AFGHAN KILLING FIELDS: BLOOD FOR OIL & GAS TO CHINA
PART ONE OF THE SILK ROAD POSTS
This is PART ONE of a series of posts with some information relevant to the recent 911 events.
It is my hope that we can learn from the recent tragic, painful events and become wiser, with more tools to move in a positive direction.
This is my small contribution.
So, who am I?
First of all I’m a Mother and a Wife who believes in the principles America was founded upon and hopes to leave this world a saner, healthier place.
Besides that, I’m retired doctor with an engineering degree.
Why should you listen to me?
Your choice.
But do me this favor; if my conclusions are wrong please show me why because some of what I am learning is enough to make me sick.
In the ideal world, this information would be in an elegantly written article.
In the real world time is running out.
I’ve also been plagued with massive computer problems including a vicious hack-in.
I’ve not been able to post the information in PART TWO after 4 days of trying.
Hopefully this will get through.
I apologize for the format; just bear with me,
It will be worth it.
PART ONE:
AMERICAN BLOOD FOR OIL TO CHINA
ARE WE ABOUT TO SEND AMERICAN MEN TO AFGHANISTAN TO DIE SO OIL COMPANIES CAN PROFIT BY BUILDING A PIPELINE TO SEND OIL AND GAS TO CHINA AND JAPAN???
This is what I have figured out so far.
Many oil companies have been interested in developing the gas and oil fields in the Central Asian, ex-Soviet Independent States in the Caspian Sea region. It has been determined that the most profitable venture is to pipe oil and gas out of Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Pakistan and to the Far East to China and Japan.
The factors include a glutted European market to the west, an underutilized infrastructure in Turkmenistan due to lack of payment by Russia and an expected high demand in China.
This will be a very profitable venture.
A US company, Unocal, has been the main partner in an oil consortium call Centgas that has been developing this project, which they call the “Silk Road”.
Unocal and The Taliban were working on this project together until the US embassy bombings in August ’98.
There were many protests lodged against both groups about Human Rights violations in Afghanistan.
Unocal has a history of Human Rights violations in Burma.
There are indications Unocal resumed the pipeline project again in March 2000, despite US sanctions.
Unocal had hoped to use The Taliban to “stabilize” the region.
After the embassy bombings Unocal campaigned the US government to install a NATO or UN like force in Afghanistan to “stabilize” the region for their pipeline project
.
Bottomline; American oil companies want to build a pipeline through Afghanistan to get oil and gas to China and Japan.
There must be “stability” in Afghanistan for this project to proceed.
This project will NOT result in any benefits for US citizens except stockholders in the oil companies; not even an increased supply of oil and gas or lower prices.
However, we are expected to pay with the blood of American men.
This is the reality of Unocal’s much-touted “Silk Road”.
In my opinion this is not a “Silk Road” but a “Sick Road”.
There will be nothing beautiful about it.
Instead of red silk we will see red blood.
This is an old “Sick Road” we’ve been down many times before.
It was called Vietnam, after that The Gulf War; more recently “Plan Columbia”.
This is “Plan Afghanistan”.
Know it for what it is.
For more details keep reading, otherwise go to the PART TWO post.
In PART TWO I will show that the intent is for the US to have a long-term presence in Afghanistan beyond the need to address suspected terrorists.
_________________________________________________________________
THIS SECTION GIVES DETAILS ABOUT THE GAS AND OIL FIELDS IN TURKMENISTAN AND THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE TALIBAN/UNOCAL/CENTGAS PIPELINE PROJECT; THE “SILK ROAD”.
_________________________________________________________________
From: Caspian Gas Export: Stranded Reserves In A Unique Predicament:
“Several countries in the Caspian Basin have ample enough reserves to support export projects including Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan.
…While many analysts point to the political problems that might block Turkmenistan from exporting gas to Europe via Iran, Russia, Azerbaijan or Georgia, the core problem remains commercial viability. Serious questions linger about whether there is a market for the gas at all in an already crowded European market, where much of the buying is already tied up in long-term take-or-pay contract structures that make barriers to new suppliers formidable.
…In terms of commercial viability, the best option for gas exports from the Caspian region appears to be sales directed at Pakistan and India. These markets provide almost unlimited demand growth for gas and an ability to pay prices that could finance the pipeline and reward producers in Turkmenistan with acceptable wellhead earnings. The major problem with this option is that the gas must travel through Afghanistan to connect with the Pakistani gas grid. Creating a stable environment in Afghanistan along any pipeline route remains problematic, but may still be feasible, as the Taliban-led Afghan government is believed to be in control of 80% of the country. Stability of the existing regime remains in question, however. A pipeline route would benefit most people and places along the stretch by providing jobs and a steady source of income for decades. However, the pipeline would not benefit all parties to the country's conflicts. This could mean the pipeline would be a lightening rod for regional conflict much the way oil pipelines have attracted guerilla attacks in Colombia. (this was written in’98)
…The potential for demand growth in the Asian market is nearly unlimited at prices that both buyers can pay and suppliers can profit. This is in sharp contrast to routes to Europe where the regional producers would likely find intense competition among themselves for a limited market. Russia, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan have all publicly noted their interest in working jointly toward an eastern corridor. In the first stage of development, Turkmenistan is likely to provide most or all of the gas, with incremental supplies coming later from other countries. Since Pakistan and India's demand for gas has nearly no ceiling --at prices around of $2 per mmBtu-- several suppliers could be considered once Turkmenistan gets the export ball rolling. However, there's no guarantee that Turkmenistan will not try to go it alone, leaving other suppliers with only small regional markets to tap.
Turkmenistan: The Gas Export Anchor
Turkmenistan's gas reserves may be the greatest of the untapped oil and gas reserves in the Caspian region. What distinguishes Turkmenistan from all other gas producers in the region is that it has a significant track record as a proven exporter of gas prior to the break-up of the Soviet Union and in recent years to Ukraine.
Plenty of countries have untapped oil and gas resources, but no country has this amount of untapped infrastructure, which makes it unique among the world's major energy producers. Re-establishing links to export markets in Ukraine are problematic, as it would require successful renegotiations with Gazprom over transit rights. Instead, Turkmenistan will likely have to create new export outlets to either Europe or Asia.
It is important to re-emphasize that the biggest problem facing Turkmenistan is that at least three other countries-Russia, Norway, and Algeria--can already land gas more cheaply from ample reserves through existing links or ones under construction such as the Yamal pipeline and the UK-Belgium 2-bcf/d Interconnector pipeline. This gas can cover all the projected demand of the next 30 years.
With fierce competition facing Turkmenistan to the west, eastern routes to Asia present a viable economic alternative. Sitting to the east and southeast are Pakistan, India, and China, which among them contain over 40% of the world's population, desperately need cleaner sources of primary energy and have no existing import links by gas pipeline or LNG.
Plans to build a 1,300 km pipeline to carry up to 2-bcf/d of gas of Turkmen gas to Pakistan and India via Afghanistan have been moving forward despite skepticism on the part of outside observers. As planned, the pipeline will travel 175 km in Turkmenistan, 770 km in Afghanistan and 547 km in Pakistan, with the consortium also planning an oil pipeline along a similar route. Lead by Unocal and Saudi Arabia's Delta, a consortium known as CentGas has been formed to execute the project, which was scheduled to begin last December, but has not been able to get off the ground. The Unocal consortium plans to tap the 25-tcf Dauletabad-Donmez field in the Amu-Darya basin but faces a legal challenge from Argentine Bridas, which is trying to develop the 27-tcf Yashlar field in the Murgab basin northeast of Dauletabad.
http://www.rice.edu/projects/baker/Pubs/workingpapers/efac/efcac3.html
See also: CASPIAN SEA OIL AND NATURAL GAS EXPORT ROUTES:
www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/casproute.html
From: Turkmenistan Energy Information Administration:
In July 1997, officials from Turkmenistan and Pakistan and representatives from Unocal and Saudi Arabia's Delta Oil signed an agreement to build the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan line. The 900+mile pipeline is estimated to cost between $2 billion and $2.7 billion, and could carry approximately 700 Bcf of gas from Turkmenistan's Daulatabad gas field to the central Pakistani city of Multan. In October 1997, Unocal set up the Central Asian Gas Pipeline (CentGas) consortium to build the pipeline. CentGas consists of Unocal with a 54.11% stake, Delta Oil (15%), Japan's Itochu Corporation (7.2%), Inpex (7.2%), South Korea's Hyundai (5.5%), Crescent Group of Pakistan (3.89%), and the Turkmen government (10%). Construction was scheduled to begin in 1998. However, in early August 1998, Unocal announced that CentGas had not secured the financing necessary to begin the work, and on August 22, 1998, Unocal suspended construction plans due to the continuing civil war in Afghanistan. Unocal stressed that the pipeline project would not proceed until an internationally recognized government was in place in Afghanistan. In addition, Argentina's Bridas has filed a $15 billion lawsuit against Unocal and Delta for allegedly conspiring to undermine its own efforts to build the pipeline.”
: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/turkmen.html
http://www.unocal.com/uclnews/97news/102797a.htm
FOR MANY YEARS AFGHANISTAN HAS BEEN MANIPULATED BY THOSE IN THE US WHO WANT TO GET THE OIL AND GAS TO THE FAR EAST.
IT SEEMS THE TALIBAN HAVE BEEN A USEFUL TOOL TO TRY TO ACHIEVE STABILITY, YET ONE THAT OUTLIVED ITS’ USEFULNESS.
FOR FURTHER DETAILS ON THE ORIGIN & CONNECTION OF THE TALIBAN TO THE CIA SEE:
THE TALIBAN: A CIA & OSAMA BIN LADEN PRODUCTION:
http://www.rumormillnews.net/cgi-bin/config.pl?read=11626
________________________________________________________________
THE VIEWPOINT OF AN INDIAN ARMY OFFICER:
_____________________________________________________________________
Mono, Ethnic Solutions: The Taliban’s Cheque Book Campaign, Autumn ‘98
The Osama Bin Laden Factor: The Paradox of American Policy
“Nothing highlights this theme better than the somewhat paradoxical American policy positions in Afghanistan. These have mostly been guided (surprisingly) by tactical and short-term and often emotive agendas. The initial crusade against Soviet occupation was fuelled by an emotive agenda of seeking historical revenge for Vietnam. Over five billion dollars of military aid and equipment were recklessly flung in and an Islamic jihad was started. The USA did not even bother to wind it down once the Soviets left. It simply lost all interest. The collapse of the Soviet Union, the emergence of the Central Asian states and their huge hydro carbon deposits led to an equally sudden revival of American interest in this region. Now the revised tactical agenda went no further than seeking oil pipeline routes for its oil companies. The UNOCOL and Saudi Arabia went overboard in financing the Taliban to secure these oil routes. They completely ignored the perils of creating and letting loose such a rabidly fundamentalist organisation like the Taliban. The perils of such a course were painfully highlighted in the explosions that rent the US Embassies in Dar-es-Salam and Nairobi on August 7, 1998. The US has been bankrolling its own ultimate nemesis. Osama Bin Laden is now comfortably ensconced in the caves of the Zahawar Mujahideen base in the Khost province south-west of Jalalabad, (which the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had financed and had constructed during the Afghan War).”
http://www.idsa-india.org/an-dec8-3.html
______________________________________________________________________
THE VIEWPOINT FROM RUSSIA (in ’98):
________________________________________________________________________
“Russia until now has regarded the oil of the Caspian Sea as its exclusive strategic reserve. In 1994 Kozyrev and Primakov are said to have convinced Yeltsin to sign a secret resolution declaring the Caspian Sea a region of Russia's special interest. However, with the increasing role of Western and above all American oil companies in the region – thus, Unocal and its Saudi partner, Delta, Oil, are reported to have financed the Taleban in part – and Russia's military and economic weakness, Moscow's conception of its hegemonic role in this region appears ever more unrealistic.”
www.biost.de/pub/beri98/bb9802.htm
THE TURKISH VIEWPOINT:
_________________________________________________________
“The article below taken from Turkish Daily News provides evidence of the conivance of the United States government and UNOCAL in the oil politics of Turkey and Central Asia. It has long been suspected that UNOCAL and Saudi Arabia's DELTA OIL have financed the Taliban's destructive marauding in Afghanistan. Here a Turkish expert on oil politics provides more evidence. The Taliban, armed and financed by the Pakistani military and intelligence services, have defied all efforts of the United Nations and responsible members of the international community to bring about a peaceful settlement to the Afghan conflict. All other political groups have shown a willingness to reach a solution based on full representation of Afghanistan's diverse ethnic and tribal groups and power sharing. It is time for concerned experts to raise their voices in protest against these criminal maneuverings which have cost the Afghan people thousands of lives.
ACCORDING TO SEVERAL INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS, THE TALIBAN HAVE ENGAGED IN WAR CRIMES AND VIOLATIONS OF BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE AREAS THEY HAVE OCCUPIED - PEOPLE WHO WANT PEACE AND JUSTICE IN AFGHANISTAN AND CENTRAL ASIA SHOULD MONITOR AND EXPOSE THEIR ACITIVITIES AND THOSE OF THEIR CYNICAL INTERNATIONAL SPONSORS.”
www.connix.com/~harry/oil.htm
_______________________________________________________
IN FACT UNOCAL HAD BEEN CITED FOR HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN BURMA:
_______________________________________________________
February 1 “A U.S. federal judge denies a preliminary injunction requested by civil rights lawyers that would have removed California-based Unocal Corporation from a $1.2 billion pipeline project in Burma. The lawsuit alleges a variety of human rights violations by the Burmese government in connection with the project. The judge's ruling states that prohibiting Unocal's participation in the project would not stop the human rights abuses claimed in the lawsuit. President Clinton imposed trade and economic sanctions on Burma in April 1997, but the ban did not affect existing investments. Unocal holds a 28 percent share in the pipeline project, which is being constructed from Burma to Thailand. (DJ)”
http://discport2b.law.utah.edu/cdroms/Energy/cd_rom/apps/cabs/chrn1998.htm
_______________________________________________________________________
UNOCAL CHARTER REVOCATION EFFORTS:
_______________________________________________________________________
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Controlling_Corporations/ChallengeCorpRule_UNOCAL.html
THERE WERE MANY COMPLAINTS OF THE UNOCAL/TALIBAN ALLIANCE PERPETUATING ABUSES TO WOMAN & CHILDREN:
________________________________________________________________________
RIGHTS; Company Sacrifices Women for Oil, says Groups
WASHINGTON, June 1 (IPS) - Women's rights organisations accused a U.S. oil company Monday of entering into a business partnership with the Taliban government of Afghanistan, depite its record of human rights abuses against women and girls.
http://www.oneworld.org/ips2/june98/22_51_075.html
_______________________________________________________________________
ALTHOUGH UNOCAL SAID THERE WAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH THE TALIBAN THE EVIDENCE WAS TO THE CONTRARY:
________________________________________________________________________
UNOCAL and the Taliban
Actions Speak Louder than Words
UNOCAL is part of a consortium (CENTGAS) that is negotiating with the Taliban to build a multi-billion dollar oil and gas pipeline across Afghanistan. Publicity on the terrible human rights abuses women and girls are suffering at the hands of the brutal Taliban regime have created a public relations bind for UNOCAL in its efforts to secure business deals in Afghanistan.
Although UNOCAL on one hand has been saying publicly it will not conduct business in Afghanistan until an internationally recognized government is in power (1), there is substantial and growing evidence that UNOCAL's business deals with the Taliban are proceeding.
The press has reported that a delegation of top Taliban officials met with UNOCAL in Texas in December 1997 to discuss the building of a pipeline. They were chauffeured in a company minibus, and had dinner at the home of UNOCAL vice-president Martin Miller. They were helicoptered to an oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico to examine UNOCAL's deep-water drilling technology. Then, in February 1998, a team from UNOCAL visited Kabul for four days where they held talks with Taliban authorities on oil and gas exploration in Afghanistan, an area controlled by the Taliban. (Facts complied from Agence France-Presse, Dec. 6, 1997; Dow Jones International News January 5, 1998; The Sunday Telegram, London, December 14, 1997; The Guardian Foreign Page, January 12, 1998; and Agence France-Presses February 14, 1998.)
Most recently, on May 22 (according to the Afghan on Line Press, website: http://www.afghan-web.com/aop/) a delegation from the UNOCAL-led CENTGAS consortium visited Afghanistan - the first time the full consortium has visited. Following the visit, Mawlawi Ahmad Jan, the Taliban militia's mines and industries minister, said preparations to build the pipeline would get underway, and that the consortium wants to start building the pipeline by the end of 1998. Jan said the CENTGAS consortium -- which includes UNOCAL, Delta, the Turkmen government, Crescent of Pakistan, Hyundai of South Korea and two Japanese companies -- had applied to survey the 743-kilometer (458-mile) Afghan leg of the pipeline. He said a CENTGAS team will test the ground and examine satellite images of the route.
In addition to known trips by UNOCAL officials to Afghanistan, the University of Nebraska at Omaha reports it has a contract for nearly $1 million from UNOCAL to train workers in Afghanistan specifically for pipeline construction, providing further evidence that UNOCAL is proceeding with business activities in Afghanistan. According to a January, 1997 Washington Post article, women were only to be included in the pipeline project as lower-level staff. The University of Nebraska at Omaha now says it is training men only because the Taliban won't permit it to train women. (Telephone conversation between Prof. Robert Benson of Loyola Law School and the head of the Afghanistan program for University of Nebraska.) This exclusion of women runs counter to UNOCAL's own corporate code of conduct.
1 UNOCAL states on its web page that it "will not conduct business with any party in Afghanistan until peace is achieved and a government recognized by international lending agencies is in place. We have neither signed nor negotiated any business deals with any faction within Afghanistan." (UNOCAL web page May 1998, Position Statement on Proposed Central Asia Pipeline Projects, www.unocal.com.) Additionally, UNOCAL's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Roger C. Beach, in a letter to the editor of the Los Angeles Times posted on the company's web page as of May 28, 1998, states: "UNOCAL is committed to improving the lives of the people wherever we operate... we adhere to the highest ethical standards and follow both the spirit and the letter of U.S. and local laws. There are no exceptions. You can quote us on that."
Prepared by the Feminist Majority from news accounts. For more information, contact the Feminist Majority at 703.522.2214 or 213.651.0495.
http://www.feminist.org/news/pr/pr060198a.html
http://mosaic.echonyc.com/~onissues/su98goodwin.html
IN FACT IN DECEMBER ’97 UNOCAL BROUGHT THE TALIBAN LEADERS TO SUGARLAND, TX, A SUBURB OF HOUSTON, FOR TALKS:
Thursday, December 4, 1997 Published at 19:27 GMT
World: West Asia
Taleban in Texas for talks on gas pipeline
A senior delegation from the Taleban movement in Afghanistan is in the United States for talks with an international energy company that wants to construct a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan across Afghanistan to Pakistan.
A spokesman for the company, Unocal, said the Taleban were expected to spend several days at the company's headquarters in Sugarland, Texas.
Unocal says it has agreements both with Turkmenistan to sell its gas and with Pakistan to buy it.
But, despite the civil war in Afghanistan, Unocal has been in competition with an Argentinian firm, Bridas, to actually construct the pipeline.
Last month, the Argentinian firm, Bridas, announced that it was close to signing a two-billion dollar deal to build the pipeline, which would carry gas 1,300 kilometres from Turkmenistan to Pakistan, across Afghanistan.
In May, Taleban-controlled radio in Kabul said a visiting delegation from an Argentinian company had announced that pipeline construction would start "soon".
The radio has reported several visits to Kabul by Unocal and Bridas company officials over the past few months.
A BBC regional correspondent says the proposal to build a pipeline across Afghanistan is part of an international scramble to profit from developing the rich energy resources of the Caspian Sea.
With the various Afghan factions still at war, the project has looked from the outside distinctly unpromising.
Last month the Taleban Minister of Information and Culture, Amir Khan Muttaqi, said the Taleban had held talks with both American and Argentine-led consortia over transit rights but that no final agreement had yet been reached. He said an official team from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Turkmenistan should meet to ensure each country benefited from any deal.
However, Unocal clearly believes it is still in with a chance - to the extent that it has already begun training potential staff.
It has commissioned the University of Nebraska to teach Afghan men the technical skills needed for pipeline construction. Nearly 140 people were enrolled last month in Kandahar and Unocal also plans to hold training courses for women in administrative skills.
Although the Taleban authorities only allow women to work in the health sector, organisers of the training say they haven't so far raised any objections.
The BBC regional correspondent says the Afghan economy has been devastated by 20 years of civil war. A deal to go ahead with the pipeline project could give it a desperately-needed boost.
But peace must be established first -- and that for the moment still seems a distant prospect.
http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/west_asia/newsid_37000/37021.stm
____________________________________________________________________
THIS TALKS IN TEXAS WERE AFTER THE TALEBAN PROTESTED BEING LEFT OUT OF TALKS THAT UNOCAL HAD WITH TURKMENISTAN:
____________________________________________________________________
Taleban say no consultation took place over pipeline
Oct. 26, 1997 A senior Taleban official complained that Afghanistan had not been consulted over plans by Turkmenistan and an international consortium to build a $ 2-billion gas pipeline across the country to Pakistan.
"They have negotiated between themselves and should contact Taleban for giving elaboration about the project," Amir Khan Muttaqi, the Taleban minister for information and culture told. It was the first official comment by Afghanistan's Islamic leaders on an announcement that Turkmenistan and a group of international companies headed by U.S. Unocal had formed a consortium to build the pipeline.
Muttaqi said the Taleban had held talks both with Unocal and the Argentinean energy group Bridas about construction of the pipeline, which is to bring gas to the southern Pakistani city of Multan when completed. "We have had talks with both, but have not reached any final deal and recently efforts have increased for a final agreement," said the minister. He said that a tripartite commission grouping Turkmenistan, the Taleban and Pakistan had been set up to study the project. "The result of the meeting (in Turkmenistan) was the formation of a tripartite delegation from Afghanistan, Turkmenistan and Pakistan for discussing future co-operation to agree on the decision which will be beneficial for the three countries," the minister said in an interview with Reuters.
http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntc74802.htm
_______________________________________________________________________
IN FACT, IN NOVEMBER ’97 THE TALIBAN SAID THEY HAD NOT SIGNED A DEAL WITH ANYONE:
The UNOCAL-led consortium's joy at clinching the pipeline deal has been tempered by subsequent statements from the Taleban regime in Kabul, which at the moment controls the territory across which the pipeline would pass.
The Talebans' minister for information, Mulla Amir Khan Muttaqi, said on Sunday that despite the presence in Turkmenistan of a Taleban delegation last week, the Kabul government had not signed any deal with anyone. Mulla Muttaqi did not rule out a deal with the UNOCAL-led consortium, But he also did not rule out a deal with a rival consortium, led by the Argentinian Bridas company.
Bridas have been competing with UNOCAL for the Afghan pipeline project for some time, The Turkmen deal with UNOCAL is clearly asevere blow to Bridas, though judging from the Taleban statement the Argentinians have not given up hope yet.
But are the Taleban the right people to be talking to in Afghanistan? Only three states have so far recognised them - Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the UAE . What about the so-called 'northern alliance' in Afghanistan, supported by much of the non-Pashtu population - Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras - and which still holds about a quarter of the country?
http://www.idsa-india.org/an-dec8-3.html
SO, WHATEVER THE DEAL BETWEEN THE TALIBAN & UNOCAL, BY FEB. ’98 A UNOCAL REPRESENTATIVE TESTIFIED BEFORE THE HOUSE ABOUT WHY WE NEEDED TO BUILD A PIPELINE TO SEND OIL & GAS TO THE CHINESE & JAPANESE:
________________________________________________________________________
“In stark contrast to the other three markets, the Asia/Pacific region has a rapidly increasing demand for oil and an expected significant increase in population. Prior to the recent turbulence in the various Asian/Pacific economies, we anticipated that this region's demand for oil would almost double by 2010. Although the short-term increase in demand will probably not meet these expectations, Unocal stands behind its long-term estimates.
Energy demand growth will remain strong for one key reason: the region's population is expected to grow by 700 million people by 2010.
It is in everyone's interests that there be adequate supplies for Asia's increasing energy requirements. If Asia's energy needs are not satisfied, they will simply put pressure on all world markets, driving prices upwards everywhere.”
______________________________________________________________________
THIS IS NOT TRUE. THERE IS ALREADY AN OVERSUPPLY GOING TO EUROPE, HENCE THE BETTER MARKET TO CHINA & JAPAN.
________________________________________________________________________
“The key question is how the energy resources of Central Asia can be made available to satisfy the energy needs of nearby Asian markets. There are two possible solutions -- with several variations.
Export Routes
East to China: Prohibitively Long?
One option is to go east across China. But this would mean constructing a pipeline of more than 3,000 kilometers to central China -- as well as a 2,000-kilometer connection to reach the main population centers along the coast. Even with these formidable challenges, China National Petroleum Corporation is considering building a pipeline east from Kazakhstan to Chinese markets.
Unocal had a team in Beijing just last week for consultations with the Chinese. Given China's long-range outlook and its ability to concentrate resources to meet its own needs, China is almost certain to build such a line. The question is what will the costs of transporting oil through this pipeline be and what netback will the producers receive.
South to the Indian Ocean: A Shorter Distance to Growing Markets
A second option is to build a pipeline south from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean.
One obvious potential route south would be across Iran. However, this option is foreclosed for American companies because of U.S. sanctions legislation. The only other possible route option is across Afghanistan, which has its own unique challenges.
The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost two decades. The territory across which the pipeline would extend is controlled by the Taliban, an Islamic movement that is not recognized as a government by most other nations. From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of our proposed pipeline cannot begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders and our company.
In spite of this, a route through Afghanistan appears to be the best option with the fewest technical obstacles. It is the shortest route to the sea and has relatively favorable terrain for a pipeline. The route through Afghanistan is the one that would bring Central Asian oil closest to Asian markets and thus would be the cheapest in terms of transporting the oil.”
Conclusion
The Central Asia and Caspian region is blessed with abundant oil and gas that can enhance the lives of the region's residents and provide energy for growth for Europe and Asia.
The impact of these resources on U.S. commercial interests and U.S. foreign policy is also significant and intertwined. Without peaceful settlement of conflicts within the region, cross-border oil and gas pipelines are not likely to be built. We urge the Administration and the Congress to give strong support to the United Nations-led peace process in Afghanistan.
U.S. assistance in developing these new economies will be crucial to business' success. We encourage strong technical assistance programs throughout the region. We also urge repeal or removal of Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act. This section unfairly restricts U.S. government assistance to the government of Azerbaijan and limits U.S. influence in the region.
Developing cost-effective, profitable and efficient export routes for Central Asia resources is a formidable, but not impossible, task. It has been accomplished before. A commercial corridor, a "new" Silk Road, can link the Central Asia supply with the demand -- once again making Central Asia the crossroads between Europe and Asia.
Thank you.
http://www.house.gov/international_relations/105th/ap/wsap212982.htm
______________________________________________________________________
UNOCAL ACTUALLY STOOD THERE & ASKED THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO CHANGE AN INTERNATIONAL LAW & GET A UN BACKED GOVT. INTO AFGHANISTAN SO THEY CAN GET THEIR PIPELINE BUILT & PROTECTED!!!
THEY WANT THEIR “SILK ROAD”.
WELL, I DON’T SEE ANYTHING COMING BACK ON THIS “SILK ROAD” EXCEPT PROFITS FOR UNOCAL.
TO ME IT LOOKS LIKE A “SICK ROAD” BECAUSE IT WILL BE COVERED WITH BLOOD, LOTS OF IT AMERICAN.
EXCUSE ME, BUT HAS ANYONE CONSIDERED THAT WE DO NOT HAVE TO RELY ON FOSSIL FUELS; THAT’S THERE IS PLENTY OF ALTERNATIVE & RENEWABLE ENERGY RIGHT IN OUR OWN COUNTRY???
CAN WE GET BACK TO SQUARE ONE & ASK WHY WE HAVE AN INFRASTRUCTURE THAT DEPENDS ON FOSSIL FUELS?
CAN WE CONSIDER WHY MOST PEOPLE WHO OFFER VIABLE ALTERNATIVE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES DIE VERY FAST & THE TECHNOLOGY GOES “UNDERGROUND”?
COULD IT BE THAT THE AGENDA FOR MAINTAINING OUR RELIANCE ON FOSSIL FUELS IS ABOUT CONTROL & KEEPING THE POWER IN THE HANDS OF A FEW?
ISN’T THERE SOMETHING VERY WRONG WHEN THOSE VERY FEW HAPPEN TO BE IN OUR WHITE HOUSE?
____________________________________________________________
BY JUNE ’98 THE TALIBAN HAD REACHED AN AGREEMENT WITH THE OPPOSITION NORTHERN ALLIANCE TO CREATE A JOINT ECONOMIC GROUP TO WORK WITH CENTGAS:
________________________________________________________________________
www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntc83001.htm
________________________________________________________________________
THE TALIBAN CONTINUED IT’S EFFORTS TO BE RECOGNIZED AS A LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT.
UNOCAL WITHDREW FROM AFGHANISTAN & CENTGAS AFTER THE US EMBASSY BOMBINGS IN AUGUST’98.
________________________________________________________________________
Effective December 4, 1998, Unocal has withdrawn from the Central Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline consortium for business reasons. Unocal no longer has any role in supporting the development or funding of this project.
As a result of portfolio rationalization and successes around the world in Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Latin America, West Africa and the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, Unocal is concentrating on its core areas in this time of reduced oil prices.
Unocal had served as the development manager for the seven-member Central Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline consortium, which was formed in October 1997 to evaluate and, if appropriate, to participate in the future construction of a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to natural gas markets in Pakistan and, potentially, India. Contrary to some published reports, Unocal was not a party to any commercial agreement with any individual Afghanistan faction.
Since the pipeline project was first proposed in 1995, there have been a number of complex issues that Unocal has taken very seriously. Unocal recognized the legitimate concerns regarding the treatment of women in Afghanistan. Consistent with our core values and business principles, Unocal provided humanitarian support and skills training to Afghanistan through CARE and the University of Nebraska at Omaha. Neither program was designed to provide pipeline construction skills training. These programs met or exceeded UN guidelines for doing fieldwork in Afghanistan. They included basic job skills training and education for both men and women, and
Sept. 14, 2001: Unocal reiterates prior statements The company is not supporting the Taliban in Afghanistan in any way whatsoever. Nor do we have any project or involvement in Afghanistan. Beginning in late 1997, Unocal was a member of a consortium that was considering construction of a Central Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline between Turkmenistan and Pakistan. Part of this pipeline would have crossed a portion of Afghanistan. However, Unocal formally withdrew from that consortium in December 1998. Our company has had no further role in developing or funding that project or any other project which might involve the Taliban. The pipeline was never constructed. The statement below was issued at the time Unocal withdrew from the project. After several incorrect reports appeared, including one published in Pakistan in February 1999, Unocal reconfirmed its position regarding this matter in another statement, which is posted in our News Archive: Feb. 16, 1999 statement. ######Unocal statement on withdrawal from the proposedCentral Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline projectUpdated 12/10/98 Effective December 4, 1998, Unocal has withdrawn from the Central Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline consortium for business reasons. Unocal no longer has any role in supporting the development or funding of this project. As a result of portfolio rationalization and successes around the world in Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Latin America, West Africa and the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, Unocal is concentrating on its core areas in this time of reduced oil prices. Unocal had served as the development manager for the seven-member Central Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline consortium, which was formed in October 1997 to evaluate and, if appropriate, to participate in the future construction of a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to natural gas markets in Pakistan and, potentially, India. Contrary to some published reports, Unocal was not a party to any commercial agreement with any individual Afghanistan faction. Since the pipeline project was first proposed in 1995, there have been a number of complex issues that Unocal has taken very seriously. Unocal recognized the legitimate concerns regarding the treatment of women in Afghanistan. Consistent with our core values and business principles, Unocal provided humanitarian support and skills training to Afghanistan through CARE and the University of Nebraska at Omaha. Neither program was designed to provide pipeline construction skills training. These programs met or exceeded UN guidelines for doing fieldwork in Afghanistan. They included basic job skills training and education for both men and women, and elementary education for boys and girls. Unocal also supported earthquake relief efforts through the Red Cross and the United Nations.
http://www.unocal.com/uclnews/98news/centgas.htm
_______________________________________________________________________
CENTGAS, WITHOUT UNOCAL, TRIED TO FIND ANOTHER PARTNER IN 1999:
________________________________________________________________________
http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/company/cnc91223.htm
http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/company/cns94825.htm
________________________________________________________________________
IN MARCH 2000, UNOCAL DISCUSSES RE-ENTERING CENTGAS WITH “AFGHAN AUTHORITIES” DESPITE US SANCTIONS:
________________________________________________________________________
http://www.brecorder.com/story/S00DD/SDC24/SDC24288.htm
_______________________________________________________________________
IN APRIL 2000, THE FOREIGN POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE HAD THIS TO SAY:
_____________________________________________________________________
“Across the world, demand for oil is growing. By 2015, China alone may have to import over 5 million barrels per day. Much of that oil will come from the Persian Gulf, a region graced with unrivaled oil reserves -- but beset with unresolved interstate conflicts, weapons proliferation, and worsening domestic political conditions.
Clearly, the stability of the Persian Gulf will remain an important focus of Western strategy for many years to come. As Operation Desert Storm demonstrated, any threat to the long-term supply of oil from the Gulf is likely to trigger a major intervention by the U.S. and other outside powers.
Preventing and countering worst-case scenarios, such as an Iraqi or Iranian invasion of Saudi Arabia, civil war, or domestic unrest, are in fact the primary motives for the continued U.S. military presence in the Gulf.
Support for a powerful military presence in the Persian Gulf remains strong in both the Clinton Administration and U.S. Congress. However, this consensus could shift if the financial or human costs of a protracted Gulf presence increase significantly -- which could happen for a number of reasons.
For one, the evident lack of support among the NATO and Arab Gulf allies (with the exception of Britain and Kuwait) for American policy toward Iraq could eventually spark a backlash within the Congress and among the American public. Further terrorist incidents that cost American lives would be sure to heighten that sentiment.
Furthermore, while economic and strategic analysts understand why the security of Gulf oil is vital to the U.S. economy (even if most of the oil is bound for Asia), the American public and some members of Congress do not necessarily share that view. Why, they will ask, should American blood and treasure assure the flow of reasonably priced oil to China and Japan?
U.S. leaders must present a more compelling and coherent strategic rationale for an open-ended Gulf commitment that is credible and accepted by the American public and key allies. Unilateral American actions will not suffice to deter serious threats such as the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. If initiatives are not soon undertaken to strengthen the allied coalition, far more will be at stake than the price of oil.
www.nyu.edu/globalbeat/mideast/Kemp0400.html
________________________________________________________________________
HAVE THE 911 EVENTS PRESENTED US WITH JUST SUCH A COMPELLING RATIONALE FOR AN OPEN ENDED GULF COMMITMENT THAT IS CREDIBLE AND ACCEPTED BY THE AMERICAN PUBLIC AND KEY ALLIES?
OR ARE WE SLIDING DOWN A SLIPPERY, SLICK, SICK ROAD OF BLOOD?
THE ONLY RESEMBLANCE THIS ROAD HAS TO A “SILK ROAD” IS IT’S RED.
NOTICE THE CONTINUAL REFRAIN OF UNOCAL WANTING TO GET THE GAS & OIL EASTWARD TO CHINA WHERE THE BIGGEST PROFITS CAN BE MADE & THE NEED TO HAVE A “A STABLE GOVERNMENT IN AFGHANISTAN.”
CHECK OUT PART TWO OF THE SILK ROAD POSTS!
Phoenix
