| Login |
This one-time registration is for participation in this blog.It
also enables you free access to all newnations.com reports and to receive newsletters.
If you are already registered with newnations all you now need to do is log-in.
Click Here to login/register
|
|
|
|
|
| Mission |
We tell
the world about the world
Our mission is to further the promotion of liberal democracy and the safeguarding
of the environment by the actions of accountable governments. To advance this
cause we report, without fear or favour, the affairs of nations that are in
transition, their politics, economics, business, finance and human rights -
and we tell it how it is, consistently, calmly, and objectively.
 |
|
| Countries: Bosnia Herzegovina |
|
Posted on Monday, July 28, 2008 - 10:06 AM |
The capture of Karadzik
The wartime leader of the Bosnian Serbs, indicted twice for orchestrating genocide in the 1992-95 Bosnia war, was arrested in Serbia on July 21 after nearly13 years on the run. He is now in a Belgrade prison awaiting extradition, which is likely to happen soon.
Relatives and supporters who have spoken to him say he is in great form, ready to take on the United Nations war crimes court in The Hague, clear his name and restore the honour of Serbs. "Radovan is spreading great optimism, he's laughing even when I started crying," said his brother Luka. "He will conduct his defence on his own. We've already prepared the defence strategy and have a lot of prepared papers and evidence."
In prison, Karadzic shaved off the beard and cut the long hair that was part of his assumed id entity as a New Age healer.
Witnesses say he looks like his old self, the man who led Bosnian Serbs in their bid to link Serb areas of Bosnia to Serbia, in cooperation with Serb autocrat Slobodan Milosevic. "He's morally and mentally very strong," said his lawyer in Serbia, Svetozar Vujacic. "He told me he was a great optimist that truth and justice will win, and that he trusts in God."
The Hague indictment against him currently in force dates from April 2000 and was prepared by former prosecutor Carla del Ponte, who had set the arrest of Karadzic and his military commander Ratko Mladic as her life's goal.
The 14-page document is a chilling account of killings, rape, torture and expulsions aimed at driving out Bosnian Muslims and Croats from areas claimed by Serbs.
The two most grave charges are over the 1995 massacre of some 8,000 Bosnian Muslim males in Srebrenica, and the 43-month siege of Sarajevo, when more than 11,000 people died from mortar and sniper fire, malnutrition and starvation.
Many people in Serbia and the Serb half of Bosnia say this is a biased account of the war, imposed by Western, anti-Serbian propaganda, and accuse the tribunal of ignoring crimes against Serbs by their wartime enemies.
Relief at Serbian result
The Croat and Muslim Bosnians were watching events in Serbia with great anxiety in the last few months. They were apprehensive that the ultra-nationalists would prevail and pursue a will-of-the-wisp in Kosovo.
The formation on July 4 of a reformist coalition government in Belgrade, under the control of the Democratic Party of President Boris Tadic, is an enormous relief. The Socialists of Milosevic ill-fame are inside, but reduced to a rump and tamed. The Karadzik outcome is putting an end to an untoward, an invidious, an obnoxious, nightmare.
There may be dissenters from this emotion among Bosnian Serbs, but even there a measure of relief must be felt that no new war is in the offing, from which in the Balkans of late the Serbs always seem to be the losers.
Dodik welcome for new Belgrade government
Republic of Srpska (RS) Premier Milorad Dodik says that he welcomes the new coalition in Serbia. "The stand of the RS leadership is well known - we will support whoever the citizens of Serbia give legitimacy to," said Dodik in an interview published by the Belgrade daily, Večernje Novosti on July 15.
The Bosnian Serb politician also said that there is "no dilemma for the Serbs across the Drina River", and that is that "the strength of the RS depends on Serbia's strength and stability". He added that Banja Luka has "big ambitions" to continue its cooperation with Serbia and expressed hope that this will be achieved.
At the same time, Dodik said that the RS institutions are enduring the pres sure, particularly that coming from Sarajevo "aimed at the disappearance of the Serb entity in Bosnia-Herzegovina.” This is standard Serb paranoia. Does he really believe it? Anyway, he has to pretend to in Banja Luka.
Closure of TI offices in Banja Luka
There is no doubt, which is the trickiest place in Bosnia for foreigners to operate. Transparency International (TI) on 10 July announced it would temporarily close its offices in Bosnia's Serb-dominated Republika Srpska, saying the lives of the anti-corruption watchdog's staff were at risk. The closure comes after back-and-forth accusations between Bosnian Serb officials, who accuse the organization of corruption, and TI representatives there, who accuse Bosnian Serb officials of orchestrating their demise.
TI says there are clear indications that it is being purposely discredited by the local government through a detailed plan contrived some six months ago. On 1 July, several Bosnian Serb media outlets (all of them known for their staunch support of the government of Prime Minister Dodik) published reports saying that two unidentified representatives from TI's Bosnian branch, headquartered in Republika Srpska's largest city, Banja Luka, as well as one employee of the Bosnian Indirect Taxation Agency, had been involved in the racketeering of local businessmen.
The allegations were brought for the media by a "protected witness" who gave the same statement to the Republika Srpska police. The press in Banja Luka reported that the corruption allegations were currently being investigated by the Bosnian Prosecutor's Office, even though at that time the Office denied the claim, saying it had not received any such information from Republika Srpska police.
A representative of the Indirect Taxation Agency was allegedly providing the financial information of the "victims," the media reports said. They also reported that Bosnian TI staff had been blackmailing Bosnian Serb businessmen to the tune of thousands of euros each in order to keep them off US and EU "blacklists."
Bosnian Serb media has published a series of articles since early July saying that TI representative Ljubinko Lek ovic had sought bribes of €4,000-20,000 (US$6,300-31,800) from officials who wished to be kept off the blacklists.
These so-called blacklists contain some 60 Republika Srpska politicians and businessmen banned from entering the US or the EU since 2005 for suspected involvement in war crimes or organized crime.
The Bosnian TI branch has categorically denied the accusations and has indicated it will take the local media to court over the matter. According to TI, the media onslaught against its offices was little more than a continuation of Dodik's policy of pressuring his critics.
Stifling the critics the easy way?
"The background of these attacks is our achievements in the past year after investigating cases of the privatization of larger companies conducted under very suspicious circumstances," Srdjan Blagovcanin, TI Bosnia executive director, told ISN Security Watch. "We were told we were going to suffer the consequences if we did not stop investigating privatization and business deals in Republika Srpska," he said.
According to Blagovcanin, Bosnian Serb officials offered TI bribes (in the form of "generous donations") if the watchdog would stop investigating corruption cases in Republika Srpska and would instead focus on the country's Federation entity.
However, the TI Bosnia executive director said, "we saved our integrity and this is the price we are now paying," referring to the latest accusations that have led to the temporary closure of the offices in Banja Luka. "What is happening now is [that] the people who we pointed out in our corruption reports, those who generated the corruption, are taking revenging on TI," he said.
Blagovcanin also said that TI had information that some people from the list of officials and businessmen allegedly blackmailed by the corruption watchdog had been paid to make their accusations to the media.
Trading accusations
In the past year, TI has been highly critical of privatization deals across Bosnia, accusing officials of violating the basic principles of public procurement, concessions and privatization processes.
Earlier this year, TI launched proceedings against the Republika Srpska government for hiding information related to an agreement with Austrian construction company Strabag, which is slated to participate in building roads there. TI's main concern is that the Bosnian Serb government is seeking to change privatization legislation in order to avoid tenders and enable the direct selection of buyers.
Furthermore, in its reports, TI accused the Republika Srpska government of misusing entity funds during the construction of the recently opened government building, which cost some €120 million (though only €10 million was initially planned). TI also raised suspicion concerning the transparency of the construction of the Banja Luka-Gradiska highway. Over the past eight years, only 5.7 kilometers of the highway has been finished, at a price per kilometer higher than anywhere in Europe.
The corruption watchdog also accused Dodik of nepotism, saying that hundreds of millions of euros worth of public contracts had been signed with one or two construction companies, based in Dodik's home village of Laktasi, near Banja Luka, for undocumented works that largely exceed the initial budgets.
Dodik told Republika Srpska media that TI was aiming economically and politically to destabilize the Bosnian Serb entity, pointing to the fact that it alone among the country's international organizations was based in Banja Luka rather than Sarajevo. "The focus of their activity was always in our entity, while the other, the Federation, was investigated only on the surface," Dodik complained, adding that the racketeering case would be investigated by the Republika Srpska Prosecutor's Office, since the state-level prosecutors could not be trusted.
Dodik said that Bosnian prosecutors had "dismissed" information about racketeering by TI officials for five years, suggesting that the international community here would not take kindly to such accusations.
The plot thickens
Nonetheless, the state-level prosecutor's office will likely be involved in the case, despite Dodik's wishes. In early July, the international community's Office of the High Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina (OHR) sent a letter to the Prosecutor's Office in Sarajevo, revealing a plan to discredit TI. The letter had been received by the OHR in early February.
Slobodan Vaskovic, chief editor of Banja Luka's weekly magazine Stav (Attitude), told ISN Security Watch that a man, describing himself as a "protected witness for Republika Srpska police," approached him in January saying that Dodik had promised him €100,000 to accuse the local branch of TI of organized crime and racketeering. "A man approached me asking for money [€25,000] in exchange for revealing the details of Dodik's 'plot' to discredit TI. Since I don't have that kind of money, I told him to go to the National Front nongovernmental organization, led by Dragomir Babic," Vaskovic said.
After both Vaskovic and Babic refused to pay him, the "protected witness," in a n attempt to prove his credibility, told them he had been instructed by Milos Cubrilovic, Dodik's chief of security, as to how to deliver his statement to the police and media in order to discredit TI. He offered them a voice recording of his conversation with Cubrilovic and other local police officials giving him the instructions and money. He said had already received part of the promised €100,000, and that he planned to take it and flee to neighboring Serbia.
Vaskovic told ISN Security Watch that the "protected witness" was actually a man by the name of Vladimir Latinovic, a known member of the organized crime network in Banja Luka. Latinovic was a suspect in the recent explosion of a local businessman's car. Previously, he was sentenced to one year in prison for hijacking vehicles belonging to the international community.
After meeting with Latinovic, Babic and Vaskovic penned a letter based on Latinovic's testimony, and sent it in February to the OHR in Sarajevo, hoping to warn them about a potential plot to discredit TI in Banja Luka.
"At that time, the information we received seemed incredible. However, since the developments over the last week have shown that the plan described in the letter is being implemented [...] OHR representatives are meeting with the state prosecutor over the letter, which can serve as potential evidence," OHR spokeswoman Ljiljana Radetic said at 1 July press conference.
Later that week, Republika Srpska police filed charges with the Bosnian Prosecutors Office against Latinovic, TI's Lekovic and Nikica Gligoric from the Bosnian Indirect Taxation Agency for organized crime and racketeering.
It is clear to most that this case should be resolved by the state prosecutor rather than the Republika Srpska media.
According to both Blagovcanin and Vaskovic, Dodik is trying to achieve more than one goal with this case: To show to his voters that he is not a criminal, but that the international community, through TI, is attempting to discredit him and destabilize the government and strip the Bosnian Serb entity of its authority.
Note: To read more, click here |
|
| >>>
Read full article: 'Bosnia Herzegovina' ( Reads) Comments? |
|
|
|
| Countries: Bulgaria |
|
Posted on Monday, July 28, 2008 - 09:41 AM |
|
|
The struggle against crime and corruption
There is one huge issue in Bulgarian politics that needs urgent attention and action – that of widespread crime and corruption at the top. This is corroding the body politic. The people despise their own politicians for their brazen fleecing of public funds and endless graft.
The European Commission (EC) is determined that its own funds at least are not going straight into the clutches of the mafia and their ilk. It stripped Bulgaria of 486 million euros ($766m) in EU funds on July 23 and warned Sofia that it might lose future aid unless it fights corruption harder. In all at least 6.4 billion euros could be at stake by 2013, although a EC spokesman in emollient mood denied this.
There are many who think that it was a mistake to bring Bulgaria and Romania into the EU before they had addressed these grave issues. It is too late to do anything about that now. But the EU has not lost all leverage; it can still withhold funds at its discretion.
The EC adopted reports on justice, crime and corruption problems in Bulgaria and Romania on July 23. Drafts of the report are said to have been kept secret beforehand even from governments in the two countries. On July 16, Reuters quoted a EU source familiar with the content as saying that "the scale of corruption and the failings of the judicial system would be censured in both countries, but only Bulgaria stands to lose money immediately."
"In Bulgaria, there are serious, systemic problems. We will be confirming that certain money will be forfeited," Reuters quoted the source as saying on condition of anonymity.
Reuters quoted the source as saying that the EC would not trigger a safeguard clause, which could freeze judicial cooperation with Bulgaria and withdraw the recognition by other member states of Bulgarian court rulings, saying that doing so would be counter-productive.
In an unprecedented move and despite pressure from Sofia, Commission officials reported that, not only have the funds been forfeited, but the European Union has blacklisted two Bulgarian government agencies handling the funds.
"There have been serious allegations of irregularities as well as suspicions of fraud and conflicts of interest in the award of contracts," said a Commission report. The funding freeze for the EU's poorest member will remain in place until "sound financial management structures are in place and operating effectively".
EU officials have also told The Daily Telegraph that Bulgaria has until the end of December to clean up its administration or else future aid, totalling £8.7 billion over the next five years [a larger sum than is reported by the Wall Street Journal Europe], will be at risk. "Unless it is sorted out by the end of the year, Bulgaria is in big trouble," said an official.
Other funding programmes related to border security are also under threat, leading to measures that will mean Bulgarian citizens could lose the EU's "Schengen" free movement rights enjoyed by most other Europeans.
Another Brussels report examining Bulgarian judicial reforms, a condition of the country's EU membership in January 2007, was harshly critical but held back from triggering legal and economic sanctions. "Reform of the judiciary and law enforcement structures is necessary and long overdue," said the Commission. "The fight against high-level corruption and organised crime is not producing results."
Bulgaria's centre-Left Socialist government has been rocked by the funding freeze and by leaks of a secret EU report linking fraud to individuals with links to the country's political establishment. Sergei Stanishev, Bulgaria's prime minister, has responded to the funding freeze by ordering urgent measures to tackle corruption. "We are working on an action plan that is expected to be ready by the end of this week," he said. "I will require concrete measures, proposals and deadlines for their implementation."
After Bulgarian lobbying, the Commission removed a reference, in a draft report, to funding "siphoned off by corrupt officials, operating together with organised crime".
"That is totally unacceptable," said Mr Stanishev, although it is not quite clear whether he was referring to the allegation or what was alleged.
Bulgaria, a former Communist country and the EU's poorest member state, is struggling to cope with organised crime, a wave of unsolved contract killings and allegations of official collusion in mafia networks.
Merci Monsieur et Madame
The Bulgarians have a lot for which to thank the French. It is actually because of the Romanian infatuation with all things Francais et Francaises that they are in the EU at all. It was Paris that pressed hard for Romania's incorporation in the EU. It could hardly have left out Bulgaria to its north. The Bulgarians got in on the coat-tails of the Romanians.
The Bulgarians have long been under the spell of Paris, which they regard as the true centre of civilisation, not London or New York. They view the world through a Parisian lorngette.
It was notable that it was French President Nicolas Sarkozy who played a vital role in securing the release of Bulgarian nurses held by Gaddafi in Libya last year. The French are the protector of the Bulgarian and Romanian peoples.
Bridging the Mediterranean
The French themselves are very conscious of their southern border on the Mediterranean, the avenue for their colonial expeditions in Africa, and, since the opening of the Suez canal, in Indo-China and elsewhere in Asia as well. Every French schoolchild is made aware of the masterpiece by Ferdinand Braudel, founder of the Annales school of historians, The Mediterranean in the Age of Philip 11, and is expected to read it.
President Georgi Purvanov represented Bulgaria at the founding meeting on July 12 2008 of the Union for the Mediterranean, hosted in Paris by President Sakozy. There is an inconvenient fact - Bulgaria is not on the Mediterranean, but the Black Sea. So what? It is now metaphorically on the Mediterranean by signing up to the Treaty of Rome.
Bulgarian National Radio reported that at a forum presided over by Sarkozy and his Egyptian counterpart, Hosni Mubarak, the heads of state and government of 43 countries discussed co-operation in areas including economic and social development, climate change, energy, migration and dialogue among civilisations.
Membership of the project is open to all states that border the Mediterranean, all members of the European Union, and some others. They represent a total of nearly a billion people.
The organisers said that the countries represented were Albania, Algeria, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Britain, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Croatia, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mauritania, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, the Netherlands, the Palestinian Authority, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Syria, Tunisia and Turkey. Plenty of those are in the same metaphorical boat as Bulgaria.
The only national leaders who were invited but did not attend were Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi, a vocal critic of the project and whose country did not send an envoy at all, and the kings of Jordan and Morocco, who both said they could not come for personal reasons.
The BBC reported that, in a declaration, the 43 nations – including Israel and Arab states – pledged to “pursue a mutually and effectively verifiable Middle East Zone free of weapons of mass destruction”.
Sarkozy singled out as a “success” the fact that Israel's prime minister had sat at the same table as Syria's president. The two countries are still technically at war.
The stated aims of the Union for the Mediterranean include an ambition to build a common future based on the full respect of democratic principles, human rights and fundamental freedoms, determination to eradicate terrorism and to combat its sponsors, creation of a free trade area in the Euromed region by 2010 and beyond and the promotion of all-round regional economic integration, promoting orderly managed legal migration and fighting illegal migration.
The meeting deferred until its next gathering in November a decision on the seat of the Union of the Mediterranean.
During the first half of the plenary session of the summit, several projects on curbing pollution in the Mediterranean and on its coasts, building sea and land ways, civil protection at the level of the Mediterranean and alternative energy were adopted.
Other projects adopted include a plan for a Euro-Mediterranean University, seen as a contribution to training people in the area, and a Mediterranean initiative to stimulate the setting up of small and medium-sized companies to the south and east of the Mediterranean.
Note: To read more, click here |
|
|
>>>
Read full article: 'Bulgaria' ( Reads) Comments? |
|
|
| Countries: Iran |
|
Posted on Friday, July 25, 2008 - 02:02 PM |
An American volte-face?
Although20some months ago few still believed that the military option towards Iran was still being considered in Washington, nobody probably expected at this point a marked softening of American diplomacy towards Iran. In July Secretary of State Rice was even reported to be studying the possibility of re-establishing a diplomatic presence in Teheran, something along the lines of the US interest section which was established in Cuba in 1977.
Some observers mainly ‘hawks,’ point out that Iran’s constant postponements have failed to meet firm reactions in Washington, whose attitudes have even been described by them as ‘slow motion capitulation’. With Senator Obama promising to enter unconditional negotiations with Iran if he is elected, it appears indeed that Iran might be about to come out ahead on its three years standoff with the Americans. Teheran does not even feel the need to keep a low profile: in July it tested for the first time long-range missiles, able to reach Israel. The current offer by the Europeans, Russian, Chinese and the Americans, includes expanded political, trade and security ties, and there was hope that Iran might show interest, at least in order to gain some more time, as some Iranian officials had hinte d a positive response.
On Saturday 19th July an international meeting took place with Iranians with a team led by Xavier Solana the EU foreign policy chief. For the first time, one of the six western delegates was a high echelon US State department representative, a first in these discussions. They were however talks about talks with the western side offering a ‘freeze for freeze’ deal where the UN would make no more sanctions if Iran would halt the production of nuclear fuel, allowing for negotiations to then take place.
Ali Velayati, adviser to Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, had stated in public that the proposal should be accepted. The head of Iran’s atomic energy agency too was reported to have stated that a decision to start talks over the proposals had been made. Instead, the Iranians in the end ignored the proposal and are calling for wider talks. This might be ‘gamesmanship’ or they might be assuming that their position is so strong now that they can afford to be even more assertive than in the recent past.
On the other hand, there are reports of strong divergences between Gates and Rice on the one side and Bush / Cheney on the other as far as Iran is concerned. Reports of covert operation against the Iranian regime are intensifying and are confirmed by sources in Washington too. The question which arises is whether this is an attempt to put pressure on Teheran, or a prelude to a more serious military option.
Limited results of economic isolation strategy
The strategy of economic encirclement continues to produce results, but too slowly to keep pace with the fast-moving world of politics, particularly in electoral democracies. In July a US court reminded of the potential impact of sanctions by fining a French company for supplying oil field equipment to Iran. At the same time French oil giant Total announced that it was bailing out of the South Pars gas field exploitation project, because of the ‘political risks’ involved. The company stated that it is interested in remaining involved in the Iranian oil and gas sector, but the Iranians were not pleased. Malaysian company Petronas, on the other hand, confirmed that they will remain engaged in the exploitation of South Pars. Other investors, however, are not scared or are far too worried by their own need for oil and gas to listen to American threats. The Turks, for example, have recently stated their readiness to invest up to US$10 billion in Iran, of which US$6 billion would be in the oil and gas sector.
Although Iran is not being affected by high food prices to the same extent that poor countries are, but due to the failure of its own wheat crop this year it has to imports large quantities of wheat, at the rate of one million tonnes each year.
On the economic front the only other development worthy of notice was in July the announcement that the Iranian government will start privatising the country’s power plants in August; currently private investors own already a total production capability of 3,000MW and are building some new plants.
Note: To read more, click here |
|
| >>>
Read full article: 'Iran' ( Reads) Comments? |
|
|
|
| Countries: Iraq |
|
Posted on Friday, July 25, 2008 - 02:00 PM |
|
|
Maliki speeds on
In July Maliki achieved another success by bringing back into the cabinet the six ministers of the Iraqi Accordance Front, which had been boycotting it for a year. They have been pacified by the release of many prisoners linked to the Sunni insurgency and by the crackdown on the Sadrist militias. The emergence of a new Sunni political grouping, the Awakening, which is linked to the militias which now work for the Americans, might in the future complicate the political equation as its members are often at odds with the Accordance Front and the organisation is becoming increasingly bold in its efforts to consolidate its hold over the regions it controls. However, Maliki might even be able to exploits its rise as it offers additional room for manoeuvre when dealing with the Sunnis.
Maliki’s most publicised stunt in July was his endorsement of Democratic candidate Obama’s platform with regard to his plans to withdraw American troops from Iraq by 2010. Maliki has been negotiating with the US for a while over the long-term presence of their troops in the country and he clearly wants them to leave relatively soon and without leaving any major presence behind. If Obama wins, he might get just that, which incidentally would also allow him to make the Iranians happy and create the conditions for his staying in power. In the short term, however, what Maliki really wanted was to put pressure on Bush to come to terms with him on a withdrawal timetable. Washington was pacified by denying that the Prime Minister’s words had been interpreted correctly, but his aims had already been achieved: the Bush administration is now beginning to move in the same direction as Obama and has agreed with Maliki to negotiate timetables for the reduction of US troops levels.
Another success of Maliki’s government in July was the approval of the long-delayed local elections law, despite the opposition of the Kurdish alliance, whose MPs withdrew from the parliament in protest. The new law will allow elections to provincial councils to take place, facilitating the integration of Sunni political groups in the political system.
Economic landscape shows some limited improvement
Foreign investment in Iraq has unsurprisingly been very low so far, reaching just US$272 million in 2006. Now there are signs of renewed interest of foreign investors in Iraq, in part due to the offers of incentives by the government, such as a 10-year tax break, and in part due to the decreasing tide of violence. Investments are not materialising yet, as shown by the fact that projects worth just US$418 million have been registered since December by the investment agency (including both foreign and domestic investment), but expectations are up. Electricity supply, although still falling much short of demand, has risen by 11% over the last year as the level of sabotage declined and better security allowed for crucial repairs to be carried out. At present Baghdad receives on average 10 hours of electricity each day.
Oil production has now stabilised at 2.5 million bpd and in order to achieve further significant improvements the government has adopted a two-fold strategy. Short term (one or two year) no-bid service contracts are now being negotiated with oil firms, while longer term contracts have now been opened for bidding to service six oilfields and two gas fields. These new contracts will be assigned only next June. The government appears to have run into some difficulties in its negotiations for the short term contracts as the oil companies are not very interested in merely servicing the fields, but want to get involved in oil production instead. Some day!
Note: To read more, click here |
|
|
>>>
Read full article: 'Iraq' ( Reads) Comments? |
|
|
| Countries: Pakistan |
|
Posted on Friday, July 25, 2008 - 01:57 PM |
Musharraf down, Nawaz up
According to opinion polls, support for President Musharraf continues to fall and has now reached an all time low of 9%. As many as 83% declare that they wanted the President out. Polls, for what they are worth, do show that PML-N is now the preferred choice of voters, with 36%, while the PPP trails behind with 32% and is seen as losing ground. Although this is likely an inflated figure, it does reflect a surge in popularity. Nawaz Sharif’s approval rate is now 82%, massively up from the 46% he polled two years ago, as opposed to Gilani’s 64%. The PML-Q suffers from Musharraf’s unpopularity and is attributed a mere 4% in the polls. In practice it seems to be on the verge of disintegration and therefore it makes an unattractive future partner for the PPP let alone the fact that PPP voters also seem to strongly oppose such option.
Coalition fragments, but it might be too late for Musharraf
Gilani faces growing trouble within the coalition. After PML-N quitting the cabinet (but staying on in the coalition), now the ANP also threatens to quit because their two ministers have not been assigned a portfolio as promised. The only religious party in the coalition, Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam, which holds just 6 seats in the parliament, is also threatening to distance itself from the government in protest at military operations against the militants. The decision to reinstate the judges sacked by Musharraf by increasing the Supreme Court strength from 16 to 29 has not been appreciated by the PML-N, which wants a more aggressive attitude towards Musharraf and is trying to capture the frustrated mood of the population with an eye to future elections. While all this must sound as good news to Musharraf’s ears, it might be too late for the General to reap any benefit from it. As indicated above, the weight of his PML-Q declines by the day. After long sticking to Musharraf, now even the Bush Administration is beginning to edge closer to Prime Minister Gilani, although not before having contributed to make the US ever more unpopular in Pakistan. Incidents occurring in the border20region where US force target insurgents operating in Afghanistan and sometimes kill Pakistani civilians and military, also contribute to widen the gap between US and Pakistan.
Economic and financial crisis deepens
The crisis of the stock exchange is now getting out of control and investors have even been rioting in desperation, an unusual sight in most countries. The index lost 35% between mid April, when it reach its peak, and mid-July. Foreign investment into the Karachi stock exchange, which had reached US$1.76 billion in the June 2006-June 2007 period, has now practically entirely dried up. The crisis has many sources, but a perception of weak leadership and of a fracturing coalition in Islamabad is the main cause. The food prices crisis has been discussed in previous updates, but a third crisis started hitting the Pakistani public hard in July, as the government finally was forced to transfer higher fuel prices to the consumers. Although the government had already increased fuel prices five times since February, such increases fell far short of the actual growth in international prices. In July instead petrol and diesel prices were increased by 14%, an unprecedented rise in Pakistan, which immediately led to street protests. Another piece of bad news which comes as no surprise is that the trade deficit has reached an unprecedented US$20.7 billion in 2007-08, a 52.9% increase on the US$13.5 billion of the previous year, despite a strong growth in exports and a weak Pakistani rupee. In the current situation attracting foreign investment will increasingly be a tall order; right now only China is showing a willingness to consider major investments in Pakistan, including hydroelectric power plants and refineries, allegedly valued at US$12 billion.
Note: To read more, click here |
|
| >>>
Comments? |
|
|
|
| Countries: Afghanistan |
|
Posted on Friday, July 25, 2008 - 01:54 PM |
|
|
No longer a success story
Although the Bush administration still holds to its view that Afghanistan has been a major success of its foreign policy, even in the United States a consensus is emerging that Afghanistan is being lost. Mid-rank officials in the State Department and even in the Pentagon are (off the record) disparaging about what is going on there, but the real news in July has been the coming out of the two presidential candidates, who to different extents have criticised the existing situation in Afghanistan. Barack Obama has been more vocal and went as far as criticising Karzai himself: "I think the Karzai government has not gotten out of the bunker and helped to organize Afghanistan and (the) government, the judiciary, police forces, in ways that would give people confidence." McCain by contrast limited himself to stating that more had to be done for the Central Asian country, but being a Republican it is noteworthy that he felt that he had to be critical at all. American officials, mostly Republicans but also critical of ongoing developments in Afghanistan, mostly believe that Obama might be going too far. Although there is near unanimity in identifying President Karzai as one of the main reasons for incipient failure, they fear that openly pointing the finger at him might destabilise Afghanistan. Explicit and unwavering American support had been the main factor leading to Karzai’s election in the first place and more in general allowed him to maintain a degree of support despite his weak performance. If the perception that Americans are likely to abandon him should spread, whatever support is left for the government could collapse.
Bad press gets worse
Afghanistan’s reputation as one of the most corrupt countries on earth received a boost in July, as Transparency International released its new league table of least corrupt countries and for the first time included Afghanistan, which stands at 172 (out of 180). While Transparency’s methodology might not be too accurate, nevertheless their reputation over many years reviewing many countries is very sound, and many observers of the scene from their own viewpoints would confirm the general thrust of the report on Afghanistan.
Afghanistan’s citizens agree that corruption has been getting much worse and is now overbearing. It is alleged that at the centre of it is the Ministry of Interior, where positions are sold for cash. According to the accusations, officials, who buy their positions, then have to tax their subordinates to repay the costs and make a profit. In turn the subordinates have to tax the population in every possible way and get involved in profitable criminal activities, such as smuggling narcotics.
One more competitor for Karzai
Afghanistan’s attorney general Abdul Jabar Sabet announced in July that he plans to stand for president in 2009. Karzai’s first reaction was to immediately sack him. Although there is no provision in Afghan law for such sacking, it is also obvious that Sabet could not stay in his post after such announcement. Sabet was the protagonist of an anti-corruption campaign that attracted much attention over the last few years, although over the last year or so it had appeared to be petering down. The campaign had significant public support, but Sabet, who belonged in the past to the Islamic Party, was also criticised for targeting his campaign against political enemies. In the absence of a countrywide network of organised supporters, it is unlikely that Sabet will emerge as a major competitor in the presidential campaign. News coming from the provinces suggest that Ali Jalali, the former Minister of Interior, is seen right now as the main anti-Karzai candidate, but it is not clear yet whether he will actually run. It appears likely that the political scene at the time of the elections will be extremely fragmented, with tens of candidates, and that the eventual winner will probably have a modest share of the vote in the first round, hence receiving a weak legitimisation from the polls. Voter turnout is also expected to be low, both due to the situation of violence and disaffection among voters.
Note: To read more, click here |
|
|
>>>
Read full article: 'Afghanistan' ( Reads) Comments? |
|
|
| Countries: Ukraine |
|
Posted on Friday, July 25, 2008 - 01:51 PM |
NATO membership on the imminent agenda
The military alliance will consider applications from Georgia and Ukraine in December. Ukraine has expressed concern at attempts by Russia to stir up separatism in Crimea. Russia’s Black Sea fleet must leave its leased Sevastopol base by 2017, but Moscow’s powerful Mayor, Yuri Luzhkov, said recently that it had “a lawful right” to reclaim the port.
Britain’s former Prime Minister Tony Blair told a conference of the Yalta European Strategy (YES) at the Levadia Palace that tensions with Russia over Ukraine’s Nato membership had to be resolved. “Russia sees Ukraine’s membership as threatening Russian interests. It is very important that we continue over time to explain that this is not so,” he said.
YES, founded by the billionaire Viktor Pinchuk, lobbies for Ukraine’s entry into the EU by 2020.
Once again the former British premier is revealing his extraordinary naivety about international affairs. This led him to ally himself unconditionally and join into a false prospectus with Bush over Iraq, ending his credibility with his own people, but also with foreigners. He even went to Moscow after the invasion in 2003, to persuade Putin that there were WMDs in Saddam's Iraq after all, without any evidence. Why should he have thought that Putin of all people, head of Russia that lost a nice client state in the process, would sympathise?
Now he wants to persuade the Russians that NATO membership for Ukraine is not against their interests. The Ukrainian public know better and by two to one in recent polls reject the idea. It will not happen.
The Yushchenko-Timoshenko feud continues
There is often no love lost between the top people in a cabinet. Look at Blair and Brown in Great Britain; the two architects of New Labour came to detest each other. The same goes for the two heroes of the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, President Viktor Yushchenko and Premier Julia Timoshenko. Yushchenko had already once sacked her from the premiership; but he has been obliged to re-instate her.
He may have been hoping a year ahead of new presidential elections, in which she is bound to challenge him, that the parliament would do his dirty work for him, voting out her government. But it was not to be. On July 11, the Verkhovna Rada (VR) did not support the motion to pass a vote of no-confidence in the cabinet initiated by the Party of the Regions, the main (pro-Russia) opposition bloc in parliament. Only 174 lawmakers, well short of the needed 226, voted for the motion.
There are plenty of people in the upper echelons of Ukrainian politics who dislike Yushchenko far more than Timoshenko. The former is a tiresome scourge of corruption and corporate high jinks, in which Ukraine and Ukrainian parliamentarians lead the field in the former communist world. He is himself a former central banker and civil servant of an evident probity (although several missing millions of dollars during his watch at the Central bank have never been accounted for).
Timoshenko is a different story, ‘one of us’, whose credentials in this regard are attested by the fact that she is ‘wanted’ even by the Russians for commercial malpractices in the 1990s. In that murky decade it was simply not possible for someone to amass a multiple billion dollar fortune in Ukraine or Russia without being a crook. Ask Berezovsky, the Russian billionaire in exile in London, who admits as much. The oligarchs of Ukraine can feel safe with her.
“Only one political player lost when Verkhovna Rada refused to pass a vote of no-confidence in the Tymoshenko cabinet – Viktor Yushchenko,” says director of the Centre for Political Research and Study of Conflicts, Mykhailo Pohrebinsky. “In fact, no one intended to pass the vote of no-confidence. Political parties in VR primarily wanted just to highlight their position and distance themselves from any responsibility for what is going on in Ukraine. They have attained this by the vote and are headed for summer vacations with a clean conscience. Their plan was to show to all that they have blown the whistle on the cabinet, but no one supported them. It seems, the Regions were aware of the vote results,” Pohrebinsky said.
For her part, Yulia Tymoshenko didn’t mind the vote of confidence because she knew that the Communists and Lytvyn bloc members would not vote for her dismissal. “Only one political player lost – Viktor Yushchenko. By suggesting his own version of a draft budget, he clearly indicated his reluctance to cooperate with the present cabinet. Now Yushchenko has an empty hand to play, while Yulia Tymoshenko got a carte blanche in her confrontation with the incumbent,” Mykhailo Pohrebinsky stressed.
Profile of the president
This is only the latest in a long series of setbacks for Yushchenko. He has lost a lot since the heady days of his country’s Orange Revolution – executive power (due to constitutional changes), voter support (due to endless infighting) and international prestige (for lack of reform). More recently, his reputation as a martyr for democracy has also come under threat.
This last laurel was conferred upon Mr. Yushchenko when his face was disfigured by dioxin poisoning during his campaign for the presidency in 2004.
Now, facing re-election in a year’s time, Yushchenko is being accused of inventing his poisoning – one of the seminal events in Ukraine’s democracy movement, which galvanized public opinion at home and abroad in support of the Orange leader’s promises of reform.
And the person most responsible for smearing Yushchenko’s victim status is not a member of the old guard of former President Leonid Kuchma, or a representative of one of the presidential hopefuls currently challenging Yushchenko’s re-election bid.
It is a lawmaker in the faction that the president himself endorsed in the last parliamentary elections, a politician who stood beside Yushchenko during his long and trying march to power the first time around. David Zhvaniya, who can be seen in summer-vacation photos with the Yushchenko family, is now one of their greatest detractors.
Mr. Zhvaniya, who was with Yushchenko on the night he is thought to have been poisoned, recently told the BBC that Yushchenko had merely suffered from food poisoning.
“It was common food poisoning. The diagnosis was made the first day. These kinds of poisonings happen a lot, to every third person in the world,” Zhvaniya said. “It was a stomach infection. On the day that he went to the doctor, they all came to this same conclusion. I was there. Then they decided that he should fly to Austria [for medical care]. I was opposed ... because the proposed clinic had nothing to do with stomach infections. It was a cardiologic center,” he said.
In a different interview, with a Ukrainian publication, Zhvaniya sowed doubt on the president’s belief that he was poisoned during a dinner meeting with the head of the country’s security service (SBU) at the time, Ihor Smeshko.
Zhvaniya, who by his own admission organized the September-5 meeting between Smeshko and Yushchenko at another SBU official’s dacha, told journalists that Yushchenko had partaken in an earlier meal just before the Smeshko visit,20and before that had stopped off at the home of a completely unknown tinkerer where the president downed no small quantity of moonshine.
Zhvaniya further claimed that all subsequent tests showing that Yushchchenko had been poisoned by dioxide were falsified and that the Orange campaign team had thought up the poisoning version for political gain.
However, Yushchenko was not only positively tested for dioxide poisoning in Austria, but his blood sample was tested by three different laboratories in Belgium, Germany and the UK, all of which came to the same conclusion.
Yushchenko’s attorney, Mykola Poludenny, said in a recent media interview that despite being stalled in their efforts by the Prosecutor General’s Office at the time, officials involved in the testing took every precaution to guarantee that the results were not compromised at any stage of the process. Western specialists were not only able to determine that Yushchenko had been poisoned by dioxide, but also when the poisoning happened – on September 5.
In the wake of Zhvaniya’s comments, his own faction, Our Ukraine-People's Self Defense, accuse the lawmaker of "exceeding the limits of decency."
“In and of itself, the attempt to sow doubt on the poisoning of Viktor Yushchenko, which shocked the world, and pretend that the crime never happened, shows that Mr. Zhvaniya, in his public rhetoric, has sunk to the level of the worst kind under Kuchma,” reads a statement released by the faction.
The Prosecutor-General’s Office, which is still ‘investigating’ the poisoning after nearly four years, accused Zhvaniya of contradicting his own earlier testimony.
The PGO’s press service released a statement last month in which it said, “The poisoning of Viktor Yushchenko has been irrefutably proven by investigators and court medical experts; therefore, David Zhvaniya’s statements cannot be true; they contradict his early affirmations and are compromising the objective investigation of this crime.”
The PGO further accused Zhvaniya of using his lawmaker immunity to ignore prosecutors’ requests that he show up for further questioning. In short, despite the public attention that he has been able to command, Mr. Zhvaniya’s credibility is highly suspect.
But, unfortunately, so is virtually every other political figure's credibility in Ukraine.
For example, how do people like Zhvaniya get on the lists of parties endorsed by the president? For that matter, how does the president manage to make so many ‘friends’ into enemies?
Secondly, if the PGO is so certain that Yushchenko was poisoned, why have they been unable to charge anyone for almost four years? It’s the president who appoints the prosecutor-general, including the one who hampered his case back in 2005 and his successors, who have continued to hold up numerous other high-profile crimes.
Since at least last year, the president himself has claimed to know who poisoned him but declined to enlighten the rest of us. “The investigation is in its final stage,” the president told journalists in Dnipropetrovsk last September.
More recently, in an interview with an Austrian newspaper, Mr. Yushchenko said that three individuals had masterminded his poisoning and were hiding in Russia, where they had been given citizenship, while Ukraine continues to request their extradition.
In addition, Russia is one of three countries which make the dioxin found in Yushchenko’s blood. But unlike the other two countries, the UK and the US, Russia has yet to provide convincing evidence that the poison did not come from there.
Yushchenko has said that he personally asked Putin to check into the matter but to no avail.
The Ukrainian president also said the investigation cannot go forward without the testimony of the three fugitives.
Although Zhvaniya’s attempts to dismiss the plainly visible scars on Yushchenko’s face are ludicrous if not profane, it is equally far fetched to believe that the investigation is being held up by Russia alone.
According to a recent poll, only 36 percent of Ukrainians believe Yushchenko was purposely poisoned. If Yushchenko wants people to again believe that he really was poisoned for his dedication to democracy, he can start by naming the people who poisoned him.
It may not get him re-elected or even return him the hero status that he enjoyed immediately after the Orange Revolution, but it could save his face.
Note: To read more, click here |
|
| >>>
Read full article: 'Ukraine' ( Reads) Comments? |
|
|
|
| Countries: Uzbekistan |
|
Posted on Friday, July 25, 2008 - 01:48 PM |
|
|
Russia's star on the wane?
Uzbekistan is in the very heart of Central Asia. It thereby is a prime concern for the West, Russia and China. They have traditionally competed for its favours in the Great Game among the leading powers there, Great Britain and Russia of yore, today the US, Russia and China to the fore.
Hitherto under Moscow's wing, even after independence in 1991, for those striving to divine the intentions of the Uzbek government, all signs suggest that Russia’s star, from Tashkent’s perspective, is on the wane. But Uzbekistan’s recent efforts to downgrade relations with Russia are not necessarily a harbinger of a renewed alliance with the United States and European Union. It is asserting a new-found independence.
The first signs that Uzbek-Russian relations were growing strained were visible in the spring, when Tashkent made a number of provocative steps against Moscow, from granting hydrocarbon contracts to Russian companies’ rivals to shunning Russian officials and making decisions without consultations with the Kremlin. Even so, the rhetoric remained rosy.
The usual bromides are trotted out for public consumption. For example, Uzbek President Islam Karimov and his Russian counterpart, Dmitry Medvedev, were all smiles during their June 6 meeting in St. Petersburg. Medvedev hailed Uzbekistan as the Kremlin’s "key partner in Central Asia," while Karimov insisted that "relations with Russia have always been a priority for Uzbekistan." "And I am sure that there are no underwater currents that could change that," Karimov added for emphasis back then.
Two months later, Karimov’s skill as an oceanographer is coming into question. Despite the statements of eternal friendship, an unmistakable chill has descended upon Uzbek-Russian relations.
In a sure sign of who’s up and who’s down, the Independence Day reception at the US embassy in Tashkent, held on July 3, was attended by a bevy of top-ranking Uzbek government officials, including the senate chairman, parliament’s speaker, the first vice premier, a security council executive and the minister of foreign economic affairs. In sharp contrast, the Independence Day reception at the Russian embassy on June 12 saw only the Uzbek foreign minister’s deputy in attendance.
Another interesting detail is that Uzbekistan was not on the itinerary of Medvedev’s early July swing through Central Asia. Official visits by Medvedev to Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan are scheduled for late August and early October respectively. Medvedev’s travel agenda marks a drastic departure from that of his predecessor and political patron, Vladimir Putin, who after becoming president chose Uzbekistan as the destination for his first official visit abroad. That trip commenced a thaw that enabled Uzbekistan’s abrupt switch in its geopolitical course in the aftermath of the Andijan events in 2005, when hundreds were massacred in the Eastern Ferghana Valley.
"It is barely a coincidence," a Tashkent-based analyst said, speaking on condition of anonymity and referring to Uzbek-Russian tension. "Either the relations are so good that there is nothing to discuss … or it is a sign that something is wrong. If the relations were good, Medvedev would have even more reasons to come visit – just to make Karimov happy – instead of visiting Astana twice, which will definitely chagrin the Uzbek president."
The West goes awooing Tashkent
Some experts believe US and EU willingness to downplay the Andijan events has encouraged Tashkent to distance itself from Russia. US and EU representatives have been trying hard to woo Uzbekistan in recent months.
In June, for example, a steady stream of Western dignitaries passed through the Uzbek capital, including US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia, Richard Boucher, the OSCE Chairman-in-Office, Alexander Stubb, and the Mediator of the French Republic, Jean-Paul Delevoye. The "honourable guests" tried hard to avoid sensitive topics, such as human rights, and focused on areas of cooperation, like regional security and economic cooperation.
Renewed Russian efforts
This hive of diplomatic activity has spurred the Russians to new initiatives of their own. Russia has attempted to offer Tashkent incentives to remain loyal to the Kremlin’s geopolitical agenda. Russia’s state-run energy monopoly, Gazprom, has already offered Uzbekistan "European prices" for its gas, a move that would fill Tashkent’s coffers. Russian companies have also purchased or invested in major Uzbek businesses.
Sounds Familiar?
Followers of Russia’s post-colonial policies towards the FSU nations will recall how Georgia and Moldova have been punished by Moscow by blocking Russian imports (their largest market), on grounds of ‘ pest control’ or ‘quality’ issues. In what could be considered a warning, the Russian Agriculture Ministry’s certification agency, Rosselkhoznadzor, banned all Uzbek agricultural imports, including cotton (the country’s most important export by far) on May 12, citing the supposed presence of a dangerous pest. The move dealt a serious blow to Tashkent, as agricultural products make up the bulk of Uzbek exports to Russia, worth roughly $2 billion. The threat was especially strong given that many major European businesses quite separately banned merchandise containing Uzbek cotton from their shelves, amid accusations that Tashkent uses child labour.
The Russian ban was eased in late May, before the meeting of the Russian and Uzbek presidents in St. Petersburg, and then lifted completely about a month later, on June 16, as a sign of goodwill, and an incentive to "remain cooperative." Karimov had reportedly sought total immunity for Uzbek exports.
The West responds in turn
The West has also offered incentives to encourage Tashkent’s cooperation. On June 12, the World Bank’s Board of Executive Directors discussed a new Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Uzbekistan. The strategy envisions loans of about $300 million in 2008-2011. The amount under discussion is striking when taking into account that the World Bank has loaned Uzbekistan a total of about $600 million since 1991.
Meanwhile, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) is intensifying its activity in Uzbekistan. Most recently, on June 18, the agency launched a three-year Aglinks Project that will work with over 1,100 farms, as well as several large agribusinesses, "to improve the efficiency of the fruit and vegetable sector in Uzbekistan." Over half of Uzbekistan’s population resides in rural areas, with agriculture providing a majority of jobs in those areas.
Such economic incentives are not paired with civil society demands, such as requirements to improve the government’s human rights record or to implement reforms. Despite this, both Western and Uzbek officials are quick to acknowledge that substantial obstacles continue to impede the restoration of close diplomatic relations.
"They want Uzbekistan for its vast natural resources – such as oil and gas – and its geopolitical importance," the Tashkent-based expert said. "NATO is already using Uzbek railroads to deliver supplies for its troubled Afghanistan contingents on the cheap. And they are afraid to lose it – they are very unconfident this time."
Boucher, the assistant US secretary of state, confirmed that the United States remains wary. "It is no secret that we lost a lot of trust in the relationship between the United States and Uzbekistan. … and it’s going to take time and a real effort … to rebuild it," Boucher said during his visit to Tashkent in June.
With the Uzbek government unable to rely on the West for consistent and unwavering geopolitical support, it is unlikely that Karimov will push relations with Russia to the breaking point. "Karimov probably intends to keep both sides hanging to make them nervous and cause them to make him better competing bids," the Tashkent-based analyst said.
Note: To read more, click here |
|
|
>>>
Read full article: 'Uzbekistan' ( Reads) Comments? |
|
|
| Countries: Turkmenistan |
|
Posted on Friday, July 25, 2008 - 01:45 PM |
A new dispensation
Times could not be more propitious for Turkmenistan to escape the blind alley into which its madcap previous president, Saparmurat Niyazov, led it. His death twenty months ago coincided with a world-wide energy boom. Turkmen oil and above all gas is in great demand. Instead of going to Western markets via Russia and to Russia’s domestic market, as hitherto, the enticing prospect is opening up (if not for the first time), of transport across the Caspian Sea to Azerbaijan and Westward Ho!
The coming conference in September
The Americans are particularly interested in the opportunities opening up. It was quite natural, therefore, that Steven Mann, US State Department senior advisor for Eurasian affairs, has been invited by minister of industry & energy, Natig Aliyev, of Azerbaijan to take part in the international conference “Oil & Gas Potential of Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan: Energy, Economy & Ecology. Partnership Strategy." The upcoming event will be held in Baku on September 9-11, 2008.
"The exhibition is expected to lead to further development of co-operation between Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan in the area,” the Ministry says.
The Exhibition & Conference Organizing Committee was established in compliance with the decree of Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, issued on June 17. The Committee, to be headed by 1st deputy prime minister Yagub Eyubov, will compose ministers for industry & energy, Natig Aliyev, and environment & natural resources, Huseyngulu Bagirov, deputy ministers for foreign affairs, Khalaf Khalafov, for finance, Ilgar Fatizadeh, for economic devel opment, Mikail Jabbarov, for transport, Musa Panakhov, the president of State Oil Company of Azerbaijan, Rovnag Abdullayev, and the vice-president of the National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan, Akif Alizadeh.
The Committee was tasked to ensure preparation and implementation of a relevant programme of actions, while the Cabinet Ministers was charged with solution of the rest of the matters that the decree covers.
The expediency of a special conference jointly with Turkmenistan was recognized in the course of the official Baku visit by Turkmen leader Gurbanguli Berdymukhamedov on May 19-20, 2008. The trip set a goal to consider large-scale international investment projects in oil, gas and energy sectors in the Caspian region, the use of new modern technologies, the coordinated realization of works in the areas of science and ecology and the thorough study of opportunities for partnership.
The conference aims to foster bilateral co-operation between the two countries, the more rational use of energy resources in both states, and the realization of regional and international projects in this area on a mutually profitable basis.
Dragon Oil to the fore
Firms have been coming from far afield to explore this new energy frontier. Dragon Oil, the Dublin-registered explorer operating in Turkmenistan, tested its Dzheitune (Lam) 22/128 development well, in the Central Asian republic and said it expects to meet its output forecasts.
The well was drilled to a depth of 3,848 metres (12,625 feet) and pumped 2,600 barrels of oil a day, Dragon said in mid-July in a statement distributed by the Regulatory News Service. Further testing is scheduled for the next few weeks. “This is the fifth well we have completed this year on schedule and in line with Dragon Oil's drilling program,” Executive Chairman Hussain M. Sultan said in the statement. “We are confident that we will meet our 2008 targets for both the number of wells drilled and production.”
Completion of the Dzheitune (Lam) A/129 well is scheduled for August, the company said.
Turkmenistan in Russian-Caspian pipeline too
Russia agreed with Turkmenistan and two other Central Asian nations in 2007 to construct a new pipeline, allowing Moscow to keep Central Asian gas flows, if not under its control, under its discretion.
Turkmenistan is ready to start building a Moscow-backed Caspian Sea gas pipeline soon to ensure its launch in March 2010, official media reported on July 15. It said that the gas-rich nation was ready to press on with the project. "The new pipeline, expected to come on stream in late March 2010, will follow the Caspian Sea coastal line through Kazakstan, like the existing one," it said, referring to Turkmenistan's main pipeline controlled by Russia's Gazprom. Turkmenistan has already mapped out details of the pipeline's route and other technicalities.
The new Russi a-sponsored link is expected to take in up to 10 bcm of Turkmen gas and the same volume of Kazakh supplies. Gazprom buys about 50 billion cubic metres of Turkmen gas a year -- the bulk of the country's existing output. But Turkmenistan, which plans to boost output in the future, is considering alternative export routes for additional volumes of gas. As ever the big question awaiting an answer, is whether Turkmenistan actually has the further deposits enabling the international investment.
This question is due to be resolved via an independent audit, the results of which will determine whether the numerous schemes (TAPI to India; supplying the EU; are the most prominent, but including the Azerbaijan initiative discussed above), will ever get off the ground.
The rival Nabucco project, supported by the West but criticised as unfeasible by Russia, aims to connect Caspian Sea gas deposits with European markets, while bypassing Russia. Turkmenistan, which is also having a pipeline built by and to China, has not explicitly said it wanted to be part of Nabucco.
Note: To read more, click here |
|
| >>>
Comments? |
|
|
|
| Countries: Kazakstan |
|
Posted on Friday, July 25, 2008 - 01:42 PM |
|
|
The Kazakhs are bred from a nomadic stock, used to being on the move. They certainly made a gigantic move ten years ago.
Tenth anniversary of new capital, Astana
It is the tenth anniversary of the switch of the capital from Almaty in the extreme south-east of this huge country - the size of Western Europe, to Astana near to its centre. This relocation was certainly undertaken with geopolitical reasons in mind. The prime motivation was to counter any threat of secession by the largely Russian-populated north, bordering Russia.
Today that seems a remote prospect. The Russians in Kazakhstan, who make up more than one third of the 16m population, are as keen on Kazakh independence as their fellow citizens. They have every reason to, living in a country bounteous beyond belief in mineral resources of every kind, most notably abundant oil and gas.
If there is one thing Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev cherishes as part of his legacy, it is the gold-plated extravagance of his new capital, Astana. Tucked away in the empty heartland of Eurasia, Astana was little more than a windswept provincial town a decade ago when Nazarbayev declared it the capital of his vast oil-rich state. Now, with its grandiose advanced architecture, giving a somewhat surreal skyline, dominating a vast barren landscape, Astana stands as a monument to Nazarbayev's two-decade rule in the former Soviet state.
With gold-tinted tower blocks, oddly shaped skyscrapers and a giant pyramid with an opera house in the basement, Astana also offers a peek into what a country can do with billions of dollars of new-found oil wealth. In power since 1989 when he was the Communist Party First Secretary until becoming president on independence in 1991, Nazarbayev dreamt up Astana's creation -- Kazakhstan's answer to Dubai and Brasilia -- in 1994, as a symbol of Kazakhstan's independence and a way to give a sense of national identity to his people, for Kazakstan has no history as a nation.
Like other nations born out of the break-up of the Soviet Union, Kazakhstan endured years of post-Soviet chaos in the 1990s, but its economy is now booming, thanks to billions of dollars of foreign investment and buoyant oil prices. Five times the size of France, but populated by only 16 million people, it wants to copy the experience of Gulf Arab states that have grown rich on the back of oil since the 1970s. It sees itself (being geographically halfway) as central Asia’s Dubai or Singapore, and is in the process of setting up an internationally linked Bourse, and an investment banking industry at its former capital Almaty, as well as seeking to attract manufacturing industry on the most generous terms. After all, and unlike the Gulf States, apart from oil and gas it also has deposits of every mineral known to man beneath its 2.7 million sq kms surface, only some of which have as yet been exploited.
It is also at the centre of global oil diplomacy as Europe courts it as an alternative to Russian energy supplies.
Nazarbayev, however, has been criticized by human rights groups for tolerating little dissent and backsliding on democracy. In July he was unlikely to hear any critical voices: he was at the centre of lavish festivities held to mark the city's 10th anniversary with the culmination on July 6 conveniently coinciding with his own, 68th, birthday. It speaks to the power of oil that he has also managed to convince the OSCE that his country should soon hold the chairmanship of this organization, whose duty it is to monitor human rights and democratic elections. This despite the fact that the recent general election gave the president’s party 100% of the parliamentary seats, and our archived reports over several years tell the story of human rights and political murder, that has scarred the short history of Kazak independence.
Over $12 billion has been invested in Astana, which is growing fast in line with a master-plan laid out by Japanese architect Kisho Kurokawa. And, it seems, some of Astana's once-sceptical residents have finally come to terms with their city's flashy image.
Note: To read more, click here |
|
|
>>>
Comments? |
|
|
|
|
|
