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

Originally Posted by BobWiley

I am sorry if this was already posted. I looked through the posts but if I missed it, sorry for the duplicate post. I got this off of DinarTrade news section.

The Iraqi dinar is witnessing a gradual improvement

The Iraqi dinar is witnessing a gradual improvement in its exchange rate these days. The price of the dinar has risen from $ 0.000676 in early November to $ 0.00069 later during the same month. This means that the number of dinars against one dollar dropped from 1480 dinars to 1440 during that period. It is noteworthy that the exchange rate in the 1970s was $3.20 for one dinar, which exceeds the current price by four thousand and six hundred times.
It seems that the Iraqi government is planning now to fix the exchange rate at 1000 dinars/dollars, which is almost one third. The government plans to make this gradual, in order to avoid a sudden rise. This was the lesson learned in the aftermath of the sudden catastrophic decline that had occurred among traders and businessmen in 1995 and the accompanying financial and commercial turmoil, bankruptcies and trade and banking collapses.If the current rise of the exchange rate from 1480 dinars to 1000 dinars to one dollar is applied, some people in Iraq will gain while others will lose, as follows:

Losers:
A- Savers in dollar. Iraqi savers lost confidence in the dinar. This urged many of them to keep most of their savings in dollars. These include traders and industrialists. When they will need to convert their savings to dinars, the loss will be huge.
B- Contractors in projects priced in dollars: Those are paid in dollar, but the majority of their expenses and local purchases are usually in dinar. This includes the labor wages and their purchases of materials of local origin. This is the case with building and construction contractors who purchase local supplies and construction materials (bricks, soil, sand, gravel). When they submitted their quotations they had evaluated their contacting service at the prevailing exchange rate before raising the value of the dinar and now they have to pay at the new rate and hence lose. After they handover the projects, they will receive the rest of their money in dollars.
C- Lenders in dollar: They will regain their loans valued at less than the value before the rate of the dinar was raised.
D- Borrowers in dinar: They will pay their debts upon maturity in dinars of a dollar purchasing power more than that at the time of lending. They will have to pay in a dinar that exceeds the lending rate by almost one-third. When the major collapse happened in 1995, thousands of traders announced their bankruptcy while indebted to others, and this was disastrous.
E- Employees who earn in dollar.
F- Estate lessors with rental allowances in dollar while their expenses are in dinars.
G- Estate tenants who pay in dinar while their income is in dollar.

Gainers:
A- Savers in dinar, for being able to buy more dollars.
B- Employees and workers who are paid in dinar, since they will receive the same pay but with a more purchasing power and a better exchange rate.
C- Producers: since they will sell their products for the more powerful dinar.
D- Borrowers in dollar and whose savings are in dinar: since they will pay their debts and their interests in the cheaper dollar.
E- Retirees: they will have more purchases with the same salary.
F- Those covered by the program of the social safety network (the retirees themselves).
G- Estate lessors in dinar.
H- Estate tenants in dollar while their incomes are in dinar.
This means that raising the dinar exchange rate will benefit some and harm others.
It is noteworthy that the terrible continuous escalation in prices during the 1980s and 1990s of the last century in Iraq was not due to an increase in the value of money itself, but due to the fact that this increase was not met by a real balance or a strong national economy and national income or a supporting domestic product. When the State issued currency, it behaved like a merchant who issues instruments with no balance to meet their nominal value. Moreover, there were the constraints of trade and external transfer. Otherwise, the amount of money in circulation in a country like Japan is more than the amount of Iraqi currency in circulation (as an absolute figure).
During the post-war period, the balance was met, but the rise in prices was due to high costs and shortage of supply. For example, the average of the prices of Iraqi vegetables and fruit has increased this year by 100% as compared to the prices of 2005, but due to the shortfall in production. The agricultural expert Jaber Abu al-Eis (Ministry of Agriculture) says that the execution rate in the agricultural plan for 2006 amounted to 17%. The prices of local poultry products this year are twice as much as 2005. The reason was the banning of the poultry industry, among the procedures of combating avian flu and the prevention of the importation of these products from many countries. Moreover, it was due to the rise in the costs of energy, fuel and transportation costs to the double or even more. Also there are the imposed royalties paid by the importers, producers and transporters to gangs and bandits, including kidnapping payments and ransoms. There is also bribery, corruption and alliances between businessmen and government officials, in addition to the high wages, the rise in prices and interests of loans caused by the Central Bank. All these factors led to an increase in the cost of production and inflation rates. Such factors have to do with costs and supplies while they have nothing to do with demand. Thus, the saying, \"Much money looking for a few commodities\" does not apply here.
The current inflation is due to high cost and shortage of supply. Nowadays, the government ensured assets that cover the nominal value of money and a domestic product that supports it. But there remain two options. The first option is to increase the quantity (number of units) by a third, raise salaries and wages and expand and improve the miserable network of social safety to include additional numbers of extremely poor people living at half a dollar per day amounting to four million. The second option is that the government raises the dinar exchange rate by one third as it is planning now.
In the first case, the needy employees and workers who are not covered by social welfare will benefit, and there will be no loss or damage to other people. In the second case, employees, workers, retirees and others will benefit, but, at the same time, others will lose as mentioned earlier.
According to reliable sources, the second option comes in implementation of the directives of the International Monetary Fund. But, as we stated in a previous article, the former American Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, described the IMF as \"a doctor who has only one pill for every conceivable illness\".
* Mr. Ali Mahmoud al-Fakiki an Iraqi expert in economics
Source: Al-Hayat - 11/26/06


-BobWiley

In re-reading this article, it appears that a reval close to the dollar might take a while. My take on this information is that it will be months before we see a super significant gain on this investement (hopefully I am wrong!). They'll probably set it at that rate and see what happens over a period of time. Then hopefully they polish things up and set it closer to the dollar!

Just my take on this article. Good luck to all.

-BobWiley

I found this article by Alan Greenspan dated (ironically) November 30th 2001. This article discusses in depth the introduction of the euro on the world exchange....check out the similarities to what we are now experiencing.....we are soooooooo close. Not to mention the November 30 coincidence....

Remarks by Chairman Alan Greenspan
The euro as an international currency
Before the Euro 50 Group Roundtable, Washington, D.C.
November 30, 2001


Today I would like to address some of the basic considerations that confront the euro in its emergence as a key international currency. I know I follow a number of contributions on this and related subjects and trust my comments will not overlap too much with what has already been said.

An international currency emerges because it is a solution to an economic problem. In a world of multiple currencies and multilateral trade, those engaged in cross-border transactions face a problem of coordinating purchases and sales of currencies. Because a sale of a given currency to a customer is unlikely to be matched by a nearly simultaneous purchase of the same currency from another customer, foreign exchange traders must make their customers wait or must hold costly inventories of currencies.

When the volume of transactions in a given currency is large, however, the waiting time between buy and sell orders for the currency will typically be shorter, and smaller stocks of the currency can be held. Thus, there are efficiency gains to channeling international transactions through a single currency, passing demands and supplies for other currencies through trades involving a so-called vehicle. In addition, as more and more transactions work through the vehicle currency, the currency becomes increasingly acceptable in international transactions because bid-ask spreads narrow and liquidity increases.

Because the attractiveness of any vehicle currency grows as its liquidity increases, an international currency has a tendency to become a natural monopoly.

If the underlying demand for one of two competing vehicle currencies falters for a reason not clearly perceived to be transitory, and its bid-ask spreads, accordingly, increase relative to its competition, demand will shift to that competitor. But that shift, in turn, will widen the bid-ask spread of the faltering competitor still more, inducing a further shift of transactions to the alternative currency. This process ends with the demise of the weaker currency as a competing vehicle and the stronger of the two becoming the sole surviving vehicle.

However, even when an emerging international currency is displacing another, the transition can be drawn out, resulting in two vehicle currencies existing side by side for a protracted period. Between the two world wars, for example, sterling and the dollar were both active as international currencies. This period, of course, was clearly transitional, and the dollar subsequently became dominant.

But the most important factor inhibiting the emergence and persistence of a single vehicle currency throughout the world is the attraction of portfolio diversification. This can be a powerful counterforce, especially because currencies offer far greater opportunities for diversification than most other assets. The average price of all currencies, by construction, is trendless, tending to increase the negative covariance within a portfolio of currencies. In contrast, equity instruments are often driven in the same direction, as are debt instruments; and often debt and equity prices move together.

This point brings us to the question: How does a currency become an international currency? The question is particularly intriguing because, in the reign of fiat currencies, its answer is unlike the explanation of how a currency becomes dominant within a country.

When gold, silver, or other commodities were the normal means of exchange, units of currency were defined by commonly understood weights of the commodities that circulated. Soon the equivalent of warehouse receipts for precious metals circulated as currency. Under a commodity standard more generally the value of paper currency or any other financial claim is derived from the value of the standard.

Contracts can be written in terms of ounces of gold or, more conveniently, in terms of a unit of exchange. The pound sterling, of course, was originally a pound of silver. The U.S. dollar was originally defined for legal purposes in the Coinage Act of 1792 as either 0.05 ounces of gold or 0.77 ounces of silver.

In today's world of government-issued monies, the unit of currency is not, and need not be, defined. It circulates as legal tender under government fiat. Its value can be inferred only from the values of the present and future goods and services it can command.

In the international arena, however, no overarching sovereign exists to decree what is money. Instead, a myriad of private agents must somehow reach agreement on which currency to use as an international currency.

In the modern world of fiat currencies, a number of factors can enhance the attractiveness of a currency to private agents, making it easier for them to settle on an international currency.

First and foremost, an international currency must be perceived as sound. To be acceptable, market participants must be willing to hold it as a store of value. A necessary condition of that willingness is that a currency's future value in terms of goods and services be viewed as predictable. Losses in purchasing power will tend to discourage the use of a currency, but so will any excessive price fluctuation that raises the risk of holding it. In addition, if a currency is seen as a viable store of value in times of general uncertainty, it will attract investors even when times are not so uncertain. Clearly, many currencies meet this test; yet few emerge as international currencies.

Other factors will govern the selection from among the body of sound currencies. One is a strong, competitive economy open to, and active in, international trade and finance. Such an economy will naturally generate a large quantity of foreign exchange transactions with at least one leg in the home currency to support its wide-ranging business activity. This factor evidently goes a long way toward explaining the dominance of the Dutch guilder in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the British pound in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and the dollar today.

Another factor is the presence of an open and well-developed financial system, a factor, of course, that tends to be part, perhaps a necessary part, of a strong competitive open economy. A well-developed financial system increases the attractiveness of doing business in a currency for at least two reasons. First, such a system offers a number of ancillary services to participants in international markets, who may want to borrow or invest in a currency or to hedge foreign currency positions. To the extent that these activities can be accomplished efficiently in a currency, that currency will be more attractive as a currency in which to conduct business.

Second, deep and liquid financial markets that offer a full array of instruments and services will attract business from abroad that might otherwise have stayed at home. Because of financial market constraints at home or other barriers to efficiency, for example, borrowing or investing abroad in an international currency and exchanging the proceeds for domestic currency might be cheaper than conducting the transactions directly in the home currency.

Thus, a currency supported by a well-developed financial system is likely to encourage greater international use, above and beyond needs associated directly with international business activity. As a consequence, the volume of gross international capital flows denominated in the currency are likely to be high, adding to its desirability, regardless of whether, on net, these capital flows are positive or negative at any point in time.

These international currency determinants are clearly interrelated. Strong financial systems tend to develop in strong economies, and well-developed financial systems tend to enhance economic development. The development of both the economic and the financial systems supports the soundness of the domestic currency, which in turn feeds back to economic and financial activity. So, to some extent, there is an element of bootstrapping here. Ultimately, however, a currency's success in the international arena requires success at home, because the strength and efficiency of the home economy and home financial system will be sources of the strength for the currency.

Returning to the specific focus of this conference, clearly the euro readily meets all the key qualifications for a major international currency. Indeed, there can be little doubt that the euro is a sound currency. The mandate of the European Central Bank to maintain a stable purchasing power of the currency is doubtless firmer than that of the Federal Reserve or any other major central bank. The economy of the twelve countries embracing the euro is roughly the size of the U.S. economy, and its financial system is rapidly approaching the magnitude of that in the United States. Continuing advances in European telecommunications and payment systems have resulted in financial systems that now have the potential to be highly integrated across borders.

The introduction of the euro and the successful implementation of the TARGET payment system has also contributed to this potential, by linking more firmly the financial markets of the continental European countries. The tremendous growth of bond markets in the euro area over the past three years shows how such potential can be employed successfully. In addition, the greater depth and liquidity of financial markets in the euro area have facilitated the development of financial instruments, such as mutual funds and commercial paper.

But in its brief history, the euro area financial system has had its difficulties as well. Expansion across national borders of important financial markets, such as equity trading and securities lending, is apparently being restrained by difficult negotiations over regulatory and legal differences. A resolution of these differences would add to the attractiveness and stature of the euro in the international arena.

Many of the concerns about the euro, however, have little to do with the euro itself but pertain to certain European economic conditions that have affected the value of the currency. Following its inception, the euro, contrary to expectations, declined significantly against the dollar. Through the first year of the euro's existence, the weakening of its dollar exchange rate was widely attributable to a booming American economy. But, again contrary to expectations, the euro has not materially strengthened as the American economy has weakened.

Having endeavored to forecast exchange rates for more than half a century, I have understandably developed significant humility about my ability in this area, a sentiment that I suspect many in this room share.

With that caveat in mind, I agree with those who have hypothesized that the evident strengthened demand for the dollar, relative to the euro, has reflected a market expectation that productivity growth in the United States is likely to be greater than that in continental Europe in the years ahead. The steady flow of capital from Europe to the United States in recent years is, presumably, the consequence of Europeans finding many investments in the United States persistently more attractive than those at home.

As I have argued in other forums, this outcome may well have resulted to an important degree from the particular legal structures and customs that govern labor relations in much of Europe. For example, over the decades, Europe has sought to protect its workers from some of the presumed harsher aspects of free-market competition. To discourage layoffs, discharging employees was made difficult and costly compared with doing so in the United States. By law and by custom, American employers have faced far fewer impediments in recent years to releasing employees.

This difference is important in our new high-tech world because much, if not most, of the rate of return from the newer technologies results from cost reduction, which on a consolidated basis largely means the reduction of labor costs. Consequently, legal restraints on the ability of firms to readily implement such cost reductions lower the prospective rates of return on the newer technologies and, thus, the incentives to apply them.

As a result, even though these technologies are available to all, the intensity of their application has been more clearly evident in the United States and other countries with fewer impediments to implementation. As a dividend, the level of employment in the United States has turned out to be higher as firms find hiring less risky and, hence, are more willing to add employees to their rosters.

The persistent strength of the dollar in the face of the United States' unsustainable current account deficit underscores this impressive propensity to accumulate dollar investments, relative to those denominated in euros.

I assume previous speakers have addressed the as-yet-unfulfilled expectation of a substantial diversification of the large holdings of international portfolios of dollars.

Some analysts predicted, before its introduction in January 1999, that the euro would rapidly displace part of the dollar holdings in many portfolios, including in particular official holdings of reserves. These expectations were probably overstated. History has shown us that once currencies achieve the status of an international vehicle currency, as the guilder and the pound did in previous centuries, the established infrastructure of deep and liquid markets favors their continuing to be so used. We have not yet reached the three-year mark since the euro appeared as a currency--a very short time by standards of international monetary history.

As I indicated earlier, we have seen substantial development in the markets for euro-denominated bonds and other fixed-income instruments. Advancements in other markets have been slower but should proceed in time.

I also note that the introduction of the euro created a motive for diversification into dollars for those investors who had previously obtained some portfolio balance by holding several European currencies. As stability between the exchange rates of those currencies increased through the late 1990s and then became absolute in January 1999, some investors were induced to substitute into dollars to regain the diversification they had lost as the euro-area currencies became more closely correlated.

We are left with the question of how the international role of the euro will unfold. The attraction of investing in dollar-denominated assets depends upon relative rates of return. To the extent that the capital flows we have observed from Europe to the United States are a critical piece of the story, the future will be determined, at least in part, by the success in Europe of matching the expected rates of return on U.S. assets. But market pressures toward portfolio diversification are clearly also going to play a major role in the future relative positions of the dollar and the euro. The world can only benefit from the competition.

Originally Posted by Bigslick116

Sad part is it's a real concern. I know most don't want to hear it but if Iraq doesn't suck it up soon we might be headed down that road. Bottom line they need to get their act together FAST! Do whatever it takes split the region up in thirds, replace top government officials "including Malaki", do something because right now nothing is working. On a personal note I believe all will be corrected.

I believe that too. And you are right, it IS a real concern. Bombs are being detonated every single day, innocent people losing their lives. Then again, you don't hear much about all the good things going on over there. The Red Cross is doing a lot of work, helping out those in need (just to name at least one). Yet, the words Civil War, as much of an oxy-moron as it is, is still a very real possibility unless they get their leadership together and start cracking down, and cracking down HARD.

-BobWiley

CANBERRA/SYDNEY, Nov 27 (Reuters) -

A judicial inquiry on Monday found Australia's monopoly wheat exporter broke U.N. sanctions against Iraq by paying $222 million in kickbacks to secure wheat sales to Saddam Hussein's regime.

The inquiry, headed by retired judge Terence Cole, said 11 former AWB managers could face criminal or other charges over the payments under the U.N. oil-for-food programme, but cleared the Australian government of any knowledge of the payments.

Reuters Pictures


Editors Choice: Best pictures
from the last 24 hours.

View Slideshow

"According to the commissioner, AWB set out to deliberately deceive and mislead," Prime Minister John Howard told a news conference after the report was made public in parliament.

Howard said law enforcement authorities would decide on any prosecutions. He said the government would urgently consider the future of Australia's wheat export system, but did not say if AWB's export monopoly would be dismantled.

Cole spent 11 months examining whether AWB had broken any Australian laws over the kickbacks, mostly paid as trucking fees through Jordanian company Alia ahead of the 2003 Iraq war.

"AWB ... knew that payments to Iraq were contrary to U.N. sanctions and Australian government policy," Cole said in his report.

"It knew the fee was a payment to Iraq," he said. "AWB went to extraordinary lengths to hide the payment of the fee to Alia." Continued...

Insurgents target oil sources, cause massive infernos - CNN.com

Hopefully these events are kept to a minimum. These could definitely hurt oil production if they continue.

-BobWiley

Originally Posted by BobWiley

I am sorry if this was already posted. I looked through the posts but if I missed it, sorry for the duplicate post. I got this off of DinarTrade news section.

The Iraqi dinar is witnessing a gradual improvement

The Iraqi dinar is witnessing a gradual improvement in its exchange rate these days. The price of the dinar has risen from $ 0.000676 in early November to $ 0.00069 later during the same month. This means that the number of dinars against one dollar dropped from 1480 dinars to 1440 during that period. It is noteworthy that the exchange rate in the 1970s was $3.20 for one dinar, which exceeds the current price by four thousand and six hundred times.
It seems that the Iraqi government is planning now to fix the exchange rate at 1000 dinars/dollars, which is almost one third. The government plans to make this gradual, in order to avoid a sudden rise. This was the lesson learned in the aftermath of the sudden catastrophic decline that had occurred among traders and businessmen in 1995 and the accompanying financial and commercial turmoil, bankruptcies and trade and banking collapses.If the current rise of the exchange rate from 1480 dinars to 1000 dinars to one dollar is applied, some people in Iraq will gain while others will lose, as follows:

Losers:
A- Savers in dollar. Iraqi savers lost confidence in the dinar. This urged many of them to keep most of their savings in dollars. These include traders and industrialists. When they will need to convert their savings to dinars, the loss will be huge.
B- Contractors in projects priced in dollars: Those are paid in dollar, but the majority of their expenses and local purchases are usually in dinar. This includes the labor wages and their purchases of materials of local origin. This is the case with building and construction contractors who purchase local supplies and construction materials (bricks, soil, sand, gravel). When they submitted their quotations they had evaluated their contacting service at the prevailing exchange rate before raising the value of the dinar and now they have to pay at the new rate and hence lose. After they handover the projects, they will receive the rest of their money in dollars.
C- Lenders in dollar: They will regain their loans valued at less than the value before the rate of the dinar was raised.
D- Borrowers in dinar: They will pay their debts upon maturity in dinars of a dollar purchasing power more than that at the time of lending. They will have to pay in a dinar that exceeds the lending rate by almost one-third. When the major collapse happened in 1995, thousands of traders announced their bankruptcy while indebted to others, and this was disastrous.
E- Employees who earn in dollar.
F- Estate lessors with rental allowances in dollar while their expenses are in dinars.
G- Estate tenants who pay in dinar while their income is in dollar.

Gainers:
A- Savers in dinar, for being able to buy more dollars.
B- Employees and workers who are paid in dinar, since they will receive the same pay but with a more purchasing power and a better exchange rate.
C- Producers: since they will sell their products for the more powerful dinar.
D- Borrowers in dollar and whose savings are in dinar: since they will pay their debts and their interests in the cheaper dollar.
E- Retirees: they will have more purchases with the same salary.
F- Those covered by the program of the social safety network (the retirees themselves).
G- Estate lessors in dinar.
H- Estate tenants in dollar while their incomes are in dinar.
This means that raising the dinar exchange rate will benefit some and harm others.
It is noteworthy that the terrible continuous escalation in prices during the 1980s and 1990s of the last century in Iraq was not due to an increase in the value of money itself, but due to the fact that this increase was not met by a real balance or a strong national economy and national income or a supporting domestic product. When the State issued currency, it behaved like a merchant who issues instruments with no balance to meet their nominal value. Moreover, there were the constraints of trade and external transfer. Otherwise, the amount of money in circulation in a country like Japan is more than the amount of Iraqi currency in circulation (as an absolute figure).
During the post-war period, the balance was met, but the rise in prices was due to high costs and shortage of supply. For example, the average of the prices of Iraqi vegetables and fruit has increased this year by 100% as compared to the prices of 2005, but due to the shortfall in production. The agricultural expert Jaber Abu al-Eis (Ministry of Agriculture) says that the execution rate in the agricultural plan for 2006 amounted to 17%. The prices of local poultry products this year are twice as much as 2005. The reason was the banning of the poultry industry, among the procedures of combating avian flu and the prevention of the importation of these products from many countries. Moreover, it was due to the rise in the costs of energy, fuel and transportation costs to the double or even more. Also there are the imposed royalties paid by the importers, producers and transporters to gangs and bandits, including kidnapping payments and ransoms. There is also bribery, corruption and alliances between businessmen and government officials, in addition to the high wages, the rise in prices and interests of loans caused by the Central Bank. All these factors led to an increase in the cost of production and inflation rates. Such factors have to do with costs and supplies while they have nothing to do with demand. Thus, the saying, \"Much money looking for a few commodities\" does not apply here.
The current inflation is due to high cost and shortage of supply. Nowadays, the government ensured assets that cover the nominal value of money and a domestic product that supports it. But there remain two options. The first option is to increase the quantity (number of units) by a third, raise salaries and wages and expand and improve the miserable network of social safety to include additional numbers of extremely poor people living at half a dollar per day amounting to four million. The second option is that the government raises the dinar exchange rate by one third as it is planning now.
In the first case, the needy employees and workers who are not covered by social welfare will benefit, and there will be no loss or damage to other people. In the second case, employees, workers, retirees and others will benefit, but, at the same time, others will lose as mentioned earlier.
According to reliable sources, the second option comes in implementation of the directives of the International Monetary Fund. But, as we stated in a previous article, the former American Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, described the IMF as \"a doctor who has only one pill for every conceivable illness\".
* Mr. Ali Mahmoud al-Fakiki an Iraqi expert in economics
Source: Al-Hayat - 11/26/06


-BobWiley

This is an interesting theory, however all points made under the Loser section can be completely reversed with a 1:1 r/v.

[QUOTE=$onedaysoon$;141088][B]what ever happened to "the pessimist will be surprised"[/B]

Annan : Iraq on the brink of civil war

(Voice of Iraq) - 11-27-2006
This issue was sent to a friend

Maybe we all missed it because we're optimists not pessimists!:

Annan is a real piece of work!

He is unstable IMHO!

Originally Posted by Dinar-Excited

WASHINGTON - U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Monday that Iraq is close to civil war, as the Bush administration stepped up diplomatic efforts to stabilize the wartorn country.

Annan talked to reporters in New York as members of the Iraq Study Group were to discuss recommendations for changes in U.S. war strategy. President Bush left for a NATO summit in Europe, but much attention was directed toward a meeting he'll have later in the week with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in Amman, Jordan.

Asked by reporters at the U.N. if Iraq is in a civil war now, Annan replied, "I think given the developments on the ground, unless something is done drastically and urgently to arrest the deteriorating situation, we could be there. In fact we are almost there."

Sectarian violence in Iraq is at its worst level in the roughly 3 1/2 years since a U.S.-led coalition invaded the country and toppled Saddam Hussein. Bush's summit this week comes in the wake of talks that Vice President Dick Cheney held over the weekend in the region and as members of the special study commission mull recommendations.

The New York Times reported in Monday's editions that a draft report by the study panel led by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III recommends aggressive regional diplomacy, including talks with Iran and Syria.

Anonymous officials who had seen the draft report told the Times it does not specify any timetables for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, although the commissioners are expected to debate the feasibility of such timetables.

The panel is expected to release its findings and recommendations in December.

Appearing Monday on ABC's "Good Morning America," former President Jimmy Carter said that "at this point everybody is waiting" for the report. "My guess is that President Bush will take their advice as much as he possibly can," he added.

Carter said he would agree with any call for direct U.S. talks with Iran and Syria over Iraq, adding: "This is one of the most counterproductive policies that I've ever known, ... not to talk to the people who disagree with you unless they agree in advance to everything you demand."

Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record) of Nebraska, a potential presidential contender in 2008, said "it's not too late for the United States to extricate itself honorably from an impending disaster in Iraq."

"If the president fails to build a bipartisan foundation for an exit strategy, America will pay a high price for this blunder — one that we will have difficulty recovering from in the years ahead," Hagel wrote in Sunday's Washington Post.

As the U.S. involvement in Iraq surpassed the length of America's participation in World War II, lawmakers have dwindling confidence in the U.S.-supported Iraqi government.

Maj. Gen. William B. Caldwell, a spokesman for coalition forces in Iraq, declined Monday to say whether Iraq had plunged into civil war.

"No. What we have right now... What I would tell you is, ... we have violence that are at unacceptable levels at the moment," he said in an interview from Baghdad with Associated Press Radio. "It had been on a downward trend for about four solid weeks."

"The vast majority of the citizens here want to live in a peaceful secure city. That's what their desire is," Caldwell said.

The Bush-Maliki summit on Wednesday and Thursday, coupled with Cheney's trip to Saudi Arabia on Saturday, is evidence of the administration's stepped-up effort to bring stability to the region.

The host of the meeting, Jordan's King Abdullah, said Sunday the problems in the Middle East go beyond the war in Iraq. He said much of the region soon could become engulfed in violence unless the central issues are addressed quickly.

The king said he was hopeful the leaders will find a way to reduce the level of violence. "We hope there will be something dramatic. The challenges, obviously, in front of both of them are immense," he said.

Iraq's leaders promised Sunday to track down those responsible for the recent attacks, and al-Maliki urged his national unity government of Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds to curb the violence by stopping their public disputes.

The Iraqi prime minister is under pressure from Shiite politicians loyal to the radical anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr who have threatened to boycott parliament and the Cabinet if al-Maliki meets with Bush.

"This is all political posturing. It's all red herring. It's an anti-threat. This is a very stable government," responded Iraq's national security adviser, Mouwafak al-Rubaie. He said he had no doubt the prime minister would meet with Bush in Jordan.

Annan says Iraq is close to a civil war - Yahoo! News

IS ANYONE TIRED OF THE WORDS CIVIL WAR!!!!!!!

I AM

Dinar-Excited

What they should be calling all the killing instead of a civil war is

ETHIC CLEANSING



Arkie.

I was just tooling around with another translator regarding this statement...

Report : Welcome again Dear viewers, Mr. Minister, the subject of recent talk is the value of the Iraqi dinar against the dollar. It seems that the state insists, or preserve the value of the Iraqi dinar 148 against the dollar but this offset by a significant increase in prices, spending and Asaaaralmwad food and fuel prices How can the government help the Iraqi citizens to these increases?

Zubaidi : this issue split the two prices and the financial aspect and talk about the monetary side. Monetary value of the Iraqi dinar must revert to the previous level, or at least to acceptable levels as it is in the Iraqi neighboring states.


And I got this translation...

The deposit : a worthy by you once again our noble viewers, the His Excellency Minister is a last topic we speak by it the Iraqi dinar and its value in front of the dollar . It appears that the country insists or 148 in front of the dollar preserves the Iraqi dinar value but this faces it a big increase is in the prices and the spending the nutritional Wasaralmoua food and fuel prices how does on the government the aid of the Iraqi citizen in these increases is possible ؟

Al Zobaidi : this topic is in two parts the prices part and this a financial side and speak about the cash side . The money value for the Iraqi dinar should return to previous its time or at least to acceptable levels as he is in the Iraq's neighbors .


Does using the phrase 148 in front of the dollar as opposed 148 against the dollar change anything in any way?

Just curious.

Cheers!
DayDream