|
[Note this remark: "So long as India, Pakistan and Iran hang together, there is every assurance of energy needs of India and Pakistan being met on the basis of remunerative returns for Iran and affordable price for India and Pakistan."
-- Pakistani Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri
--FTW]
India, Pakistan and Iran defying America on Gas Pipeline?
Tarun Sikhdar
Jun. 14, 2005
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/3157.asp
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
India, Pakistan and Iran all are together planning to go ahead with the Gas Pipe Line connecting Iran with India through Pakistan is spite of American telling all parties not to do so.
According to media sources, Standing up to the US, Pakistan has said it is aware it faces sanctions if it goes ahead with the Iran-India gas pipeline but cannot abandon the project due to the economic benefits it will bring.
Pakistan Foreign Minister Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri told his US counterpart Condoleezza Rice at their meeting last week that his country would earn up to $600 million a year from the pipeline, against the $700 million a year Islamabad receives from Washington.
"Rice, who has publicly opposed the project, reiterated Washington's position that the proposed pipeline, which will be bringing Iranian gas to India through Pakistan, is against US laws," Dawn reported on Monday.
The Iran and Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA) forbids more than $20 million of investment in Iranian oil and gas projects. The violator can be deprived of US economic assistance and may also face sanctions.
During the meeting Friday, Rice is believed to have argued that even if the US administration gave up its opposition to the pipeline, there were powerful groups in the Congress, media and academia that would continue to oppose the project and that this could ultimately impact Washington's relations with Islamabad.
Pakistan is hoping India will partner the project. At a meeting here with visiting Indian Petroleum Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar, President Pervez Musharraf said Islamabad would guarantee the security of the pipeline through this country and that he would like work on it to begin next year.
The pipeline will also create a major industrial infrastructure in Pakistan and generate new jobs, Kasuri argued.
He also pointed out that the pipeline will have a major political impact on South Asia and will add a huge economic incentive to the ongoing India-Pakistan peace process.
Rice is believed to have urged Kasuri to look at other options like a pipeline from Qatar or from Turkmenistan.
Kasuri replied that bringing gas from Qatar would double the costs, while reserves in Turkmenistan are still unproven.
"Wary of the obvious consequences of annoying America, Pakistan is trying to convince the Americans that it will not be violating any US law by agreeing to build the Iranian gas pipeline," Dawn said.
"Pakistanis say that they will not make any investment in Iran's oil infrastructure that ILSA forbids. The Iranian side of the project will be financed entirely by Iran and a group of multi-national investors Iran will be required to put together.
"Pakistan's investment into the project will start only after the pipeline reaches Pakistani territory," Dawn said.
World starts getting polarized around energy conflicts
India unfazed by US opposition to the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline
Balaji Reddy
Jun. 16, 2005
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/3178.asp
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
India has to take care of its energy needs. According to India nothing more important for India than the reliable source of energy. India, Pakistan and Iran agree on the Gas Pipeline. But US has shown increasing irritation over the Pipeline.
According to media sources, India yesterday said it was "unfazed" by US opposition to the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline, adding it would continue to pursue gas imports from Iran to meet its energy requirements.
"I am unfazed specially because my friend and Cambridge college mate, Pakistani Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri had given a befitting reply (to US opposition) in Washington," Petroleum Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar said here.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is reported to have warned Pakistan of sanctions if it continued to pursue the proposed pipeline project to meet its energy demands.
"So long as India, Pakistan and Iran hang together, there is every assurance of energy needs of India and Pakistan being met on the basis of remunerative returns for Iran and affordable price for India and Pakistan," he said.
Kasuri is reported to have told Rice that Islamabad was pursuing the pipeline as Pakistan would be come an energy deficit country by 2009-10.
Aiyar said India needs 100 million standard cubic metre per day of gas at present and imports from countries in the neighbourhood like Iran were the only economic and sustainable source for meeting the needs of its fast growing economy.
India finalizes a US $20 billion deal to import liquefied natural gas (LNG) from Iran beginning 2009-10
Media Release
Jun. 14, 2005
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/3149.asp
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
India finalised a US $20 billion deal to import liquefied natural gas (LNG) from Iran beginning 2009-10 to meet its growing energy requirements.
The Gas Sales and Purchase Agreement (GSPA) for the import of five million tonnes of LNG per annum at Dahej in Gujarat and Kochi in Kerala beginning second half of 2009-10 was finalised by a consortium of Indian state-run firms and National Iranian Gas Export Company (NIGEC), officials said.
Of the total LNG to be imported, GAIL (India) Ltd will be responsible for marketing 40 per cent, Indian Oil Corp 35 per cent and Bharat Petroleum Corp Ltd the remaining 25 per cent.
For the five million tonnes per annum of LNG (18 million standard cubic metres per day of gas), Iran will charge India 0.065 of Brent crude oil price at the time of loading of each consignment plus a fixed price of US $1.2 per million British thermal unit (mBtu). Price according to this formula would be capped at US $3.215 per mBtu at US $31 a barrel Brent price, officials said.
To this, US $0.30 per mBtu would be added for transporting the gas in its liquefied form in specialised tankers from Phase 12 of the gigantic South Pars gas field and the delivered price of LNG in India would be US $3.50 per mBtu.
The fixed price component (US $1.2 per mBtu) would have an escalation of 2 per cent per year after the second year of the contract delivery.
["Adelanté!" - MCR]
Bolivia's Gas War Moves Inside
By Jean Friedsky,
Jun 15th, 2005
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2005/6/15/16355/7224
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
The images of a returning "normality" in the capital of Bolivia are seductive. Fleets of oversized pick-up trucks filled with thousands of gas cisterns roll out of the Senkata Gas Plant in El Alto, past police guards who stand chatting next to the burned tires, rocks and barbed wire remnants of blockades that had shut down the facility for the past two weeks. The trucks zoom down the cleared Altipista highway that connects El Alto to La Paz towards the eager masses. On residential streets, rusted yellow gas cisterns snake along the pavement while neighbors visit, waiting to refill their supply of liquid cooking gas that had run out the week before. A few blocks away, a gas station owner crosses his arms across his chest, nods and smiles, watching the line of thirsty cars grow as word spreads that he has gotten his shipment of fuel. On the Prado, cars and minibuses chug along past open store fronts and happily shopping tourists, unencumbered by angry protesters or the fog of tear gas. Abel Mamani, President of Fejuve (the El Alto neighborhood organization), shakes hands with the new President, who has vowed to bring about new general elections. Cut to scenes of campesinos clearing away boulders and tree trunks on the roads that connect Bolivia to neighboring Chile and Peru. And, for the mainstream media: fade to black.
These surface images and neat-ending stories of the last five days in Bolivia are misleading because they portray closure where there are only more beginnings. La Paz is calm, market stalls are again overflowing with fresh fruit and recently slaughtered meat and tregua (truce) is the word of the week. But the quiet on the streets is a symptom of the noise that now fills the meeting halls, organizational offices and livings rooms. With a break in the marches, thousands sit analyzing this most recent "battle" and deliberating the future. So, whether its apparent on CNN or not, the Gas War here still continues - it's just gone inside.
This article is therefore a brief analysis of what's happened, what continues and what might follow.
Achievements
As renowned Bolivian activist Oscar Olivera stated in his June 10th communique, the past four weeks were not in vain, even though neither the major demand of nationalization of the gas industry nor of a Constituent Assembly was met. The social movements' ability to mobilize en mass, bring their country to a halt, take down a President and prevent the ascension of dangerous replacement were great achievements that ought to be acknowledged and praised.
In addition, there were other accomplishments in what is now known as the second phase of the Bolivian Gas War. The Bolivian people's demonstration of strength and will is, in and of itself, important. In movements for social change, demonstrations of force are strategically beneficial even when they do not directly yield the realization of the ultimate goal because they serve as warnings to those with the power. The political elite in Bolivia, transnational energy corporations and the United States government were reminded this past month that the Bolivian people will fight against harmful governmental and business practices. This conglomerate of economic and political power is now on the defensive which gives the people an edge as their struggle continues.
Over the past month, a united call for "Nationalization!" rose above all else. This unity in demand is significant to note because Bolivia's social movements began with disparate goals. This consensus grew from the ground up--it was what the people decided they wanted, not what the leaders or political parties declared. This agreement from below could create and sustain a future unity from the top. Social movement groups here are still very divided in practice but a common demand could be a helpful basis on which to organize jointly in the future.
Phase two of the Gas War was persistent, tactical and almost wholly peaceful. Through this patient movement, protesters gained the respect and support of non-protesting Bolivians, instead of alienating those whose lives were negatively affected by the blockades and marches. A recent poll by El Deber, a newspaper in the conservative Santa Cruz region of Bolivia has found that 75% of Bolivian's favor nationalization of the gas industry. Comments in El Alto and La Paz over the weekend mirrored this sentiment. "Those campesinos stood up for the rights of all Bolivians; they were out there fighting for us and I am proud of what they did," a middle-class woman in La Paz affirmed as she waited in the street for 8 hours on Saturday to get her share of the shipment of cooking gas from El Alto.
Lastly, the social movements here ought to be credited with saving lives. Their discipline and restraint, week after week, prevented escalated violence in the streets. Their strength and determination prevented the presidency of Hormando Vaca Diez, a man whose first task would have been to send out military against his own citizens. One life was lost and though there were few reports internationally about the reaction to loss of miners cooperative President Juan Carlos Coro, his death did not go unnoticed here. On Friday, black plastic bags were tied to the tops of Wiphalas and miners hats as the thousands long funeral procession marched slowly along the Prado. San Francisco felt sad that afternoon and the grief for the life that was taken was only metered by the relief everyone felt in the fact that Bolivia had avoided a situation that would have meant losing many more.
The Question of Elections
The most tangible result of the past month of mobilizations is that there is a new President. But the significance of this for the Gas Was is not yet clear because the prospect of new elections raises divisive and difficult questions that will take a long time to answer.
At the base, Mesa's removal is primarily symbolic. He needed to be sacrificed to demonstrate the consequences state power will face if it does not listen to its citizens, not because replacing him would directly bring about nationalization. President Eduardo Rodriguez is now constitutionally obligated to call new Presidential elections within six months. He is not required nor does he have the exclusive power to call new elections for Parliament as well. He has stated that he will try to bring about general elections but Congress itself must ratify a change in the country's Carta Magna or pass an amendment for this to occur. For the social movements, these general elections are more important than those for President because revamping Congress would offer an opportunity to affect a minimal shift in governmental power. Recent statements from congressional leaders imply that Congress is willing to call these new elections but nothing has been decided.
Should new general elections be called, they are, at best, a small opportunity for forward progression in the Gas War. At worst, they are a distraction that will result in nothing more than a game of musical chairs amongst the political elite of this country.
The benefit of new elections is the chance to empower politicians more likely to nationalize the gas industry and carry out an honest and people-directed Constituent Assembly. But this is easier said than done in Bolivia right now. Internationally there is much talk of "President Evo" and of MAS (Movement Towards Socialism) being in a position to gain a stronger foothold in Congress. Here, the prospects for this are more grim. The feeling among Evo's theoretical base (poor and indigenous) is that that he cares more about international approval and the long-term viability of his political party than about the life of the average Bolivian. His actions in the past month only fueled this criticism because he acted like a temperature-sensitive politician, rather than spokesman for his people. He started asking for nationalization in week four and only then because he was the last remaining voice on the left not demanding it. He also seems to know that his influence has weakened and that MAS might not be ready to govern. It took him three weeks to begin calling for new elections, and even then, his cry was an echo of what thousands had already begin chanting in the streets. If he had believed that MAS had the capacity in the next few months to take control of this nation, elections could have been a first demand rather than his last resort.
Without a party that poor and indigenous Bolivians trust, new elections may seem inconsequential rather than vital. But even if MAS was in a stronger position, the prospect of new elections right now raises larger issues for the social movement groups. Specifically, there are two fundamental questions: first, how important are elections and elected officials for the advancement of a social justice campaign? And what ought to be the role of community organizations (neighborhood groups, unions, federations, etc.) in the political campaign process?
The debate has already begun. Some scholars and movement leaders speak of transitioning the power of the streets to the ballot box, that it is necessary to work to put in place politicians most likely to enact the people's demands. Others believe that social movement groups inherently belong in the streets and that working for advancement of parties is dangerous because it places the people's hope and confidence in the political elite who can never be fully trusted. They worry that if all the resources are shifted to the polls, there wont be enough energy to then hold those politicians accountable.
The Tregua
The current truce has as many definitions as there are social movement groups in Bolivia. It could last six days or six months. The radical have threatened that if Rodriguez does not prove he is leading the country towards nationalization, they will unleash street protests. Others recognize that with a "caretaker" President and a Parliament that only has two sessions left in their work year and that is on the verge of becoming a lame-duck governing body, mobilizations ought to begin once a new government takes over.
However, the real importance of this break is not the date that it ends, but what's talked about in the meantime. Olivera noted in his communique:
"It is important, also, to reflect upon the following. In this May-June mobilization we have seen two things. On one hand, the great force that we are capable of deploying: we, the diverse social movements, are capable of paralyzing the entire country, and of avoiding the maneuvers of the businessmen and bad politicians. On the other hand, we have not been capable of imposing our own decisions and objectives on these same politicians, who today are in the worst crisis they could possibly confront. Based on these two considerations, we have opened a wide debate in all the neighborhoods and communities of Cochabamba and the country, about the need to build, little by little, our own capacity for SELF GOVERNMENT, to push for that in the next mobilization"
Olivera's analysis displays the type of reflection and forward thinking that a break from protest can allow. Social movements must use the streets, but it's how they use the time in between mobilizations that can often make the difference in whether they become victorious. Therefore, the conversations taking place all over the country during this truce--about what went right, what went wrong, and about the questions posed by current opportunities--can help the social movement groups progress by being platforms for developing a long-term strategy for winning nationalization. It may seem quiet, but the future of the Gas War is unfolding right now.
Bolivia Calm, Northern Mexico Under Siege
NARCONEWS
June 17, 2005
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0506/S00235.htm
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
After the dramatic events in Bolivia last week, where after weeks of mobilizations and general strikes the people told their ineffectual president Carlos Mesa that they'd had enough of his meager responses to their clear demands, and simultaneously prevented his hugely unpopular successor, Hormando Vaca Diez, from taking power, things have calmed down a bit. But, as our correspondent Jean Friedsky in La Paz reports, the struggle is far from over:
"La Paz is calm, market stalls are again overflowing with fresh fruit and recently slaughtered meat and tregua (truce) is the word of the week. But the quiet on the streets is a symptom of the noise that now fills the meeting halls, organizational offices and livings rooms. With a break in the marches, thousands sit analyzing this most recent 'battle' and deliberating the future. So, whether its apparent on CNN or not, the Gas War here still continues - it's just gone inside."
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2005/6/15/16355/7224
Also, Santa Cruz, Bolivia native Irene Roca Ortiz analyses a recent Spanish-only interview with former president Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada. The disgraced "Goni," she writes, blames the country's and his woes on narco-trafficking, perhaps remembering but neglecting to mention "that his party's fortunes (and those of many others) owe much to drug trafficking" and "laundered narco-dollars":
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2005/6/15/19309/2325
Meanwhile, the situation in Northern Mexico, especially in the border city of Nuevo Laredo where federal police and military have essentially imposed martial law in response to an explosion of gang violence and organized crime, is putting prohibition's failures to either provide security or prevent drugs from entering the United States into the spotlight.
Ricardo Sala, a leading advocate of drug policy reform in Mexico, writes of the possible outcomes of "Operativo México Seguro":
"Let's keep an eye on the results the Mexican government delivers. Prohibition does not allow us to know even an approximation of the total amount of illegal drug circulating in our country, but (unless the drug war develops into a state of siege) clearly any amount seized will only be a small fraction of the total.
"A more important question from a human rights perspective is this: How many of the detained persons will be and are the real (or imagined) professional narcos? How many persons walking out of nightclubs or just strolling on the streets will be stopped by the police, searched and molested and affected in their dignity, before a criminal which truly threatens national security gets put behind bars? How many simple consumers of drugs and how many poor people abused by police will be jailed with Operativo México Seguro?"
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2005/6/15/193041/053
Another unavoidable, ugly result of this increased militarization is one the Mexican government is well aware of: a stepped-up arms race between and among narcos as they face more and better-armed enemies. And where do those gangsters get their guns? The same place everyone else does - from the United States arms industry.
The Mexican government's pleas for U.S. cooperation on stopping the flow of arms to its most violent criminal organizations have so far been mostly ignored. Read more here:
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2005/6/15/204155/304
Finally, Bill Conroy writes that all of this effort on the part of the Mexican federal police and military will simply change the balance of power in a drug economy where demand is constant and one group is always poised to take the place of another fallen one:
"It is likely that most of the Mexican cops who are on the narco-take are playing on the side of Cardenas and the Zetas -- not such a stretch to accept because, after all, Guzman is the new kid on the block in Nuevo Laredo.
"So, by clamping down on narco-corruption in the Mexican police force, doesn't Fox, by extension, increase the power of Guzman and his forces?
"After all, somebody has been shooting Mexican cops in Nuevo Laredo in recent months, reportedly because those cops, just like in the days of Prohibition in the United States, were on the payroll of the narco-traffickers (bootleggers). If the power of the local cops in the narco-trade is diminished, someone will step into that vacuum, right? Those are the rules of narco-capitalism under Prohibition."
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2005/6/14/104713/876#4
From somewhere in a country called América,
Dan Feder
Managing Editor
The Narco News Bulletin
http://www.narconews.com
Please Note
This function has been disabled.
|
|
|
|
India, Pakistan and Iran defying America on Gas Pipeline?