Thread: Archive News - Iraqi Dinar Think Tank - 22/06/2010 - 04/10/2010

Oil Expert calls for the Kurds to reject the agreement oil between Baghdad and Ankara

The Iraqi expert in the field of oil and gas, on Thursday, about the need to reflect the Kurds for their rejection of the Convention which was signed by Iraqi Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani with of Energy Turkish Taner Yildiz Ankara, adding that the Maystahedv the Kurdistan region, Was described as a member of the Kurdish delegation negotiating the Convention Batabieip.

The deputy chairman of the Commission on oil and gas in the previous session of the Iraqi Council of Representatives Bayazid Hassan, a Kurdish news agency (Rn) announced today that he "signed the Convention on the export of Kirkuk crude through the Turkish territory in 1973," adding, "but the validity of the Convention may run out, and this is what called To extend the duration of a few days ago through the signing of an agreement between the Iraqi Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani Wizeraltaqp Turkish Taner Yildiz," .. "noting that" the Convention on the extension of a point not to allow the export of Iraqi oil and gas abroad through the Turkish territory without the consent of the Federal Government of Iraq, And thus targeting the Kurdistan region."

Said Hassan, who was re-elected to the parliamentary session of the new Iraqi that "worrying is that the Iraqi Council of Representatives is not active now raised the issue under the dome, however, should not be tolerated on the agreement signed by Iraqi Oil Minister with his Turkish counterpart," .. called "lists Kurdistan to express worried by and alarm the President of the Iraqi government, the outgoing Nuri al-Maliki."

He added that "time a favorable now to talk about that the Convention", ... pointing out that "each party Iraqi needs to be Kurds, especially since the Iraqi government forthcoming has not yet been."

The Convention, which provides for the extension of the export of Iraqi oil to the outside through the territory of Turkey for another 15 years, prohibits the export of Iraqi oil and gas abroad through the Turkish territory without obtaining the approval of Baghdad, a move resented by the street of Kurdistan and in particular with regard to the export gas Kurdistan region to Europe Through the Nabucco in 2014.

Increased Hassan said that "This is just pressure exercised against the Kurds," adding that "there are among the Arabs of Iraq who refuse the federal system, while article 112 of the Constitution of Iraq indicate that the provinces and territories the oil-producing work in conjunction with the federal government and go oil revenues it To be re-distributed," adding, "but this section of the Arabs rejected it and wants to focus the authorities all in Baghdad."

Relations between the KRG and the Iraqi Oil Ministry ongoing tensions over the past four years, where he was believes that Iraqi Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani raises problems about his ministry, the as long as described the region Iraqi oil policy as "failed".

And continued good that "if the Iraqi Parliament approved the Law on oil and gas, will be resolved most of the current problems, because the law defines the powers of the center and the regions and oil-producing provinces, and demonstrates how the contract and its mechanisms."

But a member of the Kurdish delegation negotiator Dara Mohammed believes that "it is natural that the oil is exported with the consent of the Iraqi government was approved by the Kurdistan Regional Government not to sell oil without the knowledge of Baghdad, as part of the oil revenues from the Kurdistan region, which is estimated one hundred thousand barrels per day goes to the treasury of Iraq Central will be attached to the budget for Iraq in 2011."

The Kurdistan officially for the first time Ptsidiralnaft abroad in the first of June 2009 through the pipeline for Iraqi oil.

http://www.aknews.com/ar/aknews/2/183360/

Redenomination an unlikely priority for the CBI
http://www.iraq-businessnews.com/201...y-for-the-cbi/
Earlier this month it was reported that the Central Bank of Iraq (CBI) might redenominate the Iraqi dinar after the new government is formed, exchanging one new dinar for 1,000 old. (For more on this story, see http://www.iraq-businessnews.com/201...m-iraqi-dinar/.) While such a redenomination would obviously help to simplify transactions and record keeping, it is not clear that these benefits would be sufficient to justify the costs, both to the government and the economy as a whole, of switching to a new currency.
It’s not even true that all transactions would be simplified. Consider the ISX, for example, where stocks have a ID 1 par value and most of the share prices tend to be in the ID 1 – 30 range. While the redenomination is usually presented as a matter of “knocking off three zeros,” in the case of a name like BCOI, which last traded at ID 1.38, you’d actually be “tacking on” three zeros as the price in the new currency would be 0.00138. Would the companies then have to consolidate their shares, replacing every 1,000 old shares with 1 new one?
In any event, it’s not really clear why the CBI would choose to redenominate the dinar at this time. Historically, redenomination has typically been done either as part of “heterodox” inflation-fighting programs or, more rarely, as a way of expropriating wealth. (Heterodox programs are designed to lower the public’s inflation expectations, mainly through administrative measures such as wage/price controls.) For example, episodes of hyperinflation led to the introduction of the Argentine peso, which replaced the austral at a rate of 1:10,000 in December, 1991 and the Brazilian real, which replaced the cruzeiro real at a rate of 1:2,750 in July, 1994. More recently, North Korea replaced existing won notes with new ones at a rate of 1:100 last November, capping exchanges at W 100,000 per family (about US$ 40 at black-market rates), with the evident intent of wiping out free-market traders.
With Iraqi inflation now in the low single digits and, as far as we know, the government not out to expropriate anyone’s cash holdings, it’s hard to see why redenomination would be a priority. And indeed the disadvantages of having three extra zeros to deal with aren’t all that clear either. Think of the South Korean won, which at 1,150 to one US dollar is worth about ID 1.03. Does anyone really think there would be big benefits to the Korean economy from “knocking off” three zeros from the currency?

China's emergence as the world's top energy consumer - and the likelihood of it keeping that status - has immense implications for the future of great-power politics and of the planet. Washington is watching with anxiety. - Michael T Klare (Sep 20, '10)
China: Energy superpower
By Michael T Klare
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_.../LI21Dj06.html

If you want to know which way the global wind is blowing (or the sun shining or the coal burning), watch China. That's the news for our energy future and for the future of great-power politics on planet Earth. Washington is already watching - with anxiety.

Rarely has a simple press interview said more about the global power shifts taking place in our world. On July 20, the chief economist of the International Energy Agency (IEA), Fatih Birol, told the Wall Street Journal that China had overtaken the United States to become the world's number one energy consumer. One can read this development in many ways: as evidence of China's continuing industrial prowess, of the lingering recession in the United States, of the growing popularity of automobiles in China, even of America's superior energy efficiency as compared to that of China. All of these observations are valid, but all miss the main point: by becoming the world's leading player in the global energy market, China will significantly determine not only the prices we will be paying for critical fuels but also the type of energy systems we will come to rely on.

More importantly, China's decisions on energy preferences will largely determine whether China and the United States can avoid becoming embroiled in a global struggle over imported oil and whether the world will escape catastrophic climate change.

How to rise to global preeminence
You can't really appreciate the significance of China's new-found energy prominence if you don't first grasp the role of energy in America's rise to global preeminence.

That the northeastern region of the young United States was richly endowed with waterpower and coal deposits was critical to the country's early industrialization as well as to the North's eventual victory in the Civil War. It was the discovery of oil in western Pennsylvania in 1859, however, that would turn the US into the decisive actor on the global stage. Oil extraction and exports fueled American prosperity in the early twentieth century - a time when the country was the planet's leading producer - while nurturing the rise of its giant corporations.

It should never be forgotten that the world's first great transnational corporation - John D Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company - was founded on the exploitation and export of American petroleum. Anti-trust legislation would break up Standard Oil in 1911, but two of its largest descendants, Standard Oil of New York and Standard Oil of New Jersey, were later fused into what is now the world's wealthiest publicly traded enterprise, ExxonMobil. Another descendant, Standard Oil of California, became Chevron - today, the third-richest American corporation.

Oil also played a key role in the rise of the United States as the world's preeminent military power. This country supplied most of the oil consumed by Allied forces in both World War I and World War II. Among the great powers of the time, the US alone was self-sufficient in oil, which meant it could deploy massive armies to Europe and Asia and overpower the well-equipped (but oil-starved) German and Japanese militaries. Few realize this today, but for the architects of America's victory in World War II, including president Franklin D Roosevelt, it was the nation's superior endowment of petroleum, not the atom bomb, that proved decisive.

Having created an economy and military establishment based on oil, American leaders were compelled to employ ever-more costly and desperate measures to ensure that both always had an adequate supply of energy. After World War II, with domestic reserves already beginning to shrink, a succession of presidents fashioned a global strategy based on ensuring American access to overseas petroleum.

As a start, Saudi Arabia and the other Persian Gulf kingdoms were chosen to serve as overseas "filling stations" for US refiners and military forces. American oil companies, especially the descendants of Standard Oil, were aided and abetted in establishing a major presence in these countries. To a considerable extent, in fact, the great postwar strategic pronouncements - the Truman Doctrine, the Eisenhower Doctrine, the Nixon Doctrine, and especially the Carter Doctrine - were all tied to the protection of these "filling stations".

Today, too, oil plays a critical role in Washington's global plans and actions. The Department of State, for example, still maintains an elaborate, costly, and deeply entrenched military capability in the Persian Gulf to ensure the "safety" and "security" of oil exports from the region. It has also extended its military reach to such key oil-producing regions as the Caspian Sea basin and western Africa. The need to retain friendly ties and military relationships with key suppliers like Kuwait, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia continues to dominate US foreign policy. Similarly, in a warming world, a growing American interest in the melting Arctic is being propelled by a desire to exploit the polar region's untapped hydrocarbon reserves.

Planet coal?
The fact that China has now overtaken the United States as the world's leading energy consumer is bound to radically alter its global policies, just as energy predominance once did America's. No doubt this will, in turn, alter the course of Sino-American relations, not to speak of world affairs. With the American experience in mind, what can we expect from China?

As a start, no one reading newspaper business pages could have any doubt that Chinese leaders view energy as a - possibly the - major concern of the country and have been devoting substantial resources and planning to the procurement of adequate future supplies. In addressing this task, those leaders face two fundamental challenges: securing sufficient energy to meet ever-rising demand and deciding which fuels to rely on in satisfying these requirements. How China responds to these challenges will have striking implications on the global stage.

According to the most recent projections from the US Department of Energy (DoE), Chinese energy consumption will grow by 133% between 2007 and 2035 - from, that is, 78 quadrillion to 182 quadrillion British thermal units (BTUs). Think about it this way: the 104 quadrillion BTUs that China will somehow have to add to its energy supply over the next quarter-century equals the total energy consumption of Europe and the Middle East in 2007. Finding and funneling so much oil, natural gas, and other fuels to China is undoubtedly going to be the single greatest economic and industrial challenge facing Beijing - and in that challenge lays the possibility of real friction and conflict.

Although most of the country's energy funds are still expended domestically, what it spends on imported fuels (oil, coal, natural gas, and uranium) and energy equipment (oil refineries, power plants, and nuclear reactors) will significantly determine the global price of these items - a role that, until now, has been largely filled by the United States. More important, however, will be the decisions China makes about the types of energy it will come to rely on.

If Chinese leaders were to follow their natural inclinations, they would undoubtedly avoid relying on imported fuels altogether, given how vulnerable foreign-energy dependence can make a country to overseas supply disruptions or, in China's case, a possible US naval blockade (in the event, say, of a prolonged conflict over Taiwan). Li Junfeng, a senior Chinese energy official, was recently quoted as saying, "Energy supply should be where you can plant your foot on it" - that is, from domestic sources.

China does possess one kind of fuel in abundance: coal. According to the most recent DoE projections, coal will make up an estimated 62% of China's net energy supply in 2035, only slightly less than at present. A heavy reliance on coal, however, will exacerbate the country's environmental problems, dragging down its economy as health-care costs mount. In addition, thanks to coal, China is now the world's leading emitter of climate-altering carbon dioxide. According to the DoE, China's share of global carbon-dioxide emissions will jump from 19.6% in 2005, when it barely trailed the US at 21.1%, to 31.4% in 2035, when it will tower over all other countries in net emissions.

As long as Beijing refuses to significantly reduce its reliance on coal, ignore its rhetoric on global-warming negotiations. It simply won't be able to take truly meaningful steps to address climate change. In this way, too, it will alter the face of the planet.

Recently, the country's leaders seem to have become far more sensitive to the risks of excessive reliance on coal. Massive emphasis is now being placed on the development of renewable energy systems, especially wind and solar power. Already, China has become the world's leading producer of wind turbines and solar panels, and has already begun exporting its technology to the United States. (Some economists and labor unions, in fact, claim that China is unfairly subsidizing its renewable-energy exports in violation of World Trade Organization rules.)

China's growing emphasis on renewable energy would be good news if it resulted in substantial reductions in coal use. At the same time, the country's drive to excel at these techniques could push it into the forefront of a technological revolution, just as early American dominance of petroleum technology propelled it to the front ranks of world powers in the twentieth century. If the United States fails to keep pace, it could find the pace of its decline as a world power quickening.

Whose Saudis are they?
China's thirst for added energy could also lead quickly enough to friction and conflict with the United States, especially in the global competition for increasingly scarce supplies of imported petroleum. As its energy use ramps ever upward, China is using more oil, which can only lead to greater political economic, political, and someday possibly even military involvement in the oil-producing regions - areas long viewed in Washington as constituting America's private offshore energy preserves.

As recently as 1995, China consumed only about 3.4 million barrels of oil per day - one-fifth the amount used by the United States, the world's top consumer, and two-thirds of the amount burned by Japan, then number two. Since China pumped 2.9 million barrels per day from its domestic fields that year, its import burden was a mere 500,000 barrels per day at a time when the US imported 9.4 million barrels and Japan 5.3 million barrels.

By 2009, China was in the number-two spot at 8.6 million barrels per day, which still fell far below America's 18.7 million barrels. At 3.8 million barrels per day, however, domestic production wasn't keeping pace - the very problem the US had faced in the Cold War era. China was already importing 4.8 million barrels per day, far more than Japan (which had actually reduced its reliance on oil) and nearly half as much as the United States. In the decades to come, these numbers are guaranteed only to get worse.

According to the DoE, China will overtake the US as the world's leading oil importer, at an estimated 10.6 million barrels per day, sometime around 2030. (Some experts believe this shift could occur far sooner.) Whatever the year, China's leaders are already enmeshed in the same power "predicament" long faced by their American counterparts, dependent as they are on a vital substance that can be acquired only from a handful of unreliable producers in areas of chronic crisis and conflict.

At present, China obtains most of its imported oil from Saudi Arabia, Iran, Angola, Oman, Sudan, Kuwait, Russia, Kazakhstan, Libya, and Venezuela. Eager to ensure the reliability of the oil flow from these countries, Beijing has established close ties with their leaders, in some cases providing them with significant economic and military assistance. This is exactly the path once taken by Washington - and with some of the same countries.

China's state-controlled energy firms have also forged "strategic partnerships" with counterpart enterprises in these countries and in some cases acquired the right to develop major oil deposits as well. Especially striking has been the way Beijing has sought to undercut US influence in Saudi Arabia and with other crucial Persian Gulf oil producers.

In 2009, China for the first time imported more Saudi oil than the US, a geopolitical shift of great significance given the history of US-Saudi relations. Although not competing with Washington when it comes to military aid, Beijing has been dispatching its top leaders to woo Riyadh, promising to support Saudi aspirations without employing the human rights or pro-democracy rhetoric usually associated with American foreign policy.

Much of this should sound exceedingly familiar. After all, the United States once wooed the Saudis in a similar way when Washington first began viewing the kingdom as its overseas filling station and turned it into an unofficial military protectorate. In 1945, while World War II still raged, president Roosevelt made a special trip to meet with King Abdul Aziz of Saudi Arabia and establish a protection-for-oil arrangement that persists to this day. Not surprisingly, American leaders don't see (or care to recognize) the analogy; instead, top officials look askance at the way China is poaching on US turf in Saudi Arabia and other petro-states, portraying such moves as antagonistic.

As China's reliance on these overseas suppliers grows, it is likely to bolster its ties with their leaders, producing further strains in the international political environment. Already, Beijing's reluctance to jeopardize its vital energy links with Iran has frustrated US efforts to impose tough new economic sanctions on that country as a way of forcing it to abandon its uranium-enrichment activities.

Likewise, China's recent loan of $20 billion to the Venezuelan oil industry has boosted the status of President Hugo Chavez at a time when his domestic popularity, and so his ability to counter US policies, is slipping. The Chinese have also retained friendly ties with President Omar Hassan Ahmad al-Bashir of Sudan, despite US efforts to paint him as an international pariah because of his alleged role in overseeing the massacres in Darfur.

Arms-for-oil diplomacy on a dangerous planet
Already, China's efforts to bolster its ties with its foreign-oil providers have produced geopolitical friction with the United States. There is a risk of far more serious Sino-American conflict as we enter the "tough oil" era and the world supply of easily accessible petroleum rapidly shrinks.

According to the DoE, the global supply of oil and other petroleum liquids in 2035 will be 110.6 million barrels per day - precisely enough to meet anticipated world demand at that time. Many oil geologists believe, however, that global oil output will reach a peak level of output well below 100 million barrels per day by 2015 and begin declining after that. In addition, the oil that remains will increasingly be found in difficult places to reach or in highly unstable regions. If these predictions prove accurate, the United States and China - the world's two leading oil importers - could become trapped in a zero-sum great-power contest for access to diminishing supplies of exportable petroleum.

What will happen under these circumstances is, of course, impossible to predict, especially since the potential for conflict abounds. If both countries continue on their current path - arming favored suppliers in a desperate bid to secure long-term advantage - the heavily armed petro-states may also become ever more fearful of, or covetous of, their (equally well-equipped) neighbors.

With both the US and China deploying growing numbers of military advisers and instructors to such countries, the stage could be set for mutual involvement in local wars and border conflicts. Neither Beijing nor Washington may seek such involvement, but the logic of arms-for-oil diplomacy makes this an unavoidable risk.

It is not hard, then, to picture a future moment when the United States and China are locked in a global struggle over the world's remaining supplies of oil. Indeed, many in official Washington believe that such a collision is nearly inevitable. "China's near-term focus on preparing for contingencies in the Taiwan Strait ... is an important driver of its [military] modernization," the Department of Defense noted in the 2008 edition of its annual report, "The Military Power of the People's Republic of China". "However, analysis of China's military acquisitions and strategic thinking suggests Beijing is also developing capabilities for use in other contingencies, such as a conflict over resources ... "

Conflict over planetary oil reserves is not, however, the only path that China's new energy status could open. It is possible to imagine a future in which China and the United States cooperate in pursuing oil alternatives that would obviate the need to funnel massive sums into naval and military arms races. President Barack Obama and his Chinese counterpart, Hu Jintao, seemed to glimpse such a possibility when they agreed last November, during an economic summit in Beijing, to collaborate in the development of alternative fuels and transportation systems.

At this point, only one thing is clear: the greater China's reliance on imported petroleum, the greater the risk of friction and conflict with the United States, which relies on the same increasingly problematic suppliers of energy. The greater its reliance on coal, the less comfortable our planet will become. The greater its emphasis on alternative fuels, the more likely it may make the 21st century China's domain. At this point, how China will apportion its energy needs among the various candidate fuels remains unknown. Whatever its choices, however, China's energy decisions will shake the world.

Trade Bank of Iraq bridging the gap

But Iraq’s financial framework still has gaps in its structure. Trade Bank of Iraq (TBI) is the country’s international bank dedicated to play a role in bridging these gaps and linking Iraqi businesses and international institutions to their mutual advantage.
The TBI itself embodies the transformation in Iraq’s fortunes. It has been operating for seven years.

While this is a short period in the banking industry timeline, TBI’s achievements match those of a longer time scale. As a wholly state-owned bank it came into being with the crucial task of acting as the trade finance bank for the government to meet the immediate need for vital humanitarian commodities as well as essential infrastructure requirements of a country emerging from successive wars.

Today, only seven years later, it has a track record of success as an Iraqi bank that has matured into a successful and resilient international enterprise. Under its Chairman and President, Hussein Al-Uzri, TBI has grown and developed so to offer comprehensive banking services for businesses and individuals. It is the leading Iraqi model of modern banking. It sees its purpose as to be a catalyst to regenerate the national economy, strengthen the banking sector and be a force for modernization. It is developing a comprehensive range of banking services to enable Iraq and its expanding businesses to deal with their global partners efficiently and on equal terms.

Now its role is to facilitate increasingly sophisticated relationships between Iraqi businesses and international partners. For example, a major international beneficiary has been General Electric, and its domestic co-beneficiary has been the energy infrastructure business. JP Morgan partnered the Trade Bank of Iraq in a complex deal on a tight schedule to agree a $3 billion letter of credit for the purchase of power equipment for 7,000MW of multifuel gas turbines from General Electric.

In the past seven years, TBI has established relationships with a formidable network of global banks of high reputation. It works in partnership with 125 prime banks in 65 cities in 39 countries, more than any other bank in the Middle East.

Such relationships have made it possible for TBI to expedite the introduction of new services to the banking industry in Iraq. It has also concluded agreements with many export credit agencies, making TBI a valued partner for cross border trade with Iraq. There has been a flow of investment by TBI into state-of-the-art online, mobile and bank card systems. As a result, Iraq is well positioned to advance from a traditional cash economy to a future-oriented electronic banking system. This will have minimal reliance on conventional cheque books and paper-based banking.

The global banking crisis tested TBI’s robustness – and it emerged strong and confident. The bank’s latest efficiency ratios and key performance indicators have recorded higher levels. Moreover, the qualitative goals contained in its business plan have been achieved. Overall, for TBI business accelerated encouragingly during the global crisis, as did its customer confidence. Total deposits last year climbed to US$ 11.4 billion, an increase over the year of more than a third. Total assets reached around US$13 billion. Growth took place in almost every area of the operation, and especially in its credit functions.

Business turnover rose by more than 40 % to just short of US$14 billion. Savings deposits registered a growth of more than 92% while loans and advances increased by more than 78%. The percentage of bad debt provisions to gross credit declined by 3.59% from 5.95% in the previous year.

As a new player in the global banking market, Trade Bank of Iraq has established a major presence in a remarkably short time. In 2009 the bank issued 2,005 letters of credit while the issuance of letters of guarantee rose by more than 41%.

TBI has invested significantly in education and training in order to ensure a steady supply of technically competent staff to meet the expansion in business, both for new ATM and credit card services and for technology-intensive activities like data centres and corporate networks. Investment in technology is turning into reality the ambition of providing a “one stop shop” for financial services. Customers can now access their accounts from any branch, anywhere, no matter where they have physically opened their accounts.

The bank prides itself on being an equal opportunities employer and more than half of its staff are women. It focuses strongly too on the customer. Its customer relationship management operation is designed to make the right offer to the right client at the right time via the right channel. Looking ahead, TBI is making preparations for the launch of its Investment Banking Division, so it can play a part in restructuring companies and entire industrial sectors. This division will work in partnership with the proposed Development Fund to identify and invest in viable new projects. Leading international investment banks will be invited to join in.

TBI benefits from being located in one of the world’s great energy centres. Iraq’s recent contracts with major oil companies have the potential to expand oil revenues at a very satisfying pace. But Iraq will have to upgrade its refinery and export infrastructure in order to enable these deals to reach their full potential.

That is why TBI is so central to the country’s economic emergence. It is greatly helped by the Government’s determined pursuit of foreign investment to accelerate Iraq’s economic growth. Sensibly, the Government has shown itself ready to listen to banks and businesses and amend its rules to facilitate growth. Thus it has amended the National Investment Law, encouraged many international trade and investment events and also facilitated private participation in joint ventures with state-owned enterprises. It has also been encouraging greater local participation and cutting bureaucratic restraints.

As a result of activities such as these, economic growth is expected to further strengthen in 2010-2011 as foreign direct investment picks up, especially in a range of oil and infrastructure projects. Rising consumer demand is also likely to boost the wholesale and retail trades. The Government’s capital budget in 2010 is much larger than in 2009.

Consumer price inflation has stayed low since early 2008, as the appreciation of the dinar – overseen by the Central Bank - plus an improvement in the supply of basic items and, until recently, falling global commodity prices lowered import costs and kept down inflationary expectations. The Central Bank is also seeking to manage liquidity effectively through the introduction of an interbank market.

Entrepreneurial institutions such as the Trade Bank of Iraq are bringing new energy to a fast emerging market. On the track record so far of the New Iraq, and the historical record of countries like Germany, South Korea and Japan, Iraq’s best days lie ahead. The opportunities for foreign direct investors and for international banks seeking profitable correspondent relationships are too good to miss

http://www.tradefinancemagazine.com/...d-finance.html

Revival of the New Iraq is the best kept secret in world finance

The entire world loves a stereotype, even when it is based on an assumption that is no longer true. When you watch television news or open the pages of a newspaper, the stereotype they like to show of Iraq is of a country still at war.

The reality is very different and much more hopeful. For a whole lot of reasons – not least its priceless oil riches - Iraq is becoming the world’s fastest emerging economy. Banks and businesses that have already made this discovery are well on the way to highly profitable deals and investments and trades.

Others are still allowing their perceptions to lag behind reality. They risk missing business opportunities by holding on to assumptions that were true once but are true no longer.

Anyone with a sense of history should in fact be surprised if Iraq continued to be disabled by war. All they have to do to get a reality check is to remember what happened to Japan, South Korea, Germany and indeed Vietnam.

All of those countries were devastated by terrible wars. Yet all recovered, grew and became the magnets they are today for investment and trade. None of them is any longer defined by the violence that once scarred their land. Iraq is now well advanced on the same voyage of recovery.

In fact, Iraq is much more favourably placed than any of them at a similar post-war stage. Yet, so far, Iraq’s revival is arguably the best kept secret in world finance.
Of course violence has not ceased altogether. But it is becoming more and more localised, as more and more cities and towns and rural areas re-establish normal life and a peaceful day to day existence. Indeed the level of violence in some cities in the Western world is now greater than the level in Iraq as a whole.

Not that the Iraqi authorities are ready to relax. They know there is still a long way to go before total normality is achieved. But the evidence of progress is all around – in the form of new power stations, new bank branches and new businesses, private as well as public.

One of the invaluable foundations of the recovery is the oil sector. This is, naturally, where many of the biggest new projects are to be found. The successful oil licensing agreements are already having a clear multiplier effect on the private sector as well as on government finances. The bidding round for gas field development contracts is due soon and will provide a similar boost.

All this is good news, especially for the world’s oil companies and oil support services. But the beneficial impact will spread much wider than just the energy sector. For, like most other oil and gas economies in the Middle East, Iraq is no longer content simply to export oil and spend the money on the import of goods and services.

The MENA region has changed so that downstreaming, infrastructure and diversification are becoming the rule rather than the exception. More than most of its neighbours, the New Iraq is emerging as an economy sparkling with opportunity.

Iraq’s traditional emphasis on education and on enterprise is serving it well. Big developments are coming on stream in the private sector as well as in the public sector. As an illustration, within two or three years, more power plants will be in the private sector than in the state sector. Inevitably, in an energy-hungry world, oil is the big magnet for international organisations. But Iraq is prudently diversifying into a growing number of other sectors. They include agriculture, minerals, infrastructure, construction and housing, health, telecoms – and even tourism, as more regions become peaceful and welcoming. Increasingly, Iraqi’s economic resurgence is broadly rather than narrowly based and less and less dependent on a single-sector cycle.

A point of difference with some other economies in the region is that Iraq is consciously developing a mixed economy in which the public sector and the private sector can each grow and can strengthen each other. What does all this mean for international banks and businesses? It means that there are big projects to bid for and big projects to be financed. Project finance is becoming of critical importance. International businesses that grasp this fact now can gain an early mover advantage in what is becoming the world’s fastest emerging economy.

http://www.tradefinancemagazine.com/...d-finance.html

Official: Iraqi Oil Ministry has delayed the gas deal with Shell

Said a senior adviser to the Iraqi government on Monday that the oil ministry has delayed a deal billions of dollars in with Shell and Mitsubishi of Japan to capture and gas investment , which being flared is currently in the southern oil fields because of issues legal relating to the joint venture ...

Iraq's cabinet agreed in June to invest to be , worth $ 12 billion, the government owns a 51 percent stake to the imprisonment of associated natural gas produced in oil fields in southern Iraq near Basra, but he was now waiting to return the oil ministry to submit a draft agreement for approval.

Said Thamer Ghadhban, a senior adviser to Prime Minister Nuri al- Maliki told reporters at a conference in Istanbul that the deal may see further delay if was unable to the ministry re- draft the agreement before the formation of the new government.

He added, "It's up to the Minister of Oil to enter into this Agreement and they are now amending the draft."

And burn Iraq billion cubic feet of gas per day in oil fields which energy need to generate electricity in a country suffering from disruption a chronic in electricity supply.

It has been agreed for the first time on the deal Shell in 2008. said Ghadhban that the Ministry of Oil and Shell discussing are now amendments to the final draft to address a legal loophole to prevent the Ministry's role in the formation of the joint venture.

"We adjust the draft in order to be signed between Shell and the South Gas Company (government ), while to ensure the ministry other obligations such as supply of raw gas operations upstream."

He said some members of the government they would prefer the contract was awarded through a competitive process.

Was formed after a new government in Iraq after six months of the elections that took place in March, was inconclusive, creating a political vacuum.

He angered the "If the minister ( the contract of the Council of Ministers) before forming a new government, there is no doubt in my mind that the Council of Ministers will approve it."

"As if it were delayed and parliament has to nominate a prime minister, there will be a delay."

Said Mounir Bouaziz, Vice President of Shell's gas and electricity during the conference that the company was waiting for to end the ministry of the details of the contract, adding that the postponement is a setback for the project at a time rising when oil production.

"He was expected to be signed this contract for over a year so it will be the task of catching up with the oil sector very difficult."

and signed Iraq several deals with international oil companies that will enhance production capacity to 12 million barrels per day during the seven years from 2.5 million barrels per day currently.

Bouaziz said that the contracts awarded by the government to oil companies to develop fields southern in the city of Basra, could produce enough of the associated gas to generate 30 gigawatts of electricity, adding that the ethane extracted during the liquefaction of natural gas may also help in establishing industry a petrochemical in Iraq.

http://www.oil.iraqiamedia.com/index...atest&Itemid=1

financial control Discuss the mechanism to recover Iraqi funds with the Assistant Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction

Search President of the Office of Financial Supervision, Dr. Abdul Basit newborn with the aid of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, Mr. Ginger Cruz, the fate of Iraqi money spent by U.S. agencies during the past seven years and contained in the latest report issued by the Office of Inspector General and the money the Development Fund for Iraq spent by agencies above.

A statement by the Supreme Audit Agency has received the independent press (Iba) a copy of which had been research also in Iraq's request to host the Council of the International Advisory and Monitoring Board at its next meeting on 14-15 of next month for each of the Inspector General and the U.S. related to the disposition of money in Iraq.

The statement added, it was agreed that a joint mechanism in the future to recover the money.

This has been the Court of Audit the issued a report on audit Iraqi money spent by U.S. agencies and had been informed authorities U.S. of relationship the have been published on the website of the Cabinet.

http://www.ipairaq.com/index.php?nam...onomy&id=30692

Adnan al-Sarraj : National Alliance seeks extension, for another five days to choose a candidate as prime minister

A member of a coalition of state law Adnan OS that the National Alliance, which includes a coalition of law and the Iraqi National Congress, is preparing to extend the deadline for selecting a candidate to head the next government, for five days, which ended without coalition can to resolve his command to choose one from among the candidates, Adel Abdul Mehdi Nouri al- Maliki.

He added OS that the National Alliance needs more time to choose one candidate and the resolution of a file head of government as required in accordance with the standards that have been developed in this context with pointed out that the most important criteria to be adopted is the candidate's ability to engage the rest of the components of the mass, and blocks allied Political and economic decisions in the country, as well as other conditions will be a dividing line in determining the nominee.

He pointed to the existence of directions to extend the deadline for the completion of consultations on Achtiaralamrah because of the completion of the consultations in this regard by the components of the alliance.

http://www.nakhelnews.com/pages/news.php?nid=2384

Kuwaiti Foreign Minister : Iraq's new government commitment to implement international resolutions

Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammad al-Sabah and a match in views on Iraq needs to form a government as soon as possible.

According to the Kuwait News Agency (KUNA) that the morning talks with his British counterpart William Hague on the sidelines of the General Assembly of the UN the Iraqi file, which he said had identical views on it.

He stressed the morning that he must be the new Iraqi government a message reassures and reaffirms its commitment to implement the resolutions of international legitimacy, he said, adding that we look at some of the statements and attitudes that come from different parties inside Iraq with some concern when it comes to the extent of Iraq's commitment to the implementation of international resolutions, but what concerns us in Ultimately is the decision of the Iraqi government official.

In regard to the next phase and the role of the Security Council to consider and review the extent of Iraq's commitment to these decisions, it was reported the morning that he must be the new Iraqi government to confirm really is not in word only, and on the ground of respect for international resolutions and its commitment to its implementation.

http://www.ipairaq.com/index.php?nam...itics&id=30711

Iraq: US should help break government deadlock

Iraq's foreign minister urged the United States on Monday to take a more active role in breaking the deadlock over formation of a new government, saying the nearly seven-month election stalemate has not only left the country in limbo but hurt its economy.

Hoshyar Zebari said in an interview with The Associated Press that since the pullout of U.S. combat forces at the end of August, Iraqi security forces have proved that they are taking responsibility and there hasn't been a security vacuum — but he said the failure to form a government is creating serious problems.

"Lack of efforts of government formation has been very negative on all aspects of life," he said. "Everybody is holding back to see whether there would be a government, whether this political, security stability can last and continue."

A Sunni-backed coalition led by ex-Prime Minister Ayad Allawi narrowly defeated Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's Shiite-dominated bloc in March elections, but political bosses have been deadlocked over forming a new government. The Iraqi public grown increasingly frustrated, and Iraqi and U.S. officials fear that insurgents are trying to exploit the political vacuum in an attempt to re-ignite sectarian tensions.

Zebari said the Obama administration hasn't taken "an active or pro-active engaging role" because it believes the formation of the government should be done by the Iraqis themselves.

"I personally think strongly that they have a role — to encourage, to urge, to facilitate the Iraqis leaders to meet, to take the process further," he said.

Zebari said there has been "an important positive result" of the delay in forming a government.

It shows "that the Iraqi leaders, that the new Iraq, will not budge to foreign pressures, not to Iran, not to the United States, not to Arab countries, not to Turkey," he said.

"They want to decide their own future, to choose their own government, their own leaders by themselves. But their way — it has taken us too long."

That's why the United States should become more actively engaged to help break the deadlock, Zebari said.

The Iraqi minister blamed the impasse on a fight over personalities — essentially who will be prime minister — not "the substance of government."

"Unfortunately ... there has been a case of entrenchment, of insistence, and unwillingness to compromise or to reach middle ground solutions, or to make concessions," he said.

Zebari, who is returning to Baghdad on Friday after more than a week of meetings around the United Nations General Assembly, voiced confidence in his country's progress in spite of the election stalemate and all that the country has suffered over the last three decades of war, sanctions, invasion and internal divisions.

He noted that the country has survived with its borders intact, and that in the end it avoided the perils of breakup or open civil war.

"Iraq has passed the most dangerous period of its history," he said. "Despite all the trauma and pain, ...we have not lost hope in the future of this country." He added that now Iraq "needs a period — a big period — of stability to rise up and become the powerhouse of the Middle East. And it is the soul of the Middle East."

One other challenge awaiting the new government, he said, is to win parliamentary approval for $400 million in payments to settle claims by U.S. citizens for damages from the former government of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, who was ousted in the 2003 U.S. invasion and later captured by the United States and executed by Iraq's authorities.

Iraq has been pressing for the U.N. Security Council to cancel sanctions and more than 70 resolutions adopted after the 1990 invasion of Kuwait under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter. In August, the council called on Iraq to solve the outstanding issues related to Kuwait, oil-for-food program contracts, and disarmament, so those sanctions can finally be removed.

Settling the U.S. claims "is very important for us," said Zebari, to get free of the limits that the United Nations still puts on Iraq.

By paying the outstanding claims to U.S. citizens, he said, Iraq would also be indemnified against other possible claims against it and therefore be able to operate internationally without fear of court cases attempting to seize its assets.

"Unless we settle this, there will be many, many other legal claims against our money and our assets here in the United States by different law firms, by different individuals and by different companies. That is why the settlement that we have is the key, really, to close that."

Zebari congratulated Iraqi security forces, who as of last month are now taking the lead in maintaining safety across the country, even though the United States still has some 50,000 troops in the country to train, advise and provide backup to the Iraqi army and police.

The foreign minister acknowledged that government opponents like Al Qaeda in Iraq and the so-called Islamic State of Iraq are still able to mount sporadic attacks around the country, but on the whole he said that the country is healing and far safer that it was just a few years ago. "The security forces really are stepping up to their responsibility and there hasn't been a vacuum (that) many people anticipated," he said.
Zebari also heralded the fact that Iraq's former isolation within the Arab world is starting to come to an end. "That negative attitude toward Iraq, it has changed," he said.

"Egypt has reopened its embassy. Kuwait has sent an ambassador. UAE, Bahrain, Syria restored relations recently. ... Everybody is waiting actually for the new government to have full diplomatic relations with Iraq because they realize that their absence is not in the best interest of Iraq, or the region, or themselves."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...ocId=D9IGEQAO2