Global News Journal
Beyond the World news headlines
Iraq: was it all about the oil?
Five years after the U.S.-led invasion to topple Saddam Hussein, Iraq is throwing open its oil sector to foreign oil firms in a way Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and others in the region are reluctant to. Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani says no company will have any special privilege.
Some analysts take a different view. They reckon U.S. and British oil majors are in a strong position to help develop the world’s third-largest oil reserves. Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell and BP head the queue. They have already built up a relationship with Iraq’s oil officials by negotiating short-term technical deals.
Now Iraq is inviting bids for long-term development contracts at its biggest fields, the “backbone of its industry” in the words of Shahristani. He believes Iraq could become the world’s second- or third-biggest oil producing country, rivalling Saudi Arabia and Russia.
Are U.S. and British firms obvious choices as partners because of their expertise? After all, before the U.S.-led invasion Iraq often preferred Russian firms. Or are U.S. and British firms reaping the benefit of their governments’ policies?
from Africa News blog:
Zimbabwe election rage
President Robert Mugabe's re-election has sparked cries of outrage from Zimbabwean bloggers and demands for international intervention.
Mugabe's victory in Friday's one-candidate poll was condemned in the West and by all three African monitoring groups who said the vote was deeply flawed.
"Now we wait for the Old Man (Mugabe) to swear himself in to a power that he does not have. We wait for him to claim a throne that he stole one-dark-night-that-is-our-country. We wait for real international pressure and solidarity to force a transition," Zimbabwean protest poet Samm Farai Monro, better known as Comrade Fatso, wrote.
Official results of the June 27 election, from which opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai withdrew a few days before the poll, showed Mugabe, 84, received 85.51 percent of the vote.
Many bloggers said the figure was rigged.
"They are cooked results and unfortunately or fortunately rather, they are not valid to the world and around us," wrote one blogger who called himself Nice-Shona-Guy on www.newzimbabwe.com
Zimbabwe's crisis has ruined a once prosperous country, saddling it with the world's worst hyper-inflation and straining neighbouring nations, especially South Africa, with a flood of millions of economic refugees.
from Africa News blog:
Has Mugabe out-foxed the African Union?
It would be out of character for the African Union (AU) to order any tough sanctions against Zimbabwe's strongman President Robert Mugabe at its summit in Egypt on Monday. But has his swearing-in on Sunday for a new five-year term after a widely condemned election further narrowed the AU's latitude for action? Mugabe defied international calls to cancel a presidential election run-off and negotiate with opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai who defeated Mugabe in the first-round ballot on March 29 but fell short of an outright majority. Mugabe was the only candidate in the second round after Tsvangirai and his Movement for Democratic change pulled out because of widely reported government-backed violence and intimidation.
Mugabe was heading for the AU summit after Zimbabwe's electoral commission declared him the winner as expected. He was immediately inaugurated in Harare, extending his 28-year rule. This could force the AU to deal with him as the legitimate head of state of Zimbabwe, in the face of calls from the likes of South Africa's Bishop Desmond Tutu for the pan-African body not to recognise his election. A defiant Mugabe vowed to confront his critics at the summit. The wily Mugabe invited Tsvangirai to the inauguration ceremony and pledged at the event to talk to the opposition to solve the country's political crisis. Tsvangirai rejected the invitation.
Political analysts said Mugabe was attending the AU summit from a position of strength and with an appearance of willingness to negotiate with Tsvangirai, a long-standing demand of the AU.
"If the AU does not recognise his presidency Mugabe simply retuns to Harare and goes on with his life," analyst John Makumbe told Johannesburg's City Press. "Life for Zimbabweans remains the same, if not worse. So the AU has to make a difficult choice: going for Mugabe or going with Mugabe."
The pan-African organisation had for years used a sacred principle of non-interference to justify inaction against rogue leadership on the continent. Many African leaders have been reluctant to condemn Mugabe, who has enjoyed the status of an African liberation hero. But all that is changing, with Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga leading a growing number of African voices critical of Mugabe.
So do you expect the AU to take any tough stand against Mugabe? Or has Mugabe out-foxed the AU? What form of international intervention is possible in Zimbabwe? Is Mugabe sincere about his declared intention to reach out to the opposition?
As he cares not a damn about what anyone thinks of him he should not take umbrage if he is addressed as “bug-a-me”, after all this is merely an anagram, not the insult which mugabe is!
from Africa News blog:
Has Mugabe out-foxed the African Union?
It would be out of character for the African Union (AU) to order any tough sanctions against Zimbabwe's strongman President Robert Mugabe at its summit in Egypt on Monday. But has his swearing-in on Sunday for a new five-year term after a widely condemned election further narrowed the AU's latitude for action? Mugabe defied international calls to cancel a presidential election run-off and negotiate with opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai who defeated Mugabe in the first-round ballot on March 29 but fell short of an outright majority. Mugabe was the only candidate in the second round after Tsvangirai and his Movement for Democratic change pulled out because of widely reported government-backed violence and intimidation.
Mugabe was heading for the AU summit after Zimbabwe's electoral commission declared him the winner as expected. He was immediately inaugurated in Harare, extending his 28-year rule. This could force the AU to deal with him as the legitimate head of state of Zimbabwe, in the face of calls from the likes of South Africa's Bishop Desmond Tutu for the pan-African body not to recognise his election. A defiant Mugabe vowed to confront his critics at the summit. The wily Mugabe invited Tsvangirai to the inauguration ceremony and pledged at the event to talk to the opposition to solve the country's political crisis. Tsvangirai rejected the invitation.
Political analysts said Mugabe was attending the AU summit from a position of strength and with an appearance of willingness to negotiate with Tsvangirai, a long-standing demand of the AU.
"If the AU does not recognise his presidency Mugabe simply retuns to Harare and goes on with his life," analyst John Makumbe told Johannesburg's City Press. "Life for Zimbabweans remains the same, if not worse. So the AU has to make a difficult choice: going for Mugabe or going with Mugabe."
The pan-African organisation had for years used a sacred principle of non-interference to justify inaction against rogue leadership on the continent. Many African leaders have been reluctant to condemn Mugabe, who has enjoyed the status of an African liberation hero. But all that is changing, with Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga leading a growing number of African voices critical of Mugabe.
So do you expect the AU to take any tough stand against Mugabe? Or has Mugabe out-foxed the AU? What form of international intervention is possible in Zimbabwe? Is Mugabe sincere about his declared intention to reach out to the opposition?
from Pakistan: Now or Never?:
Pakistan and the battle for Peshawar
Peshawar is such an important city for Pakistan that it can be hard to write about it without sounding shrill. It is significant strategically since it lies near the entrance to the Khyber Pass into Afghanistan. But it is also important emotionally -- not only is it a Moghul city and an ancient Silk Route trading hub, but it is also a Pashtun town on the Pakistani side of the Durand Line , the ill-demarcated border between Pakistan and Afghanistan imposed by British colonial rulers that splits the Pashtun people of the region in two. For Pakistan, fighting for control of Peshawar is probably comparable to what France and Germany felt about Alsace Lorraine before World War Two.
So when the New York Times publishes an article about Peshawar being at risk of falling into Taliban hands we must pay attention. "In the last two months, Taliban militants have suddenly tightened the noose on this city of three million people, one of Pakistan's biggest, establishing bases in surrounding towns and, in daylight, abducting residents for high ransoms," it says. "The threat to Peshawar is a sign of the Taliban's deepening penetration of Pakistan and of the expanding danger that the militants present to the entire region, including nearby supply lines for NATO and American forces in Afghanistan."
The Daily Times says it more dramatically, with a Kiplingesque notion of what the fall of Peshawar to Taliban control would mean for Pakistan: "The Taliban are no longer at the gates of Peshawar, they're inside, making their presence felt in the largest city in the NWFP (North West Frontier Province)," it says.
Pakistan has just launched an offensive against Taliban fighters near Peshawar in an attempt to re-impose government control. As I said at the beginning, it's hard not to sound shrill about a place that few outsiders understand. But history is in the making here, and the battle for Peshawar is one we all should watch.
Snapshot of German power at Bild summer fest
At any one of the dozen high-powered Berlin summer parties thrown by major media outlets and the political parties in Germany each year you can count on finding a reasonable cross-section of government and industry movers and shakers to rub elbows with. But nowhere in Germany can you find as rich an assortment of A-list government, business, media and entertainment industry types as at the “Sommerfest” held by Bild newspaper.
From Chancellor Angela Merkel and Deutsche Bank chairman Josef Ackermann to heavyweight boxers, assorted actors and actresses, and people famous for just being famous, there is no more eclectic gathering of 750 people who see themselves as Germany’s best and brightest — all on fine form ahead of Germany’s cherished two-month long summer holiday season.
Many countries have their own special events — awards ceremonies, banquets or parties — that can sometimes be used to gauge the national mood. In Germany it’s the Bild fest.
“We like to party in Berlin and the Bild people know how to organise a great bash,” said Cherno Jobatey, a well-known television host for public broadcaster ZDF who said he had been to 10 such events in the last 14 days (“my fridge was always empty and the food is usually pretty good”). “But seriously, you can run into all the people you wanted to run into here. You can talk to people you’ve always wanted to talk to in a way you wouldn’t normally be able to.”
Even politicians, captains of industry or celebrities who have been bashed in the headlines of Bild, Germany’s best-selling tabloid-style newspaper, are usually more than happy to show up for the unique German-style barbecue party — it’s “informal” but everyone still wears a suit.
“Someone once said ‘You haven’t really lived until you’ve battled with Bild’ and I think there’s some truth to that,” Bild editor-in-chief Kai Diekmann said with a big smile after pointing to some of those who had been thrashed in his paper but still came to the party. “I’m always happy to see the people here that we’ve had rip-roaring battles with. You can really find everyone here — from the ruling coalition to the opposition and across industry. There are lots of fellow journalists here as well. There’s a cheerful atmosphere to it all, there’s nothing forced about it. You can swap ideas with just about anyone you want.”
This year’s Bild fest provided a rich harvest for anyone looking for nuances in German politics as pretty much every member of the cabinet was there. Merkel, in especially high spirits presumably due to her superb opinion poll numbers, was easily the most sought after person to talk to. And those she spend extra time chatting with (such as Lower-Saxony’s ambitious state premier Christian Wulff) are sure to be seen as rising stars in the months ahead. Conversely those she doesn’t talk with (but had in the past) are on the way down.
Has U.S. slipped nuclear bombs out of Britain?
U.S. nuclear weapons in Britain – out with a whimper, not with a bang?
It was once one of the most contentious issues in Europe, inspiring mass demonstrations, “peace camps” and a movement that shaped the politics of a generation. After more than half a century, there are no more U.S. nukes in Britain.
On Thursday, the Federation of American Scientists, a group set up by former Manhattan Project scientists alarmed by the legacy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, reported that the United States had removed the last of its nuclear bombs from the Royal Air Force base at Lakenheath in eastern England.
The move had more to do with changing U.S. strategic imperatives and military technology than with a sudden outbreak of global harmony. Dropping nuclear bombs out of airplanes is an old-fashioned way to deliver them in an era of accurate ballistic missiles. Washington now considers its main threat to come from the area south of the former Soviet Union, and is still keeping nuclear bombs in bases in Italy and Turkey and other parts of Europe. Britain has its own nuclear weapons and has decided to replace the submarines that carry them with a more modern fleet.
If the removal of American nukes from Britain really happened, it happened on the sly. A spokewoman for the U.S. forces in Lakenheath said Washington never talks about the location of its nuclear bombs. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s spokesman had not read reports on the subject and had nothing to say about it, and the Ministry of Defence had no comment.
But the event, if confirmed, marks the end of an era for thousands of British protesters who defined themselves by their opposition to U.S. nukes, camping outside bases like Lakenheath throughout the 1980s.
The head of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, the biggest single-issue campaign group in Europe, welcomed the news that the bombs were gone and said it would be good if the government would announce it publicly. She also said the fight would continue against U.S. plans to set up an anti-missile defence, perhaps with base stations at the same location in Lakenheath.
Sorry to read that the English cartoons of hippies and grannies chained to fences in the rain will probably end with the removal of the nukes. Maybe they can turn their attention from a tactic that kept them safe and allowed them to protest to the demise of democracy in Rhodesia.
Enter the new farmers
What’s with farming these days? The humble, even if slightly romantic vocation, is attracting a new breed of participants as investing in farmland and agriculture becomes the latest fad in the world of investments. With financial markets in tumoil and commodity prices at record highs, traditional financial players such as investment banks and hedge funds, and even sovereign wealth funds of cash-rich emerging economies are increasingly looking at farm land as the next major investment avenue.
The motivations are varied — from pure financial punting to concerns about food security. Underlying all this is the belief that the rapid economic expansion of China and India could add more than a billion people between them to the ranks of consumers of meat and wheat-based products. And then there is the growing demand for land to grow crops for biofuels.
Morgan Stanley has bought some 40,000 hectares of land in Ukraine , while the New York Times reported this month that Calyx Agro, a division of the giant Louis Dreyfus Commodities, is buying tens of thousands of acres of cropland in Brazil.
Chinese firms are said to be locking up farmland and mineral reserves in Africa, while Saudi Arabia and Bahrain plan to grow strategic grains abroad to protect their countries from crises in world food supply.
According to Asia Times, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Yousaf Gillani during a visit to Saudi Arabia in early June sought $6 billion in financial and oil aid in return for hundreds of thousands of acres of agricultural land, which could be tilled by the Saudis. All this could present some poor countries with both opportunities and threats. With oil prices at near record highs, they could trade their energy security with the food security needs of their investors and bring millions of acres of non-arable land into use. But contract farming could just as easily boomerang if high prices and domestic food shortages create a backlash against such barter deals.
It is interesting that beecee denounces people investing in agriculture at a time of food shortages.
Face to face with Medvedev
What makes Russian President Dmitry Medvedev tick? How independent is he of his predecessor, Vladimir Putin? Medvedev gave Reuters a chance to find out more about his plans, and get some clues about the questions being asked by Russia watchers, analysts and diplomats, by granting us an interview in the Kremlin. During a 90-minute question-and-answer session he played down differences with Putin, his long-time ally who is now prime minister, and portrayed himself as a continuity figure but the contrast in style and tone between the two men was striking. Medvedev made none of the harsh attacks on the West that became Putin’s trademark and used considered, lawyerly phrases that sounded quite unlike Putin’s more direct and earthy language. Medvedev said Russia’s foreign policy would not be swayed by criticism from abroad, but added that complaints about its policy were normal. He avoided echoing Putin by making charges of Western hypocrisy and double standards. But he did sound more like Putin when discussing Russia’s media, saying television channels, newspapers and websites were “absolutely free” and dismissing any possibility of special controls on the media in Russia. Some analysts think Medvedev is a deliberately more liberal choice than Putin who can usher in an era of greater freedom, private property and foreign investment. Others view him with suspicion as little more than a Putin puppet.
What do you think?
Russia is set to surpass Saudi Arabia as the leading hydrocarbon exporter this next year and more billionaires in Moscow than anywhere else on Earth in 2008, not to mention a tripling of GDP growth year-over-year since Putin came to power in 2000 that dwarfs the West. Russia is back in a major league way no matter how it’s dished under the Soviet system or the Revanchist Social Controlled Capitalist version … politically or militarily, Tsarist or totally Russified under the Putinist Socialist-Yet Capitalist Federated Republican structure or Medvedev. Many speak of the largest country in the world as it were the Bahamas – remember they can still retarget and obliterate half-the-planet in 30 minutes and are verifiably rebuilding much to the annoyance of the West … so it’s not surprising to hear normal poppycock from the Western mediated and medicated yuppified media of the lack of freedoms enjoyed by who … The Sun of London in tabloid journalism – that era ended with Yeltsin who rightfully deserves credit as well as critics for the way he handled the dissolving of Russia’s USSR. Russian and Sviet respect from WW2 comes from the fact that the Red Army and Soviet Russia lost more than 30 million people in war caused by Nazi Germany … and liberated more than half of the European Continent as so-called Communists! That again dwarfs the Western Allies and probably even the amount of Holocaust by Hitler vs. Soviet/Russian casualties. Imagine the Germans fighting the US back to the Mississippi River – losing control of the East Coast for a year or so, having the largest tank battle in history across the entire Mid-Atlantic US, laying siege to Chicago (aka … Stalingrad … now Volgograd and perhaps New York … aka … Leningrad … again Petrograd ??? for another year) … all out war in most of North America and losing 30 million people in the process as they battled their way across the Atlantic all the way to Berlin? There lies your answer – no need for Salon.com!
The sudden collapse of the USSR and subsequent opening of the region has led to an intense investment and development scramble by international oil companies. A key problem to further development in the region is the status of the Caspian Sea and the establishment of the water boundaries among the five littoral states. Also: much controversy currently exists over the proposed Trans-Caspian oil and gas pipelines. These projects would allow western markets easier access to Kazakh oil, and potentially Uzbek and Turkmen gas as well. NOTE here also: the US has given its support for the pipelines. Russia officially opposes the project on environmental grounds. Analysts note that the pipelines would bypass Russia completely (that will not happen/nor will Russia allow it – because of the giant Gazprom, Rosneft and Lukoil – who will soon overtake the Western Major Oil Cos. soon in value and size (and they are all quasi-Soviet) … denying Russia and ex-Soviet states valuable transit fees, as well as destroying current Russian monopoly on westward-bound hydrocarbon exports from the region is a `war we won’t win’ … unless we follow John McCain’s 100 Year Bush-Cheney plan of liberty – now entitled by McCain as `Rogue States Rollback’ …. it seems the New Cold War has begun?
Folks in the naive West and media, to put bluntly … the conflict between Russia and former Tsarist regions is 500 years older than the discovery of America – so we should mind our own biz, stop expanding NATO as agreed to in the 1990 CFE treaty which Russia has honored since the disintegration of the USSR and the US/NATO have not. Russian reemergence as an energy and military Superpower disturbs us in the West … so some journalists begin speculating in the West, as the West normally does in its own terms – not historically. The Medvedev, Putin … the Russian and former Soviet peoples will work out their own terms and we should let them do just that instead of wooing them to NATO. This is idiotic anyways if we say the `Cold War’ is truly over … the US wants NATO to replace the UN as the World Enforcing Body, no doubt – but is a nuclear war worth it. We need to concentrate on extracting ourselves from a trillion USD mistake in Iraq before we worry too much about integrating the Ukraine and Georgia into NATO. Just remember … the Red Army and the Russians/USSR lost 31 million people in WW2 and bore the brunt of defeating Nazi Germany again – any conventional war with them will prove the same result to the West … and smart bombs will be used by both sides, but the numbers lie with the 100 plus Russian Divisions, 15 million troops, tactical nukes and 20000 tanks.
from Africa News blog:
Has Tsvangirai made a fatal mistake?
Morgan Tsvangirai's decision to pull out of the presidential election on Friday leaves the road open for President Mugabe to win another term in power.
The decision has been met by a storm of international condemnation of the violence, with increasingly powerful voices speaking out from Africa. On Tuesday President Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal and ANC leader Jacob Zuma joined the condemnation and called for the vote to be postponed.
But there is no sign that Mugabe and his supporters, including the powerful security chiefs, will budge. They are vowing to press ahead with the election despite suggestions Mugabe will have no legitimacy if he wins this vote.
Perhaps Tsvangirai had little choice. President Wade said he fled to the Dutch embassy on Sunday -- where he is still seeking refuge -- minutes before soldiers came to his home. Western powers have defended his decision.
But at the end of the day, will international pressure make any difference?. Mugabe has a long history of defying outside pressure, even though now his support within Africa is diminishing. Can he continue to ignore the pressure and battle on in Zimbabwe as the economy spirals even further into total chaos?
Did Tsvangirai misjudge his move? Has he let down all those who have suffered to support the MDC, some at the price of their lives? Or has he made a calculation that by pulling out of the vote he will show that Friday's election is a sham and he will win in the end? What do you think?
Be Prepared! The Us Economy will go down the tubes if Oil hits $200.00 a Barrell. IF Gas hits $10.00 Plus a gallon in the US ….we are all in Trouble. Food, Gas and any other service you can think of will go up as well! And,Crime rate will increase dramanically!
OPEC doesnt want to do anything about the situation but count their $$ they are getting.
Who in the world wants to help their fellow countrymen??
Its a Sorry situation we are in at this time. Feel sorry for our GrandKids and how will they ever afford to go to College!