quagmire."

"I don't mean to diminish the difficulties that we have in Iraq and that the Iraqi people have in Iraq," Rice said. "This is difficult going."

As she has for months, Rice urged the Iraqi government to take tough decisions and the society as a whole to "face up to their differences."

"If they do that and if we support them and if we remain committed to them and if they realise that the stakes in Iraq are (really) the stakes for a different kind of Middle East that can form the center of a more peaceful world -- they have a chance and (we also) have a chance," she added.

Rice spoke on the sidelines of an Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Hanoi that has drawn repeated comparisons between the war in Iraq and the Vietnam War, an idea that she and other U.S. officials seek to rebut at every opportunity.

Dismay over the Iraq war is widely regarded the key reason that the Democrats swept Bush's Republican party from control of the U.S. Congress earlier this month and has accelerated a search for a solution inside and outside the government.

Rice sought to cast the Iraq war as comparable to the challenges the United States faced in history, including its independence from Britain, the Civil War, and the struggle against communism after World War Two.

"We are talking about people that are struggling, we believe, toward a better future," she said of the Iraqis.

Keywords: IRAQ RICE

Originally Posted by railroad

I'm with ya....But I have a question....Let say you are right on the mark with this and it gets in the neighborhood of $1.48, and does not go on the forex, what's our options? Do we buy a ticket to "way down under and then fly to northern Iraq to deal with Iraqi banks? All the banks I have been calling and dealing with say they won't trade until it's on forex. By the way I was in a bank the other day, in good ol Alabama, Regions as a matter of fact, told me they did not deal in dinar yet. Key word here being "yet". But they expected to when it was on forex......just some early morning thoughts to start my day....

I think at that point you find a Chase bank and cash out, no matter where it is.

Bill

if this were to change on the forex when will be the next time it will be shown?

Originally Posted by warrior44

if this were to change on the forex when will be the next time it will be shown?

I am new to trading forex but as far as know, it is being seen on the forex market now and just not trading yet. I would guess when the time is right one of our master traders will post that it is trading and we will be off to the races. Not much help I know but what do you want from a Denver Broncos fan. Sure wish I could see that game live next week. lol

Iraqi deputy Prime Minister visits Basra
By Malik Saadon
Basra, Nov 18, (VOI) – The Iraqi deputy Prime Minister Dr. Barham Saleh arrived on Saturday in Basra on an undeclared visit to the southern Iraqi province.
Dr. Saleh was accompanied by the finance minister Bayan Jabr Solagh.
This visit came amid media reports of an expected visit by the British finance minister to Basra, a visit that was not confirmed yet by the Iraqi authorities.
Dr. Saleh is expected to give a news conference later in the day.


interesting

This was published in June, but has some very interesting info.
A good read into oil production and future outlook for our investment.



Oil Industry Implications Of Iraq’s Constitutional Articles 108, 109 & 111 Governing Oil & Gas Assets: A Call to Reconsider


The following article was written for MEES by Tariq Shafiq, Founding Executive Director, Iraq National Oil Company (INOC), Director, Petrolog & Associates, and Chair, Fertile Crescent Oil Development Co (based in Baghdad).


1. Constitutional Articles Governing Oil and Gas Assets


Article 108*1 states that “oil and gas are the property of the nation (people) of all the Regions and Governorates”.


Article109* states:


1st “The Federal government development will administer (manage) the production of oil and gas fields in cooperation (consultation) with the governments of the producing Regions or Governorates,” “provided that the revenues will be distributed in a manner compatible with the demographical distribution all over the country.”


2nd “The Federal government and the governments of the producing Regions and Governorates in cooperation (in consultation or together) will draw up the necessary strategic policies to develop oil and gas assets (wealth) to achieve the greatest benefit to the Iraqi people, based on the most modern market technology and encouraging investments.”


Articles 108 and 109 fall under the exclusive powers of the Federal Government, hence the choice of words in the translation is affected accordingly, as in the possible use of ‘consultation’ rather than ‘cooperation’ or ‘jointly’.


Article 111* states that, “All that is not written in the exclusive powers of the Federal government falls under the authority of the Regions and all that is not written in the exclusive powers of the Federal authority is in the authority of the of the Regions and Governorates. In case of disputes on matters that fall under powers common (shared) between the Federal government and the governments of the Regions and Governorates the priority will be given to the latter.”


1. The above articles 108*, 109*, and 111*, have been changed to 111, 112 and 115 respectively.


2. Technical Facts


There are in Iraq some 530 structural anomalies. Some 115 have been drilled to-date. Of these, 80 fields have today proven oil reserves of some 115bn barrels. The 415 unexplored structural anomalies are estimated to have in excess of 215bn barrels.


Present production is 2mn b/d, of which the export is 1.5mn b/d. Historical production high was 3.5mn b/d in 1979 and production prior to March 2003 war was 2.8mn b/d.


Finding and development cost per barrel of oil is estimated at $1, which is equivalent to around $ 5,000 per 1 b/d production rate (365 barrels per year) and operating production cost is $1.0-1.5/B.


Present proven reserves can support a production rate of 10mn b/d which can be maintained for over 8 years before it starts its decline.


Building Iraq’s current production rate to a peak of 10mn b/d and maintaining the plateau for eight years would require annual depletion rate of 4% at the beginning, rising to 5.3% when it would be allowed to decline in order to maintain the sound depletion rate of 4-5%. Theoretically, if it is allowed to decline, the oil production rate would have reached 6.4mn b/d by the end of 25th year of production when the country’s reserves would have declined to around 40bn barrels, from the present 115bn barrels at the start of the build-up of production capacity which is still a few times of the North Sea or Caspian reserves.


The 10mn b/d plateau could be raised to 12+mn b/d, with the addition of new reserves to maintain the sound depletion rate of 4-5%. However, it would take Iraq over a decade or even two to reach a production rate of 10mn b/d.


Contrary to the generally held concept that exploration activities are required at all times at least to replenish the reserves which have been produced, Iraq’s case is unfortunately and sadly unique. Iraq’s production rate has never been commensurate with its proven reserves over the past decades throughout the Iraq Petroleum Company (IPC) concessionary era or the nationalized era that followed since the 1970s.


The IPC parents had obligations elsewhere in the Middle East to develop, hence they limited production in each country to a low 1% annual depletion rate. And, they considered other countries safer to invest in than Iraq, which pursued radical policies after the issuing of Law 80 in 1961 which enforced unilateral relinquishment of the unexplored areas and undeveloped discoveries. INOC, since then, adopted inherited practices including low production depletion rate. Having to rebuild production capacity from where they started repeatedly, because of the numerous Gulf wars, while oil reserves continued to accumulate, resulted in hugely disproportionate reserves to production ratio.


Iraq today has, on a global basis, the highest proven reserves or total oil resource reserves to production ratio (a measure of life expectancy) of 157 years and 452 years respectively (when adding the potential to the proven reserve). At a production rate of 5mn b/d it would still take 62 years and 180 years respectively. Couldn’t Iraq then hold on unnecessary long-term exploration production-sharing agreement (PSA) contracts for a few years or at least until stability prevails and big powers’ pressure subsided? In the meantime, the industry can concentrate its capital investment and limited human resources on production capacity growth to bring in the necessary revenue.


Major producers outside the Middle East keep reserves-to-production ratios at a fraction of Iraq’s: UK at 6, Norway 8, Denmark 9, US 11 and Russia at 21 years, according to the statistics at the beginning of 2005. Russia’s production rate was 9.4mn b/d with oil reserves of 72bn barrels which corresponds to an annual depletion rate of 5%.


This does not mean, however, no exploration activities should be carried out to enhance the understanding of the geological knowledge and enrich the oil and gas prospectivity. Such exploration activity would be part of the comprehensive and unified planning for exploitation and development of the whole country. But, it would be limited to a scale far smaller than the uncoordinated competing numerous exploration ventures by IOCs in the various regions and governorates which are expected under the present constitutional articles. In fact Kurdistan had already started and a few other Governorates are at the beginning of the road, following suit.


3. Planning Oilfields Development


Planning oilfields development for production capacity growth is carried out on a composite master plan which examines the capacities of the discovered and producing fields (including each and every producing formation within each field) from technical and economic feasibility points of view. In the meantime, it takes into consideration Iraq’s economic development plans and needs. The choice of the plan for execution must ensure:


Optimal use of proven reserves which are housed in numerous and different locations throughout the rich governorates and regions.


Optimal oil fields development cost plus cost of any additional or replaced major pipeline carriers and export terminal capacities.


Catering for future additional potential reserves as and when needed.


Securing investment capital and the managerial capability of the national effort (be it the ministry and/or INOC) and deciding on the role and number of the complimentary international oil companies (IOCs).


Such comprehensive and integrated planning could not be realized in the absence of a centralized, coordinated and unified oil policy mechanism and the whole country’s data base. It is best accomplished by the central authority, Ministry of Oil (MoO) and/or a High Energy Commission working jointly with the MoO and in consultation with a think tank and qualified non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from the various regions and governorates, chosen, though, on merits.


4. Management Of Oilfield Exploration/Development In The Light Of The Present Constitutional Articles


Without a central unified policy there will be disharmony and competition between INOC (operating on production and marketing its export oil to provide the state’s income) and the Regions and Governorates (operating on exploration for unneeded additional reserves), and among the various Regions and Governorates, with disharmony and envy between the haves and have-nots. This would lead to an unhealthy oil industry, causing instability and damaging consequences contributing to the fragmentation of the country.


Instability would discourage the serious major IOCs with knowledge, capital and markets from engaging in Iraq’s oil industry development. Iraq would then find itself accepting the speculators and minor independents with more promises than they can deliver.


Lack of experienced oil personnel of managerial quality at the regional level and absence of unified Ministry of Oil model contractual terms and agreements are likely to lead to inferior oil and gas agreements with the more knowledgeable IOCs, which is, in itself, a failure as it does not satisfy the constitutional requirement of “ensuring highest benefits to the nation”. Worse yet is the likelihood that accountability and transparency might prove difficult to expect from the embryonic Regional governments and Governorates lacking institutions and traditions. Furthermore, contracts enacted under such conditions of unfair terms due to gross disparity between the parties would be consider nul and void under the Unidroit (International Institute for the Unification of Private Law) principles of international commercial contracts which establish contract law principles.


Highest benefit from produced oil could only come from a national oil operation where direct investment of $1 per developed barrel brings in a return of over $55 in today’s market, which is unlikely to fall below $35-40 to the end of the decade and beyond. It is illogical to leave such a highly profitable business solely to the IOCs.


The interpretation of the constitutional paragraph, “latest technology of the market principles and investment promotion”, taken out of its context of “ensuring the greatest benefit to the nation”, a wholesale of Iraq’s future oil riches is expected to go to IOCs sole operations, effectively denationalizing Iraq’s oil and gas assets. This would take Iraq back to the concessionary era with all its drawbacks, including serious infringement of Iraq’s sovereignty for its near total financial dependence then on IOCs.


While IOCs can achieve many positive mutual benefits, including among others fast track and sound development, unchecked production of competing IOCs leads to excessive production causing price deterioration and market instability. This is neither in Iraq’s interest as a major producer, nor in compliance with Iraq’s obligation towards OPEC.


As a long-term consequence of the application of Articles 109 and 111, the oil and gas rich Regions and Governorates would lead to their exclusive future control over nearly two thirds of Iraq’s oil. And, as the oil reserves from the producing fields decline, and new reserves of the Regions and the Governorates build-up, the latter would have increasingly greater economic power than the Federal government.


5. A Balanced Oil Policy


Reinstating INOC, which has proven success in the past (it built production capacity to over 3.5mn b/d from 1.5mn b/d in a few years and added oil reserves at the rate of 6+bn barrels per year during the 70s). As long as Iraq’s economy remains dependent on oil income, it is absolutely necessary to establish a national state-owned oil industry, which should be given the administrative and financial independence to command a pivotal role in the development of the country’s oil industry. It would ensure orderly exploration and developments (E&D) operations, decisions based on technical and commercial priorities, and optimum flow of income to the treasury.


Large investment capital for future oil and gas development should not give credence to substituting national operation by IOCs. To build a production capacity of one barrel per day (365 barrels per year) costs around $5,000. The oil industry elsewhere was built by the IOCs through loans to the extent of 80-90% of the required investment capital. A borrowed capital of $5,000 to build a rate of a barrel of oil per day could be paid in less than 100 days of production in today’s market price. A bridge loan under such circumstances would be fairly easily obtained. And, the case would not be far different under a market of $35-40/B under such price eventuality. Thus, while capital investment for fast track oil development coming from IOCs has credence, its benefit should not be exaggerated.


Partnership between the national oil industry (INOC) and IOCs is the best balanced policy option for expediting the building of Iraq’s oil industry to dimensions commensurate with its huge resource base. This is preferable to the disadvantages of sole operations of IOCs, regardless of contractual form. Partnership with INOC is also the preferred route of the major oil companies. It provides transfer of technology and management, eases capital investment requirement and ensures orderly development and marketing oil export. However, there is no universal contractual form, being PSA or any other. Different situations demands suitable contractual forms under different market and competitive circumstances, be it a PSA or buyback, other service type contracts or tax and royalty contractual forms.


Today, Iraq’s oil industry limitations inhibiting fast track oilfield capacity development (clearly, apart from the lack of security, instability and absence of a government in full control of the country), are caused by insufficient oil experienced management personnel and the lack of up-to-date state-of-the-art technology. An active INOC working jointly with IOCs on oil field development provides a solution to technology and management limitations and a balanced approach between total state oil monopoly and a free market controlled by IOCs.


Growing dependence on IOCs, in a diminishing or absent role for INOC, deprives the state from economic independence and puts it at serious risk during circumstances when the IOCs’ obligations toward its shareholders or nationality might have to override Iraq’s national interest.


Upstream oil exploration and development is capital intensive. It would be wasteful to use it as a means of creating employment in the Regions and Governorates. Oil and gas are the assets of all the people. It should remain the best tool in the hands of the state for generating capital to the nation as a whole. However, many of its technical and commercial arms such as drilling, seismic/gravity/magnetic surveying, well-bore examination by various tools and testing operations could be privatized to create investment opportunities and employment for the Regions and Governorates. Likewise, many phases of the downstream operations could be privatized, such as distribution and even refining. However, proper planning along a reasonable time scale and preservation of labor rights should be upheld.


Additionally, “local content” (obligations on IOCs to carve some of the industry’s functions to nationals to lessen total dependence and provide wealth and employment for the locals) ought to be adopted and enforced as obligatory contractual policy. “Local content” accounts to 51% in Iran and Russia and 70% in Norway. It has worked to the mutual benefit of IOCs and host countries. It has been accepted elsewhere and there is no reason not to adopt it in Iraq. However, like everything new, it should be built gradually in accordance to rules and regulations to avoid abuse.


Internal power politics exhibiting itself in appointments based on sectarian and ethnic divisions, not on merit, and the politicization of oil policy and management are bound to obstruct the development of an efficient, transparent and accountable Iraq oil industry. A corrected course of action and the appointment of well-qualified oil technocrats are badly needed to rectify much of the wrong doings of the present trend.


The constitution, that is the articles governing oil and gas, has been dictated by the heads of the ruling political parties, and changes to the draft prepared by the parliamentary drafting committee were made in isolation from the managerial, technical and economic realities of the oil business. A corrected course of action to modify the present constitutional articles governing management and strategic policy making is badly needed in order to create the right conditions for an efficient, growing, transparent and accountable oil industry that does justice to Iraq’s present huge proven and potential reserves. In turn, this would truly create the conducive conditions to help realize the overriding article 108 that “oil and gas are the property of the nation (people) of all the Regions and Governorates”.


6. Corrective Measures


The application of articles 109 and 111 as illustrated and stated above, would lead to serious damaging consequences and cannot achieve the equitable distribution of wealth and benefits among the entire nation demanded by article 108. It would not ensure the highest benefit to the nation unless corrective measures are taken which should include, among others:


Separating the two factors of (A) management of the oil industry from (B) revenue distribution, by breaking the linkage between the two provided in Article 109. The former factor, (A), ought to be re-examined and so worded in such a way as to create and optimize an Iraqi oil industry that would bring in the greatest return commensurate with its natural richness, and which could put it on par with the world leader, Saudi Arabia. Treatment of the latter factor, (B), ought to be based on equity, fairness and the needs of each of the Governorates and Regions in the context of the economic and social development of the country and the nation, rather than on ethnic or sectarian basis or on the temptation of the Regions and Governorates to control the underground mineral resources under their surface. These mineral resources are not owned by their surface proprietor. Article 108 resolves this issue. Corrective measures ought to be considered to avoid the inevitable and seriously damaging consequences. The wording should also be carefully chosen to clear up the confusion of the present imprecise text. Criteria should include:


Application of a unified oil plan and policy free from uncalled for contradictory competing plans between the Federal government and the governments of the Regions and Governorates, and among the Regions and Governorates.


Adoption of a hydrocarbon law which sets out the foundation for a national oil company as the principle operator in the country under sound health and safety rules and technical and commercial codes of practice to explore and develop oil and gas in all the Regions and Governorates, with transparency, accountability and efficiency.


INOC working independently and jointly with IOCs on internationally accepted and balanced contractual modes with “local content” that ensure greatest benefit to the nation, encourage private enterprise and permit an assured reward to IOCs, governed by clear rules and regulations, under a secure and stable social and political environment.


A radical solution to truly satisfy the objective of article 108 and set Iraq’s oil and gas industry on a correct path, therefore, requires the inclusion in article 109 of “exploration operation” to unfold and develop Iraq’s huge oil and gas resource potential, in addition to the management of production operations.


Article 109 should then read as follows: “The Federal government shall manage the oil and gas production of the discovered and producing fields as well as the exploration and production operations necessary to unfold the potential oil and gas resource.” This implies eliminating articles 111, which allocate future exploration to the governments of the Regions and Governorates and give them the right to overrule the Federal government in case of differences or disputes.


It is neither correct nor practical for a part (any part of the nation) to rule the whole nation. Consultation and/or representation in policy making and management should provide the logical solution.


Making the national oil company (INOC) a parent company with operating oil companies in the Regions (the nucleus for this in fact already exists; the North and South Oil Companies) whose directors could become members of the board of INOC, provides an effective role for the Regions and Governorates in the whole country’s oil and gas operations jointly with the Federal government.


In order to have efficient development of the oil industry “ensuring highest benefit to the nation” it is necessary that a reference be made in the constitution to legislate a hydrocarbon law which endorses, among others, the allocation of the upstream and down operations and related commercial aspects, to a national oil company (INOC), while the Ministry of Oil and a Higher Energy Commission focus on strategic plans, policy and overall regulatory supervision.


Oil policy by the Ministry of Oil should be made in consultation with the Regions and Governorates through a consultative body from among relevant NGOs and oil technocrats having representation from the Regions and Governorates. The policy should then be reviewed for approval by the cabinet, which, after all, represents the will of the elected members of Parliament from all the regions.


Negotiated oil and gas agreements with IOCs, oil and gas related strategic projects with other countries and between the regions and governorates, in order to become valid, should have the approval of Parliament in order to ensure that their terms and conditions satisfy the hydrocarbon law, constitutional criteria of article 108, and satisfy acceptance by the representatives of all the Regions, Governorates and the nation as a whole.


Leaving the constitutional terms unchanged, the Regions and Governorates’ likely course would be to go down the route of indiscriminate PSAs and second rate oil companies and the damaging consequences enumerated above. This would also be regarded by critics as inviting privatization of the nation’s very livelihood through the back door; a policy known to be absolutely unacceptable by the nation.

Posted by Lawk Salih

Originally Posted by www.xealthy.com

I beleive there is a limit to how much foriegn currency you can travel with.
Customs will ask you at the airport if you are traveling with more than you are allowed. If you lie - remember the Magnetic securicy strips embedded into the IQD. Well those may just trigger the X-ray in baggage or set off the metal detector. You may find yourself in line for a baggage check - possible Cavity search and definate confiscation of your IQD! NOT a good thing to do. So unless you live in one of these countries- best to call around and do your own research on this one. JMHO

Marlene in NY

PS I have aske Chase if they would hold the IQD in an account they said " No we dont hold those kinds of accounts" they suggested that I contact an international bank - they did not have any suggestions on which banks.
when this all goes down for real - we will have banks jumping out at us.

You can travel pretty much anywhere in the world with the DINAR. The metal strips will not set off anything that I can tell. At least 15 million will not set off anything. You can travel with as much currency as you wish to coming into the US as long as you declare anything over $10,000.00. This is the way I understand it to be anyway.

Originally Posted by adm

I spoke to someone in the Dealing Room (Trading Room) at the Commerical Bank here in Qatar last Thursday about the Dinar; they said they're not trading it but can give me "some international trading rate" (the first Ive heard this) of 1403 per USD and 385.15 per QR. I then ask if and when she expect to begin trading; she said "I can't answer that now."

Also, I called a couple of large Xchange houses and I ask what the current exchange rate for the Dinar, Both Xchanges ask me...the buy or sell rate. I said I'm interested the the buy...guess what-they wanted me to sell. I said no!

It seem that things are changing everyday and sometimes it's difficult to get information, however, the change I see now is different...more positive. I'll keep you posted.

AL

As the more knowledgable members of this Investment have posted that the more it gets closer, the more that will be known. In the beginning of my Investment to this arena, you could not get post like this of Financial Institutes having somesort of info. Now it seems....TOO ME... that members are posting this type of postings more and more. So in that Reality, as the known have posted, "THE CLOSER WE GET THE MORE THAT WILL BE INVOLVED".

IMHO, I am getting more excited now than ever before. Just of the resent news of post like this. Not to mention the ones that are very own have posted of Articles stating that the "Dinar Will Rise IN 2006" or the resent ones of there ministry reporting in the "News Papers and Official Articals" of the need to "RAISE the Rate and Strengthen the Iraq Dinar". Hang on "Dinar Gang", everyDay is a Day CLOSER.

Originally Posted by nventr

I need to apologize for suggesting Custom House Global Foreign Exchange (Custom House Global Foreign Exchange) is a good place to exchange our NID. I called their office in Edmonton, AB, Canada where I deal with them corporately and this is the 'real story'. In Canada they will exchange Dinar cash (when it is traded on Forex) into any other traded currency. In the USA they have only a few selected offices that will likely do exchanges of cash. They told me that regulatory issues from State to State are so variable that they have decided not to pursue that market. In Canada the regulatory conditions are nationally uniform.
I am sorry that I did not verify that their services were not internationally uniform with their domestic protocol.

See here is another. Great post of information nventr. This is what excites me. Everyone is coming into the known., as Far as Financial Institutes. Why else would they waste there time with it?

Originally Posted by "GK"

"Multinational bank HSBC recently opened branches in Erbil and Basrah. HSBC now has 400 Iraqi and seven expatriate staff working in a total of 14 branches throughout the country".

14 branches!!! Boy, these guys are pretty sneaky.

Can anyone find some short of Article about this. I believe this is Good Also. My understanding about HSBC is that it is a Hugh Financial Institute. Thanks ahead.