Posted on 10/13/2001 12:09:56 PM PDT by Wallaby
The intercepts, Hersh writes, "depict a regime increasingly corrupt, alienated from the country's religious rank and file, and so weakened and frightened that it has brokered its future by channelling hundreds of millions of dollars in what amounts to protection money to fundamentalist groups that wish to overthrow it."
By 1996, Hersh reports, Saudi money was supporting Al Qaeda and similar extremist groups in Afghanistan, Lebanon, Yemen, and throughout both Central Asia and the Persian Gulf region.
"Ninety-six is the key year," one American intelligence official tells Hersh in the October 22, 2001 issue of the NEW YORKER . Hersh reports that the intercepts have provided several important insights into political and economic affairs in the kingdom, including the extent of the physical incapacitation of King Fahd, the corruption of specific royal-family members, and the funding of fundamentalist groups through charities. The intelligence official tells Hersh that asfar as bankrolling fundamentalist groups goes, the Saudis had "gone to the dark side."
Current and former intelligence officials suggest, Hersh reports, that the instability of the Saudi regime is "the most immediate threat to American economic and political interests in the Middle East," and that "the Bush Administration, like the Clinton Administration, is refusing to confront this reality." Impacting Monday...
Company said it was talking with several potential investors and would approach others later this month, but plan that could save company from liquidation was expected to be in place at least by Oct. because of time-sensitive nature of its cash position. It didn't rule out bankruptcy as option. "We've been saying for quite some time that we cannot rule out the possibility of bankruptcy," spokesman said. "It's not our preferred option by any means." |
Competitors Iridium and ICO already have been forced into bankruptcy, but recent investors have bought into both companies with hopes of reviving them, indication that demand for type of service still exists, officials said. Spokesman said Iridium faced much greater obstacles than Globalstar confronts. "They had a much higher cost structure," he said: "They had to have enormous revenues. Our system cost $3 billion to build, and it cost Iridium $6 to $7 billion. Their monthly operating costs were double or triple ours." Globalstar had 2nd quarter gross service revenue of $2.3 million, 13% over previous quarter. Net revenue, including royalties from phone sales and less discounts and promotions, was $1.8 million, up 21% over first quarter. Company said it had total of 5.4 million min. of use, including both mobile and fixed service, in 2nd quarter, 33% increase from previous quarter. Estimated number of mobile and fixed subscribers at end of June was 51,600, up 27% from previous quarter. |
In the days following the attacks, Iridium Satellite LLC and its main competitor, Globalstar, a division of the British mobile phone giant Vodafone Group plc, donated airtime and equipment to groups helping in recovery efforts. Both companies report that activations and airtime traffic have quadrupled since Sept. 11. Iridium Satellite, a privately held company based in Leesburg, Va., launched commercial service in March after an investment group acquired the assets of the bankrupt Motorola-backed entity called Iridium. The earlier iteration of Iridium filed for bankruptcy less than a year after launching business and threatened to let its satellites fall to earth before investors made a $25 million bid for the company's assets. Iridium Satellite now operates a constellation of 66 low-orbiting satellites that float about 475 miles above the earth's surface."Satellite Phones Increase In Popularity After Attacks," Wireless Week; By Deborah M ndez-Wilson; October 01, 2001; News; Pg. 15
IMO this means that our leadership thinks that we will go back to business as usual after a suitable period of television pyrotechnics has demonstrated to the sheeple that "the job is done". Absent any policy changes (none are on the horizon), their plan appears to be continued exports of boat loads of money to Saudi Arabia and the rest of Islam. Why not? its a system that has made a lot of money for those who back our elected officials.
Well, considering recent events at the World Trade Center and Rockefeller Center, it's also a system that may soon make them dead.
Only in the most immediate sense does the dispute, which has seen Tehran mass 200,000 troops along its eastern border, stem from the murder of nine Iranian diplomats by Taliban militiamen when they captured the northern Afghan city of Mazar-e-Sharif last month. The outrage at the killings was understandable enough. But the very presence of the diplomats in a town previously held by Shia rebel factions reflects the religious divide between the Taliban who are Sunni Muslims, and overwhelmingly Shia Iran. Long before the murder of the diplomats, Iran was providing bases for Taliban opponents. Its hostility now will only be fuelled by reports of large-scale massacres of Shias after the fall of Mazar-e-Sharif. However, nearly all Islamic countries in the region are Sunni and do not share this instinctive enmity. Pakistan has long been a source of support for the Taliban. Less obviously, Saudi Arabia has extended financial and logistic support to the radical movement. Both are Sunni, and both are among the three countries that have officially recognised the Taliban regime. The other is the United Arab Emirates. The West, too, seems to have quietly decided that the Taliban, however unpalatable some of its methods, is the horse to back. That might not seem so after America's 20 August attack on the Afghan base of the alleged terrorist Osama bin Laden. But the US has been careful to distinguish between the Taliban and Bin Laden. |
After two decades of war and civil war since the Soviet invasion of 1979, the fundamentalist militia seems to offer the best chance of pacifying and stabilising a shattered country. And a more stable country is a more suitable place to build a pipeline. So, finally, to oil, or, more exactly, the colossal energy riches of former Soviet central Asia to the north. The prize for which the two regimes are vying is not only regional leadership. It is also the path to be followed by any pipeline carrying oil and gas from Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan to the deep-water ports in the south.
Hence the Afghan alternative. The Houston-based Unocal company and Saudi- owned Delta Oil are ready to go with a 900-mile gas pipeline through Afghanistan to a Pakistani port. Both Afghanistan and Pakistan stand to reap massive economic benefits, which is another reason for their de facto alliance. Their gain would be Iran's loss. Hence the suspicion that Tehran is keeping the fighting going to prevent the pipeline. So, in the politics of oil as well, Tehran is also largely isolated from its neighbours, with the partial exception of Russia. Whether Iran likes it or not, the Taliban - which controls over 90 per cent of Afghanistan - will surely soon be recognised by the international community. For all the belligerent talk from Tehran - and yesterday's closure of the moderate Tous newspaper, which had advocated a negotiated solution to the crisis - a full-scale invasion is unlikely. Memories of the carnage of the eight-year war with Iraq are still fresh, as is the failure of the Soviet Union to tame Afghanistan during the same period. If Iran uses force to avenge the diplomats, air strikes will probably be the chosen method. |
Bad link. Could you try again?
House Revisits Iran Libya Sanctions Act
Gilman's committee also held a hearing on July 23 on the subject of "Iran Libya Sanctions Act--One Year Later." Witnesses included two State Department officials, Assistant Secretary for Economic and Business Affairs Alan Larsen and Acting Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs David Welch; Dr. Patrick Clawson of the National Defense University; Dr. Mehdi Khorshidi of the Iranian National Conference; Petroleum Intelligence Weekly editor Sara Miller; and Jeffrey Schott of the Institute for International Economics.
For the most part, the testimony was predictable. Clawson and Miller both agreed that the act had been successful in limiting petroleum investment in Iran and Libya, but each also pointed out the act's cost in terms of lost business for U.S. firms and soured relations with America's allies.
Miller pointed out the irony in limiting access to oil and gas in a region where a major U.S. national priority is to assure unimpeded access to those resources. She also pointed out that for the U.S. to use the "oil weapon" seems short-sighted, considering U.S. reactions in 1967 and 1973 when the Arab League used the same weapon, and she reminded the committee that the U.S. has spoken out strongly against the use of secondary boycotts when they were applied by Arab countries against companies doing business in Israel.
Although the media gave most coverage to State Department witness Larsen's statement that the proposed pipeline to transport Turkmenistan gas through Iran to Turkey does not violate the act so long as it does not also transport Iranian gas, this did not surprise most observers. In fact, onlookers were more surprised with how strongly State Department witnesses appeared to be supporting the sanctions.
Larsen said that although no sanctions have been imposed under the act, this was because international companies have taken the act seriously and have taken care not to violate it. He said the department is looking very hard at the recent agreement by a German bank to lend $90 million to an Iranian oilfield engineering and construction company to see if it violates the act. He also said they are looking at the recently concluded agreement by Malaysia's Petronas and Saudi Arabia's Nimr Petroleum to invest in Libyan oilfield development, but have tentatively concluded that the deal falls below the act's $40 million threshold. He said the department is also closely watching the proposed investment by the French firm Total in developing Iran's South Pars gas field.
The Total South Pars deal especially interested Gilman. He asked the witnesses what the U.S. should do if the deal is completed. Clawson and Miller both pointed out that the field is so large that even a company as big as Total would need partners, which could delay things for a long time. Clawson said that the best approach would be to work behind the scenes to reach an agreement "that doesn't rub Total's face in it" whereby the contract is allowed to be concluded, but with a side agreement that the field will not actually be developed until Tehran changes its policies.
|
Observers in Pakistan are attaching much importance to the latest move. A cash-strapped Turkmenistan, they say, would find a lucrative outlet for its gas. As for energy-deficient Pakistan, it would find a source to fuel its development plans and cater to a rapidly growing population and galloping urbanisation. Even though, to date, gas discoveries made have a potential totalling 9 Tcf (IGR 372/26), it still cannot keep pace with continuing industrialisation and a population growing at an annual rate of 2.8%.
However, despite renewed optimism, the fact remains that Unocal held 54.11% of the shares and its exit leaves a big hole to be filled both in equity terms and as project leader. The respective governments have now given the consortium three months to muster the required funding. In case of failure, the three governments say they will share the construction costs, each financing the infrastructure in its territory. This would certainly put the financial and technological wherewithal of the three countries to the test. |
Sorry. Try this. IIRC, Larry Homenick was involved--but I can't find the specific reference.
ISLAMABAD :
The investors lost their confidence when the US Company Unocal announced its withdrawal from the project in August 1998 because of the US bombing of the alleged terrorist bases of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. The project was also rendered impracticable due to fighting close to the proposed pipeline route. "Investors would now feel more secure about the project, and would show their interest in it," an official of the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Resources said. He admitted they could not ensure the investors about the feasibility of the project during the last two years when Unocal backed out of the CentGas consortium formed to carrying out the project. |
The consortium was formed in 1996 to carry gas from Daulatabad in Turkmenistan to Multan in Pakistan with its possible extension to India. The length of the proposed pipeline is estimated to be around 1,800 km. Experts now hope that the fall of Taloqan, capital of Takhar province of Afghanistan and stronghold of Taleban's opposition forces would send positive signals among investors. Experts say that Taleban's latest victory in northern Afghanistan would put Pakistan and Turkmenistan in a strong position to find a replacement for the Unocal and make the project feasible. Pakistan is also working on an alternative plan of importing gas from the Gulf to overcome its shortage. The government is considering import of gas from the North Dome field in Qatar and South Pars field in Iran. The experts believe that the two projects are more practicable. The government has already signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with UAE Offsets Group (UOG) last year for the supply and transmission of 1.5 billion cubic feet (bcf) of natural gas from Gulf to Pakistan daily. UOG is already planning to supply gas from Qatar's North field reserves to UAE and Oman in a pipeline, which is expected to be extended to Pakistan. Pakistan's gas demand is increasing every next year. According to official estimates the current gas shortage stands at 2.6 bcf a year. The estimates have predicted that the gas shortage would increase to 4 bcf by 2006. The experts in gas sector put the possible gas shortfall at 1.5 bcf a year by 2005. The demand for gas is increasing due to government policy of replacing oil with natural gas and kerosene with liquefied petroleum gas in the domestic sector. Officials say it is the best option to save the foreign exchange reserves from spending a big chunk of it on petroleum import. |
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.