West Asia News and Discussions

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 30 Jun 2012 18:56

Isn't this one the RF 4s fitted with electonic gizmos (Israeli stuff when things were lovey dovey between the two)- it was probably trying to sniff out OR provoke some fire and ended up miscalulcating

now I doubt Turkey would be upto this khujli wihtout some level of EU\US backing

so interesting that the US is leaking the fact they do not believ the Turkish mission

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 Jun 2012 19:14

Iranian minister just announced a union will be created between Syria Iraq and Iran

--------
US answer to every thing is after the elections. Realistically they were quite against Libya too.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 30 Jun 2012 19:16

^^^
Will they have the blessings of Russia & China?

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 Jun 2012 19:19

^^ it's a method to prevent the Turkish british French and Arab action that is waiting for a green signal.

Everything is just waiting for the go ahead. But all sides need assurances from Russia and perhaps Iran and china

-----------------
New route being taken to buy Iranian oil is to blend it with oil from other countries. EU is using this route now as you can't verify the source.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 30 Jun 2012 21:54

^

We need to break the back of EU. Without them as advisers, Massa will be more amicable.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 Jun 2012 23:48

Euro is toast anyway and with it EU will be burnt.

ShyamD Looks like Turkey is non state actor of NATO in West Asia.

The Turkish imperative is to act before the Russians arrive. Wasnt there a convoy of Russian ships per Nightwatch en-route and the thing to watch was it embark or disembark their assets.

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 01 Jul 2012 02:04

India wins another gulf war, gets Fasih

NEW DELHI: After the arrest of 26/11 handler Abu Jundal, India is on the verge of another success in Saudi Arabia having convinced the authorities there to deport Bihar engineer Fasih Mahmood, accused of carrying out terror strikes in India and recruiting youths for terror-related activities.

Highly placed sources in the government said India issued an identity certificate to the Saudi authorities for Fasih last week after Pakistani agencies too laid claim by stating that Fasih had a valid Pakistani passport. Pakistani agencies had made a similar claim for Jundal.

Sources said US pressure helped in swinging the case in India's favour.

Another suspect to be deported with Fasih

Saudi authorities said they had the option of ignoring the identity certificate issued by India through the ministry of external affairs for terror suspect Fasih Mahmood to counter Pakistan's claim that he was a Pakistani national. Sources said that US pressure helped swing the case in India's favour. In fact, it was Washington that had worked on the Saudis to get Fasih detained in the first place.

It is also learnt that the Saudis have agreed to deport another Indian terror suspect along with Fasih, but his identity has not been confirmed yet. Indian authorities suspect Fasih is linked with Riyaz Bhatkal and Iqbal Bhatkal, leaders of LeT proxy Indian Mujahideen (IM).

Sources say the two absconding terrorists won Fasih over when he was studying engineering in Karnataka. The engineer from Bihar's Darbhanga district has since tried to find new recruits for LeT plots. A CBI team is likely to be sent to Riyadh to bring him back.

Sources said they had to face stiff opposition from Pakistani agencies bent on proving that Fasih was a Pakistani national. He was even said to have a passport issued from Lahore. "Fasih was obviously in regular touch with agencies in Pakistan which tried to protect him," said a source. Pakistani agencies apparently wanted Fasih to be either released or sent to Pakistan.

Indian agencies said his interrogation will be crucial because as a prime recruiter for terrorist activities in India he has knowledge of several sleeper modules operating across the country. "Keeping that in mind he is no less a catch than Jundal," added the official.

According to the Interpol Red Corner Notice issued for Fasih, his name surfaced in the Pune's German Bakery blast case followed by the Chinnaswamy Stadium blast in Bangalore. The notice says that he has been a member of Indian Mujahideen since 2003. He is alleged to have been involved in the 2010 Jama Masjid blast and shootout cases.

member_23626 · Post by **member_23626** » 01 Jul 2012 04:58

Egypt's newly elected president's golden words... I welcome Egypt to stone age

(from wherever it is today) and whole heartedly thank the west for creating another country ready for jee-hard

[youtube]reLigeHGKzE&feature=g-all-u[/youtube]

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 01 Jul 2012 08:37

^ How can Allah be one's goal. Does it mean, he will become Allah or one with Allah?

Isn't this blasphemous?

P.S: If your response is religious in nature, please answer in Off-Topic thread.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 Jul 2012 12:36

RamaY wrote:^ How can Allah be one's goal. Does it mean, he will become Allah or one with Allah?

Guess that means implementing the Sharia law or the relevant laws of Koran ?

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 01 Jul 2012 21:40

Statements like that (Allah is one's goal) - are interpreted differently by different individuals. Wily politicians and demagogues use such statements to obfuscate the fact that they haven't really taken any stand, while still managing to convince people with different stands that their (politician's) position is exactly the same as the listener's.

It is the Islamic version of American presidents' making statements like 'I fight for freedom'. (Whose freedom? And freedom from what? - these are never answered).

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 01 Jul 2012 21:43

I guess I didn't put my question correctly. When he says "Allah is our goal" what does he mean from MB perspective?

Are they indicating possible alliances and willingness to be Ummah's arm in certain international initiatives?

member_23626 · Post by **member_23626** » 01 Jul 2012 21:59

RamaY wrote:I guess I didn't put my question correctly. When he says "Allah is our goal" what does he mean from MB perspective?

Are they indicating possible alliances and willingness to be Ummah's arm in certain international initiatives?

IMO "allah is our goal" actually means he will keep allah and the islamic laws in mind and will try to implement them across Egypt (sharia is on the cards it seems). No matter how "secular" a muslim country is, it , in the end is filled with jihadi big*ts. MB it seems is an extension of saudi arabian mulla organisations. Every muslim is in a deep agreement that "allah" is only thing that matters and "we" (the muslim population) must fight the evil kaffirs to spread islam. As far as becoming equal to allah is concerned, every mullah knows that it is his duty to kiss allah's feet, not to challenge him. A lot of non-muslims will be killed and more egyptian womens will be seen wearing burkhas from now.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 01 Jul 2012 22:46

^ that is a good thing IMO.

We need more and more sharia compliant states in WANA. I hope emirates go this way too. It will slowly but surely remove the dependence certain Indian sections have on this region.

A good thing for long-term Indian interests, IMhO.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 01 Jul 2012 22:58

Ramana,

Its not going to be like Mussolini in Yugoslavia. No matter what happens, the Turks are not going to try and take Damascus.

Back in July-August of 2011 the Turkish government and military drew up contingency plans for establishing a safe haven running along border on the Syrian side should the violence in Syria and the number of refugees spike. That spike has just kept getting bigger since March.

The safe haven would obviously have an No Fly Zone established above it.

The original hope was that diplomacy would bring Russian support for a UNSC mandate. That simply isn't going to happen.

However with incidents like these Turkey suffers a loss it can claim self-defence, and invoke Article V of the NATO treaty to establish and enforce it. The problem is that Erdogan can not play his cards so close to the chest, or other Alliance members will feel played and drag their heels. Alliances work on trust as well as mutual need.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 01 Jul 2012 23:11

RamaY wrote:I guess I didn't put my question correctly. When he says "Allah is our goal" what does he mean from MB perspective?

Are they indicating possible alliances and willingness to be Ummah's arm in certain international initiatives?

Rama,

The Egyptian MB are Egyptian nationalists. Its just that they define national identity through religion as well as geography and culture unlike the secular nationalists. That is the MB mission - redefining what is the Egyptian nation in symbolic terms across the board.

That means while they may talk about Allah and the Ummah, their emphasis will be on symbolic unity with the Arab and Muslim world. Egyptian interests will still be first under all of that talk.

Keep in mind though that the MB are not mullahs. They're all professionally educated and a fair number of them are businessmen. They are pragmatic. They are still a Mediterranean state, and they still want the billions from Western tourism, trade and investment even as they want to Islamise Egyptian society.

The compromise being talked about as an eventual goal is designating special tourist zones, like the Sinai Peninsula, the coast west of the Delta, etc where the booze and the bikinis will stay legal.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 02 Jul 2012 00:06

I agree. Taking religious nationalism route is one way to break the hold of Christian-secularism for some societies. Looks like Turkey and Egypt are in this 1st phase.

Cultural nationalism will help break the next layer - religious invasions like Islamism. I think this is the phase Iran is currently in. They undid secularism with 1979 revolution. Perhaps that is why Iran is many times important to Bharat than other GCC nations.

We also need to see what this means to India itself. It is yet to start Phase 1.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 02 Jul 2012 13:53

Former Obama Official on Syria: 'A Lot of What We're Doing Is Not Visible' - The Atlantic bit.ly/Ml7yJd

One of the most difficult questions in international affairs right now is whether the U.S. is doing enough to aid Syrian rebels. When pressed on the issue during a panel discussion at the Aspen Ideas Festival Sunday, Anne-Marie Slaughter, a former senior official at the State Department, pushed back against the idea that the U.S. is standing on the sidelines: "We're doing much, much more than we were and a lot of what we're doing is not visible," said Slaughter, who stepped down as the State Department's director of policy planning in 2011. "Right now, I actually think we've been doing much, much more than we were." The level of U.S. involvement in the escalating crisis is a tightly-guarded secret and reportedly ranges from diplomatic efforts to the coordination of weapons shipments to rebels. But it's anyone's guess just how entrenched the U.S. is becoming in the conflict, which is spiraling into a full-fledged civil war. Here's what we know about U.S. involvement thus far:

In April, the State Department acknowledged that it was going beyond humanitarian assistance and providing rebels with communications equipment to evade attacks and coordinate with people outside the country. Sources told CNN that included satellite communication equipment and hardware systems "to help the opposition evade government censors, and more easily communicate internally and externally."
In May, The Washington Post reported that the U.S. was helping coordinate shipments of "lethal materials," including antitank weaponry, to opposition fighters. Details were slim but in a June story by The New York Times, it was revealed that the CIA was helping steer "automatic rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, ammunition and some antitank weapons" into the country in an effort to make sure weapons purchased by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar weren't getting into the hands of Islamic extremists.
On Friday, The Guardian reported that a tiny Syrian village four kilometers from Turkey has become a hub of arms shipments to rebels. The report includes the curious detail that an American working for the U.S. government was brought in by rebels a week ago for purposes that couldn't be confirmed.

------------

Western/gulf intervention started a while ago. It's just that no one knows what they are doing yet and the scale of the intervention

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 03 Jul 2012 00:58

"Objective" proof that Turkish jet was shot in Syrian airspace: Russia | The Hindu

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 03 Jul 2012 01:20

shyamd wrote:Western/gulf intervention started a while ago. It's just that no one knows what they are doing yet and the scale of the intervention

The weapons are trickling in very, very, slowly to the FSA. That's because the FSA is really a collective of local units rather than an integrated force.

Trying to vet every outfit in the field before they are allowed to touch a weapon is not the easiest thing I imagine.

Still, it will limit the eventual fallout of the conflict. One of the ripple effects of the opening of all of Gaddafi's armories has been the current Mali Taliban running around wrecking places like Timbuktu.

Subcontracting the job of managing the arms pipelines in the Bosnian and Afghan wars was one of the worst mistakes US administrations made in those wars.

This kind of caution will earn the Obama administration a lot of respect in the longer term. Just like George W. Bush Srs. caution about driving all the way to Baghdad and toppling Saddam in 1991.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 03 Jul 2012 03:21

^^ it's flowing in a lot faster, the biggest problem that they are facing is trying to get those weapons deeper into the country.

I was referring to US/British etc military intervention on the ground in Syria.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 03 Jul 2012 06:06

shyamd wrote:^^ it's flowing in a lot faster, the biggest problem that they are facing is trying to get those weapons deeper into the country.

I was referring to US/British etc military intervention on the ground in Syria.

There's an interest in liaising with the FSA, knowing exactly what the regime is doing, and keeping chemical weapons out of jihadi hands, but there isnt going to be anything more than that.

This isn't Iraq 2003, or even Libya 2011. There's no UN mandate, and no stomach for unilateral, overt and direct intervention. If those underlying conditions change, then perhaps.

Turkey is taking bigger risks. They did that even in Iraq, which produced some awkward situations between Turkish SF and Coalition forces.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 03 Jul 2012 06:11

Acharya San,

http://pukmedia.co/english/index.php/77 ... le-in-iraq
Reliance Globalcom launches subsea cable in Iraq

Reliance Globalcom, the underseas cable unit of Indian mobile operator Reliance Communications, said on Monday it had launched a joint venture with Iraq that substantially expands the country's broadband and telecommunications links to the outside world. The activation of Al-Faw Cable Landing Station, in a project with Iraqi Telecommunications and Post Company (ITPC) will connect Iraq to countries in the Middle East, Asia, Europe and North America, the Indian firm said in a statement sent to Reuters. Reliance Globalcom, which owns the world's largest private undersea cable system spanning 65,000 kilometers, said the station with a design capacity of 680 Gbps with two diverse routes, would initially use 50 Gbps on each route to cater to existing market demand. The two diverse routes were connected to the Falcon undersea fiber-optic cable network owned by Reliance Globalcom. This will help connect Iraq to the rest of the world through our global networks. The Middle East is one of the fastest-growing regions in the world," said Rory Cole, COO of Reliance Globalcom said in the statement. Industry executives said the project was the first cable network to land in Iraq, a country of 30 million people, still recovering from the 2003 U.S. invasion that followed years of international sanctions under Saddam Hussein. Under 3 percent of the country's population is currently connected to the Internet. Poor infrastructure, high operating costs, conflicts between communications regulators and security problems are seen stunting development there.
Iraq holds a pivotal geographical position in the region and could be an important communications bridge joining the Middle East with Europe and Asia. "This is an extremely important strategic initiative that will facilitate the connectivity of all countries in the Middle East region to Iraq and also significantly improve the quality and speed as well as the reliability of Iraq's connectivity to the rest of the world," Iraq's Minister of Communications Mohammed Allawi was quoted as saying in the statement. Reliance Communications, India's second-largest mobile firm by users, acquired the FLAG undersea cable network for $207 million in 2003, and the business is now part of its Reliance Globalcom unit. It sells capacity on the network to many of the world's major carriers. Demand for bandwidth is soaring in the Middle East, driven by the deregulation of regional telecoms markets as well as a desire by governments to diversify from oil and gas into sectors such as finance and media that require fast international connections.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 03 Jul 2012 06:21

Demand for bandwidth is soaring in the Middle East, driven by the deregulation of regional telecoms markets as well as a desire by governments to diversify from oil and gas into sectors such as finance and media that require fast international connections.

pentaiah · Post by **pentaiah** » 03 Jul 2012 07:21

Oh boy now it's dejavu all over again
Johann is always instructive and intelligent opinion shaper
Where did this chemical weapons come is it repeat saga WMD(
Weapons of mass delusions )? Pretext?

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 03 Jul 2012 07:49

Spinster, how nice to see you after so long.

Its not exactly news. They've had chemical weapons and scuds since the 1970s. How do you think the Syrians have maintained deterrence against Israeli nukes all these years, especially since the fall of the Soviet Union? The Egyptians were the first in the ME to seek that option, and they helped out their brother Arabs in places like Iraq , Syria, Libya and Sudan.

Nowadays there's exactly 3 countries in the world left that have not signed the CWC and have long thought to have stocks - Egypt, Syria and North Korea.

Its hard to imagine Asad using them, but on the other hand, the jihadist groups operating in Syria now would certainly love to get their hands on a few of those bunkers.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 03 Jul 2012 08:08

Arab secularism and its discontents

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 03 Jul 2012 14:08

Johann - agreed, but it's a bit bigger than we think. But still these are just small groups in the bigger picture and are not the decisive factor.
Weapons are reaching but not deeper - logistics issues in a war zone, but this will change over time and the Syrian businessmen have begun switching sides because they think Asad won't be able to sustain this for long.

Pentaiah, they are training the rebels to safeguard the chemical weapon stocks a while ago and this has been the biggest worry for Israel and the west. The Libyans went through training in Tampa FL.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Jul 2012 21:42

LINK

Egypt: President Mohammed Mursi took the oath of office before the General Assembly of the Supreme Constitutional Court on 30 June. Mursi is the first freely elected head of state in Egyptian history.

Among his first acts of state he asked the US to release a notorious jihadist, known as the blind sheikh. Sheikh Omar, who is blind, is serving a sentence in a North Carolina jail for having masterminded the 1993 bombing attack on the World Trade Center. That attack failed.

Comment: It is difficult to imagine why the fate of the blind sheikh would top the agenda of Egypt's new president, unless he is a true believer of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Egyptian economy is in collapse. The political system is unsettled. The roles of the Army and of Sharia in national life are begging for resolution. Nevertheless, Mursi focused on the fate of the blind sheikh as a first order of business, deliberately provoking the US.

This man does not seem to be in touch with the depth of the wound Egypt has suffered because of the apocryphal Arab spring. Alternatively he deliberately is pursuing an Islamist agenda which he did not disclose and which considers the present travails of Egyptians to be the path to redemption. In either case, the regional security situation is being altered fundamentally.

Mursi appears to have been deceptive about his true beliefs, suborning the democratic process. He is pursuing an Islamist revolution, not a democratic revolution.

{In true takkiya fashion!}

Mali: The fighters from the Ansar Dine group, which controls much of northern Mali and is affiliated with al Qaida, are methodically destroying the 16 historic Islamic shrines in the city of Timbuktu. They destroyed mausoleums of Sufi saints with guns and pick-axes for a third day, according to witnesses on the scene.

The Salafist Ansar Dine members believe in strict application of Sharia, Islamic law, and consider the centuries-old shrines of the local Sufi version of Islam in Timbuktu to be idolatrous. They deride and ignore that some very respectable Muslims, especially Sufis, regard the shrines as sacred and acceptable in Muslim worship.

Last week UNESCO, the UN cultural organization, put Timbuktu on its list of endangered world heritage sites, fearing damage following the coup which toppled the Malian government in March. That decision and announcement appear to have infuriated the Islamists.

Ansar Dine spokesman Sanda Ould Boumama told Agence France-Presse the shrines would be destroyed, "all of them, without exception." He went on: "God is unique. All of this is haram (forbidden in Islam). We are all Muslims. UNESCO is what?"

In addition to the shrines, Timbuktu is the repository for some 700,000 ancient manuscripts preserved in about 60 private libraries.
{Recall the burning of library of Alexandria! The murder of Hyaptia by Christians. All were pre-Enlightnment spirits/djinns}

The International Criminal Court denounced the destruction as a crime against humanity comparable to the Afghan Taliban's destruction of ancient Buddhist structures in Bamiyan Province, Afghanistan, in 2001.

{Does this really hurt the Ansar Dine? }

Comment: This is another example of the ignorance and barbarism of the jihadists. Ansar Dine in Mali are cultural savages, indistinguishable in beliefs and actions from the hard core Taliban in Afghanistan.

So the UK/US combine that unleashed the Salalfist Kraken on the Middle East is now reaping the whirlwind and pretending to be concerned at their mis-deeds.

What took the UNESCO so long to declare Timbuktu as a heritage site before the Ansar Dine took over?

Anyway what do we know of the gentle Sufis of Timbuktu? Most likely they were early scouts of the Islamic armies which rampaged in their aftermath.
So not sorry for that.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Jul 2012 00:00

"God is unique. All of this is haram (forbidden in Islam). We are all Muslims. UNESCO is what?"

This is the most funny one liner i came across ....quite amusing

UNESCO is evil ....Damn break those tomb

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 04 Jul 2012 06:48

The International Criminal Court denounced the destruction as a crime against humanity comparable to the Afghan Taliban's destruction of ancient Buddhist structures in Bamiyan Province, Afghanistan, in 2001.

But not a single Taliban has been tried by the esteemed "Court". Of course if it was a Serbian general accused of "crimes against humanity" when that humanity happened to be "Muslim" - then justice would be swift. Hmm.

But anyway, glad that they are doing our work. Cleaning up after themselves - sort of!

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 04 Jul 2012 07:07

Austin wrote:
"God is unique. All of this is haram (forbidden in Islam). We are all Muslims. UNESCO is what?"
This is the most funny one liner i came across ....quite amusing

UNESCO is evil ....Damn break those tomb

UNeSCO is a joke at best. They never have the authority to protect the heritage sites thru force anyway.

Ramanaji -

My4THCousin thinks the UNESCO announcement is in fact a timely provocation for these fanatics. The same happened w.r.t Bamiyan Buddhas.

The Shias and Sufis are hardly 10-13% of 1.6 billion Muslim population. Even after cleaning them out, the Sunnis will remain a formidable demographic force in the humanity.

The Shias on the other hand do not have any viable alternative to return to. Between Islam an other Abrahamic religions, Islam offers a better social and political cohesion. The non-Abrahamic alternatives are deliberately kept secular.

The missing link is a self-realized Bharat

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 04 Jul 2012 07:08

^ Bji

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 04 Jul 2012 08:20

Few dead Suffies occupying Indian soil also require the cleaning services of the Pure ones . Lets hope these Suffies gets their just dessert after the long rest in their nest.
East or the West
Exhumed Suffi
Is the Best
Test of Purity Quest.

habal · Post by **habal** » 04 Jul 2012 09:12

The Shias on the other hand do not have any viable alternative to return to. Between Islam an other Abrahamic religions, Islam offers a better social and political cohesion. The non-Abrahamic alternatives are deliberately kept secular.

The missing link is a self-realized Bharat

all bharatiyas should become Sikh for one decade. This movement can spread across borders and take over West Asia. Whoever will not be with us will be with west. Saudis will obviously side with west and they can be easily quashed.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 05 Jul 2012 01:44

The United Arab Emirates is planning on enlisting up to 3,000 former Colombian soldiers in its armed forces

The oil-rich Arab country is looking to bring the soldiers over from South America to assist its armed forces, the weekly Semana reported.

Up to 842 Colombian troops have already been brought in, according to the report.

They are said to be attracted by high pay - up to 10 times what they get in their home country.

It is believed Colombian soldiers are being targeted because they are highly experienced and less in demand at home as the war against Farc rebels winds down.

But Colombian top brass were upset by the move and feared Colombia would lose valuable troops and some of its best officers.

"They have recruited soldiers with a lot of combat experience, valuable men with years of service in which the army invested a lot in terms of training," a general told Semana.

"Without a doubt, this is a loss for the army, but there isn't much we can do because it is by no means illegal," the official added.

Soldiers as mercenaries

The paper said the UAE offers Colombian soldiers between US$2,800 and US$18,000 (£1,300 and £11,500), depending on rank, in stark contrast to the $530 a month officers are said to earn in Columbia.

In May 2011 the New York Times claimed the Arab state had hired Colombian soldiers to use them as mercenaries.

It said Erik Prince, the founder of the controversial security firm Blackwater, was given the job of forming an 800-member battalion of foreign troops by the crown prince of Abu Dhabi.

The move came as several Arab countries, including Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, were convulsed by the Arab Spring. The UAE, along with Saudi Arabia, sent troops to Bahrain when unrest broke out there.

According to Colombia Reports, however, the 800 Columbians currently employed in the UAE's army are not mercenaries. Citing a former colonel who recruits soldiers for the UAE army, it said they were directly employed by the armed forces.

"What is happening now is different to before. We are not mercenaries. The contract of the people who travel is directly with the government of the [United] Arab Emirates," the source said.

Do i smell something burning from our paki direction ?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 05 Jul 2012 04:15

habal wrote: all bharatiyas should become Sikh for one decade. This movement can spread across borders and take over West Asia. Whoever will not be with us will be with west. Saudis will obviously side with west and they can be easily quashed.

Habalji,

my response here: http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 4#p1306534

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 05 Jul 2012 04:46

The Fading Arab Oil Empire - Paul D. Miller

PRESIDENT OBAMA’S "pivot to East Asia"(a rather quaint use here - rather than "pivot to Asia-Pasific" which is more common term widespread in MSM) is well-timed. The geostrategic importance of the Middle East is vastly overblown. The region matters to the United States chiefly because of its influence in the world oil market, but that influence has been in terminal decline for a generation, a fact almost wholly unnoticed by outside observers. A confluence of developments—including rising prices and production costs, declining reserves, and the availability of alternate fuels and unconventional sources of oil—will decisively undermine the defining role of the Middle East in the global energy market. Meanwhile, the United States has vital interests at stake elsewhere in the world at least as pressing, if not more so, than its interests in the Middle East. These include thwarting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, fighting transnational terrorism and maintaining stability in key strategic locations of the world.
...........

The contemporary strategic importance of the Middle East stems from its comparative advantage in producing oil, a commodity vital to the modern world economy. This comparative advantage is based on four factors. First, Middle Eastern oil is the cheapest in the world to produce because of simple geology. Middle Eastern oil lies under flat desert, not under an ocean or in the Amazonian river basin. In 2008, producing a barrel of oil cost between $6 and $28 in the Middle East and North Africa, compared to up to $39 elsewhere in the world and up to $113 per barrel of oil shale.

Second, most Middle Eastern oil is a superior product. The chemical properties of Middle Eastern “light sweet” crude oil make it easier and cheaper to refine than the “heavy” crude of Venezuela, for example. Third, Middle Eastern oil developers benefit from economies of scale because the cheap oil there is so plentiful. Even today, the region is still home to more than half the world’s proven, commercially viable conventional oil reserves and a third of world oil production. Fourth, the Middle East’s dominance of oil production and reserves makes it “too big to fail,” (from now on into the future ME is nolonger too big to fail - which is the basic argument of the author throughout this essay - this conclusion if already accepted will inherently destabilize India's energy security going into the future) which effectively lowers producers’ risks. Buyers believe, with justification, that neither the governments in the region nor the developed world would allow a significant disruption to oil production (especially after the embargoes in the 1970s backfired).

This comparative advantage translates into global power and influence because of the modern world economy’s high demand for oil.

.....

THESE TWO factors—the Middle East’s comparative advantage in oil production and the world economy’s need for oil to power transport—made the modern Middle East what it is today. The region would not be as strategically important otherwise.

But the Middle East’s comparative advantage in energy production and the world’s need for oil both peaked around 1974, and both have been in long-term decline ever since. In reaction to the oil embargoes and disruptions of 1974 and 1979, the Western world embarked on a generational and largely successful effort at energy conservation. The United States’ energy intensity—a measure of how much energy is used per dollar of GDP—has been cut in half since 1973, falling from 15,400 BTUs per dollar to 7,470 in 2010, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. This unheralded success means that because of advances in efficiency and conservation practices, the world economy is less dependent on all forms of energy, oil included, than previously. Additionally, the world’s energy needs are being met by an ever-expanding menu of inputs, including nuclear power and renewable sources. In 2010, petroleum’s share of America’s energy sources was the lowest it had been since 1951. The world economy’s oil intensity, or “the amount of oil needed to produce one dollar of GDP,” in the words of the International Energy Agency (IEA), “has fallen steadily over the last three decades.” That is not the whole story: “The decline has accelerated since 2004, mainly as a result of higher oil prices, which have encouraged conservation, more efficient oil use and switching to other fuels.” The introduction of electric and hybrid cars in recent years, while still in its infancy, promises to accelerate the decline in demand for petroleum-based fuels.

The Middle East’s comparative advantage in oil production also is eroding. It will always have a superior product, but the three other factors comprising its advantage are disappearing. First, oil-production costs in the Middle East are certain to rise. Oil is so cheap in the region because it is easy to get out of the ground. But as the world uses up the cheapest and most easily developed oil, Middle Eastern crude will become more costly to produce. Some fields in the Middle East have been producing continuously for eighty years and are rapidly maturing (meaning they are almost past their peak production). Saudi Arabia in particular has a high percentage of mature or maturing oil fields. Thirteen of the twenty largest oil fields in the world are located in the Middle East, and they all entered production between 1928 and 1968. As a field passes its peak, it becomes more technically difficult and costly to extract its oil. This is especially true once a developer switches to secondary, tertiary and unconventional methods to extract the remaining oil. Production costs in the Middle East inevitably will rise in coming years; that is as certain as the laws of geology and economics. The oil market will be characterized increasingly by harder-to-develop, more expensive oil.

This trend will accelerate as demand for oil increases in the developing world and prices rise. After the oil-price spikes of the 1970s, the rest of the world invested in oil production (and energy conservation). The Middle East’s share of production fell to less than 19 percent by 1985, its lowest point since 1953. Overcapacity then caused prices to collapse, and the Middle East recovered its relative position in the market, but the episode shows what is in store for the future. Prices are on a long-term and relentless increase, driven largely by rising demand in places like China and India; global liquid-fuel consumption is likely to reach 111 million barrels per day by 2035—up from 85 million barrels per day today. Prices have risen sharply since 2002, partly because of political instability in the region but also in part because of the long-term, underlying pressures on the market. This is likely to spur worldwide investment in capacity, further eroding the Middle East’s market share over the next decade.

Second, rising prices are a powerful incentive for producers to develop new production capacity in other regions and through unconventional methods. Oil recovered from secondary and tertiary drilling technology or from shale, sand and deep-water rigs will become more commercially viable as prices rise. The Middle East’s market share will shrink, and other regions will start to benefit from the same economies of scale that Middle Eastern producers have enjoyed, leveling the playing field. Already, the Middle East accounts for a decreasing amount of the world’s proven oil reserves. It accounted for 56 percent of reserves in 2010, its second-lowest point since 1953. This was down from 66 percent in 2002 and below the long-term average of 61 percent over the last three decades. Even those numbers may be inflated; much of the Middle East’s reserve growth in recent decades came in a single leap, from 1986 to 1987, when several states reported sudden and massive increases in their estimated reserves without further exploration or technological development. Industry experts speculate these “paper reserves” were primarily a bargaining tool in negotiations between OPEC states—because OPEC members’ production quotas are linked to their proven reserves, claiming more reserves allows them to produce more. Reported figures since then are unreliable. Even under the inflated numbers, the Middle East accounts for only 46 percent of remaining reserves of oil and liquid natural gas ultimately recoverable with conventional means, according to the IEA.

And that is only “proven” reserves. Proven reserves comprise oil deposits recoverable under current market prices and with current technology. A better indication of a state’s future share of the oil market is its “ultimate” reserves, which include proven, probable and possible reserves. As the world oil price rises and technology improves, possible and probable reserves become proven. In the Middle East, it is likely that a greater share of ultimate reserves is already proven than in the rest of the world. As prices increase and technology advances, therefore—and more possible and probable reserves become economically viable—the rest of the world will see a disproportionately greater rise in proven reserves.

The picture here is stark: when unconventional methods of oil development are taken into account, including development of heavy oil, shale oil and oil sands, the Middle East suddenly becomes a minor player. There may be as many as 7.9 trillion barrels of potentially recoverable oil left in the world from all sources, according to the IEA, with more than 90 percent of it outside the Middle East. The Middle East dominates the currently proven, conventional and commercially viable reserves, but these reserves account for less than 10 percent of the total oil in the world. Once unconventional methods become commercially competitive, the Middle East will be dwarfed by Canada, the United States and Venezuela.
(India will be a looser in both cases because US will increasingly destabilize ME in future and we neither have the technology nor the proven reserves of shale, or oil sands or gas reserves to fallback upon - basically we cant count on access to cheap transport which gave the big comparitive advantage to the western economies through out their rise in previous century)
Finally, as the massive unconventional oil deposits become commercially viable, the Middle Eastern oil industry will no longer be too big to fail. Middle Eastern oil producers will lose the implicit discount on risk they gain from dominating the current world oil market. They will, in fact, be dispensable, making it much harder for them to get a free ride on the implicit guarantees and subsidies they currently enjoy from their host governments. As they devolve from global politicians into businessmen, governments will rightly ask if these guarantees make good business sense anymore.

There has been much discussion about when the world will reach “peak oil,” the point at which we will have used up more than half the total petroleum on the planet. That point is a long way off. But the world is approaching—if it has not already passed—an earlier point that is hugely significant for the global balance of power: the peak of cheap Middle Eastern oil. And that means the Middle East’s comparative advantage is eroding. As the price of oil rises, producers elsewhere in the world will be able to invest in larger operations and benefit from the economies of scale that Middle Eastern producers have always had. And as demand, production costs and prices rise, Middle Eastern producers will be competing with the rest of the world in a much tighter market.

(now proceeds to explain historical role of USA in ME fairly accurately)
SINCE 1945, the United States has rightly sought to prevent any single power from dominating the Middle East’s oil supplies. An oil hegemon, whether Soviet, Baathist, Nasserite, Iranian or Islamist, would have had the capacity to blackmail the United States and the world with economic warfare. To that end, the United States supported anticommunist monarchies and autocracies in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Bahrain, among others, during the Cold War. It has armed Saudi Arabia with a staggering $81.6 billion of arms sales since 1950, almost a fifth of all U.S. weapons shipments. It supported Iraq against Iran in the 1980s before fighting Iraq to defend Kuwait and Saudi Arabia in 1990–1991. After the 2001 terrorist attacks, it further bolstered ties in the region, adding Kuwait, Bahrain and Morocco to its collection of major non-NATO allies, which includes Egypt, Israel and Jordan. In 2003, it invaded and occupied Iraq over fears, later proven overblown, that Iraq’s WMD proliferation might give Saddam Hussein or allied terrorists unacceptable leverage in the region. The U.S. military’s Central Command, formed in 1983, has a forward headquarters in Qatar, and the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet is based in Bahrain. This military infrastructure guarantees a long-term U.S. military presence in the region.

Those policies were largely sensible efforts to maintain the security of world energy supplies. However, they make less sense in light of the brewing realities in the world oil market. These developments—the world’s increasing energy efficiency and the Middle East’s loss of its comparative advantage in oil production—will take time to play out fully. But they have been under way for several decades already. In two decades or so, the global oil market and the Middle East’s geopolitical influence will be dramatically different from what they are today. The Middle East will remain an important player, but it will no longer be able to act as the “central bank of oil,” as the princes of Saudi Arabia style their kingdom. Moreover, it will forever lose the ability to credibly threaten to wield oil as a weapon. The sword of Damocles that has implicitly hovered over the West since the 1970s will be gone.

That means the central goal of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East will essentially be achieved (reading b/w lines, he is says the goal of US in dominating ME had been acheived and now its time to destabilize it for other nonwestern oil hungry gaints - aka India,China) : no power will be able to threaten the United States with unacceptable leverage over the American economy. That is because oil itself will be less important, and the world oil market will be more diffuse and diverse. The importance of this development cannot be overstated. It is a tectonic shift in the geopolitical balance of power, a strategically pivotal development only slightly less momentous than the fall of the Soviet Union. It is the slow-motion collapse of the Middle Eastern oil empire.

In turn, the United States can and should begin to adapt its foreign policy to reflect these realities. It can look with more complacency on the rise and fall of particular regimes across the Middle East and North Africa. The Arab Spring, even if it brings to power moderate Islamist governments, is unlikely to threaten American interests. Washington also can play a less active part in conflicts between states, reverting to a role more like its indirect support for Iraq against Iran and less like its direct involvement in the 1991 and 2003 Iraq wars. Further, it can speak out more freely against tyranny and human-rights abuses, especially in Saudi Arabia, one of the most oppressive countries on earth. (i wonder if the KSA lobby in US is becoming more and more toothless ?) It can reclaim its position as the advocate of global liberalism, undoing the damage to the U.S. brand done by its close association with Middle Eastern dictators.

THE UNITED States has additional interests in the Middle East, but they are outweighed by those in other parts of the world. For example, the region is a hotbed of terrorism and may become a major locus of WMD proliferation. But South Asia hosts terrorist groups, including Al Qaeda, that threaten the United States more directly. Further, South Asia is home to two declared nuclear powers. Thus, South Asia—not the Middle East—should be the focus of U.S. counterterrorism and counterproliferation efforts in coming decades.
(Therefore "South Asia" - aka India should be defanged and made pliable through decades of sustained "2G like" Polity. On a side note - if anyone thinks we achevied some measure of success in dehyphenation of Indo-Pak and emergence of Af-Pak terminology with benefit of accruing a degree of exceptionality for India in IOR, they should think again....
The US plans for domination of "South Asia" will entail an Offshore Balancing Strategy (version 2.0) among the "2G like" polities across India,BD,Pak. Only it will be more refined than the original played out among the dictatorships of ME in the previous century. We can only hope NonAlignment 2.0 as implemented by our strategic types will suffiently dent this impending US play in "South Asia" )

Additionally, the Middle East has two of the world’s most important choke points for ocean-going trade: the Suez Canal and the Strait of Hormuz. But governments in the region, heavily reliant on exports, have strong interests in keeping trade routes open. Despite Iranian leaders’ recent threats, no government is likely to cut off its own economic lifeline voluntarily. Meanwhile, the Malacca Strait in East Asia will remain important for a diverse array of ocean-going trade for the foreseeable future.

Finally, the United States rightly is committed to Israel’s security. If Iran succeeds in building a nuclear weapon, Israel could face a potential existential threat—the same threat fellow U.S. allies in East Asia, including South Korea, Taiwan and Japan, have been facing from North Korea since 2006. Once again, U.S. interests in the Middle East are no more, and probably less, important than U.S. interests in other regions.

The changing realities of the world energy market do not mean the United States can or should ignore the Middle East. Certainly, Israel’s security and Iran’s behavior will keep the region a focus for policy makers’ attention. But, placed in a global perspective, the United States has more or deeper interests at stake in other regions of the world—especially Europe and Asia—than in the Middle East. Budget cuts are concentrating minds inside the Beltway with newfound discipline. And a new presidential term begins next January, either with President Obama or Mitt Romney taking over. This confluence of events gives American policy makers a powerful opportunity to reassess U.S. grand strategy, along with its attendant military-deployment and force structure. As they do so, they should recognize the emerging realities in the Middle East. Our rationale for guaranteeing the region’s stability in exchange for cheap oil is fading, and that mission quickly is becoming more trouble than it is worth.

My views in blue.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 05 Jul 2012 04:53

Received confirmation that India has opened a line of communication on the nuclear issue with Tehran, however it isn't that effective yet. Lets see what happens

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 05 Jul 2012 17:44

WikiLeaks releases Syria Files, almost 2.5 mln emails to be published

The whistleblower website WikiLeaks has announced the release of almost 2.5 million emails derived from 680 Syria-related entities and domain names http://wikileaks.org/syria-files/.

They are said to be “embarrassing to Syria, but it is also embarrassing to Syria’s opponents.”

“It helps us not merely to criticize one group or another, but to understand their interests, actions and thoughts. It is only through understanding this conflict that we can hope to resolve it," the website’s founder Julian Assange said.

The website says the files“shine a light on the inner workings of the Syrian government and economy, but they also reveal how the West and Western companies say one thing and do another.“