[Peace-discuss] Bad craziness in DC

[Dlind49 at aol.com]

"Liberated" means under US dominance and complying with specific directives 
designed to achieve economic, political, and military objectives.  According 
to Cheney we invaded Afghanistan to liberate them- "B.S." - we invaded to 
ensure construction of a pipeline!!  Look at the money trail--Our nation has 
been hijacked by individuals pursuing their own economic and political 
agenda. 

Asia Times - The Oil Behind Bush 
And Son's Campaigns
By Ranjit Devraj
Asia Times
10-8-1

NEW DELHI - Just as the Gulf War in 1991 was all about oil, the new conflict 
in South and Central Asia is no less about access to the region's abundant 
petroleum resources, according to Indian analysts. 
  
"US influence and military presence in Afghanistan and the Central Asian 
states, not unlike that over the oil-rich Gulf states, would be a major 
strategic gain," said V R Raghavan, a strategic analyst and former general in 
the Indian army. Raghavan believes that the prospect of a western military 
presence in a region extending from Turkey to Tajikistan could not have 
escaped strategists who are now readying a military campaign aimed at 
changing the political order in Afghanistan, accused by the United States of 
harboring Osama bin Laden. 
  
Where the "great game" in Afghanistan was once about czars and commissars 
seeking access to the warm water ports of the Persian Gulf, today it is about 
laying oil and gas pipelines to the untapped petroleum reserves of Central 
Asia. According to testimony before the US House of Representatives in March 
1999 by the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation, Azerbaijan, 
Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan together have 15 billion barrels of 
proven oil reserves. The same countries also have proven gas deposits 
totaling not less than nine trillion cubic meters. Another study by the 
Institute for Afghan Studies placed the total worth of oil and gas reserves 
in the Central Asian republics at around US$3 trillion at last year's prices. 
  
Not only can Afghanistan play a role in hosting pipelines connecting Central 
Asia to international markets, but the country itself has significant oil and 
gas deposits. During the Soviets' decade-long occupation of Afghanistan, 
Moscow estimated Afghanistan's proven and probable natural gas reserves at 
around five trillion cubic feet and production reached 275 million cubic feet 
per day in the mid-1970s. But sabotage by anti-Soviet mujahideen (freedom 
fighters) and by rival groups in the civil war that followed Soviet 
withdrawal in 1989 virtually closed down gas production and ended deals for 
the supply of gas to several European countries. 
  
Major Afghan natural gas fields awaiting exploitation include Jorqaduq, 
Khowaja, Gogerdak, and Yatimtaq, all of which are located within 9 kilometers 
of the town of Sheberghan in northrern Jowzjan province. 
  
Natural gas production and distribution under Afghanistan's Taliban rulers is 
the responsibility of the Afghan Gas Enterprise which, in 1999, began repair 
of a pipeline to Mazar-i-Sharif city. Afghanistan's proven and probable oil 
and condensate reserves were placed at 95 million barrels by the Soviets. So 
far, attempts to exploit Afghanistan's petroleum reserves or take advantage 
of its unique geographical location as a crossroads to markets in Europe and 
South Asia have been thwarted by the continuing civil strife. 
  
In 1998, the California-based UNOCAL, which held 46.5 percent stakes in 
Central Asia Gas (CentGas), a consortium that planned an ambitious gas 
pipeline across Afghanistan, withdrew in frustration after several fruitless 
years. The pipeline was to stretch 1,271km from Turkmenistan's Dauletabad 
fields to Multan in Pakistan at an estimated cost of $1.9 billion. An 
additional $600 million would have brought the pipeline to energy-hungry 
India. 
  
Energy experts in India, such as R K Pachauri, who heads the Tata Energy 
Research Institute (TERI), have long been urging the country's planners to 
ensure access to petroleum products from the Central Asian republics, with 
which New Delhi has traditionally maintained good relations. Other partners 
in CentGas included the Saudi Arabian Delta Oil Company, the Government of 
Turkmenistan, Indonesia Petroleum (INPEX), the Japanese ITOCHU, Korean 
Hyundai and Pakistan's Crescent Group. 
  
According to observers, one problem is the uncertainty over who the 
beneficiaries in Afghanistan would be - the opposition Northern Alliance, the 
Taliban, the Afghan people or indeed, whether any of these would benefit at 
all. But the immediate reason for UNOCAL's withdrawal was undoubtedly the US 
cruise missile attacks on Osama bin Laden's terrorism training camps in 
Afghanistan in August 1998, done in retaliation for the bombing of its 
embassies in Africa. UNOCAL then stated that the project would have to wait 
until Afghanistan achieved the "peace and stability necessary to obtain 
financing from international agencies and a government that is recognized by 
the United States and the United Nations". 
  
The "coalition against terrorism" that US President George W Bush is building 
now is the first opportunity that has any chance of making UNOCAL's wish come 
true. If the coalition succeeds, Raghavan said, it has the potential of 
"reconfiguring substantially the energy scenarios for the 21st century". 
  
(Inter Press Service) ©2001 Asia Times Online Co., Ltd. Room 6301 The Center 
99 Queen's Road, Central, Hong Kong 
http://www.atimes.com/global-econ/CJ06Dj01.html
 

U.S. INTERESTS IN THE CENTRAL ASIAN REPUBLICS HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE 
ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS HOUSE OF 
REPRESENTATIVES 
  
ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION 
FEBRUARY 12, 1998
  
  
Next we would like to hear from Mr. John J. Maresca, vice president of 
international relations, Unocal Corporation. You may proceed as you wish. 
  
STATEMENT OF JOHN J. MARESCA, VICE PRESIDENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, 
UNOCAL CORPORATION
  
Mr. Maresca. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's nice to see you again. I am John 
Maresca, vice president for international relations of the Unocal 
Corporation. Unocal, as you know, is one of the world's leading energy 
resource and project development companies. I appreciate your invitation to 
speak here today. I believe these hearings are important and timely. I 
congratulate you for focusing on Central Asia oil and gas reserves and the 
role they play in shaping U.S. policy. 
  
I would like to focus today on three issues. First, the need for multiple 
pipeline routes for Central Asian oil and gas resources. Second, the need for 
U.S. support for international and regional efforts to achieve balanced and 
lasting political settlements to the conflicts in the region, including 
Afghanistan. Third, the need for structured assistance to encourage economic 
reforms and the development of appropriate investment climates in the region. 
In this regard, we specifically support repeal or removal of section 907 of 
the Freedom Support Act. 
  
Mr. Chairman, the Caspian region contains tremendous untapped hydrocarbon 
reserves. Just to give an idea of the scale, proven natural gas reserves 
equal more than 236 trillion cubic feet. The region's total oil reserves may 
well reach more than 60 billion barrels of oil. Some estimates are as high as 
200 billion barrels. In 1995, the region was producing only 870,000 barrels 
per day. By 2010, western companies could increase production to about 4.5 
million barrels a day, an increase of more than 500 percent in only 15 years. 
If this occurs, the region would represent about 5 percent of the world's 
total oil production. 
  
One major problem has yet to be resolved: how to get the region's vast energy 
resources to the markets where they are needed. Central Asia is isolated. 
Their natural resources are landlocked, both geographically and politically. 
Each of the countries in the Caucasus and Central Asia faces difficult 
political challenges. Some have unsettled wars or latent conflicts. Others 
have evolving systems where the laws and even the courts are dynamic and 
changing. In addition, a chief technical obstacle which we in the industry 
face in transporting oil is the region's existing pipeline infrastructure. 
  
Because the region's pipelines were constructed during the Moscow-centered 
Soviet period, they tend to head north and west toward Russia. There are no 
connections to the south and east. But Russia is currently unlikely to absorb 
large new quantities of foreign oil. It's unlikely to be a significant market 
for new energy in the next decade. It lacks the capacity to deliver it to 
other markets. 
  
Two major infrastructure projects are seeking to meet the need for additional 
export capacity. One, under the aegis of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium, 
plans to build a pipeline west from the northern Caspian to the Russian Black 
Sea port of Novorossiysk. Oil would then go by tanker through the Bosporus to 
the Mediterranean and world markets. 
  
The other project is sponsored by the Azerbaijan International Operating 
Company, a consortium of 11 foreign oil companies, including four American 
companies, Unocal, Amoco, Exxon and Pennzoil. This consortium conceives of 
two possible routes, one line would angle north and cross the north Caucasus 
to Novorossiysk. The other route would cross Georgia to a shipping terminal 
on the Black Sea. This second route could be extended west and south across 
Turkey to the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan. 
  
But even if both pipelines were built, they would not have enough total 
capacity to transport all the oil expected to flow from the region in the 
future. Nor would they have the capability to move it to the right markets. 
Other export pipelines must be built. 
  
At Unocal, we believe that the central factor in planning these pipelines 
should be the location of the future energy markets that are most likely to 
need these new supplies. Western Europe, Central and Eastern Europe, and the 
Newly Independent States of the former Soviet Union are all slow growth 
markets where demand will grow at only a half a percent to perhaps 1.2 
percent per year during the period 1995 to 2010. 
  
Asia is a different story all together. It will have a rapidly increasing 
energy consumption need. Prior to the recent turbulence in the Asian Pacific 
economies, we at Unocal 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, we stand behind our long-term 
estimates. 
  
I should note that it is in everyone's interest 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. 
  
The key question then is how the energy resources of Central Asia can be made 
available to nearby Asian markets. There are two possible solutions, with 
several variations. One option is to go east across China, but this would 
mean constructing a pipeline of more than 3,000 k ilometers just to reach 
Central China. In addition, there would have to be a 2,000-kilometer 
connection to reach the main population centers along the coast. The question 
then is what will be the cost of transporting oil through this pipeline, and 
what would be the netback which the producers would receive. 
  
For those who are not familiar with the terminology, the netback is the price 
which the producer receives for his oil or gas at the wellhead after all the 
transportation costs have been deducted. So it's the price he receives for 
the oil he produces at the wellhead. 
  
The second option is to build a pipeline south from Central Asia to the 
Indian Ocean. One obvious route south would cross Iran, but this is 
foreclosed for American companies because of U.S. sanctions legislation. The 
only other possible route is across Afghanistan, which has of course its own 
unique challenges. The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost 
two decades, and is still divided by civil war. From the outset, we have made 
it clear that construction of the pipeline we have proposed across 
Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place that 
has the confidence of governments, lenders, and our company. 
  
Mr. Chairman, as you know, we have worked very closely with the University of 
Nebraska at Omaha in developing a training program for Afghanistan which will 
be open to both men and women, and which will operate in both parts of the 
country, the north and south. 
  
Unocal foresees a pipeline which would become part of a regional system that 
will gather oil from existing pipeline infrastructure in Turkmenistan, 
Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia. The 1,040-mile long oil pipeline would 
extend south through Afghanistan to an export terminal that would be 
constructed on the Pakistan coast. This 42-inch diameter pipeline will have a 
shipping capacity of one million barrels of oil per day. The estimated cost 
of the project, which is similar in scope to the trans-Alaska pipeline, is 
about $2.5 billion. 
  
Given the plentiful natural gas supplies of Central Asia, our aim is to link 
gas resources with the nearest viable markets. This is basic for the 
commercial viability of any gas project. But these projects also face 
geopolitical challenges. Unocal and the Turkish company Koc Holding are 
interested in bringing competitive gas supplies to Turkey. The proposed 
Eurasia natural gas pipeline would transport gas from Turkmenistan directly 
across the Caspian Sea through Azerbaijan and Georgia to Turkey. Of course 
the demarcation of the Caspian remains an issue. 
  
Last October, the Central Asia Gas Pipeline Consortium, called CentGas, in 
which Unocal holds an interest, was formed to develop a gas pipeline which 
will link Turkmenistan's vast Dauletabad gas field with markets in Pakistan 
and possibly India. The proposed 790-mile pipeline will open up new markets 
for this gas, traveling from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Multan in 
Pakistan. The proposed extension would move gas on to New Delhi, where it 
would connect with an existing pipeline. As with the proposed Central Asia 
oil pipeline, CentGas can not begin construction until an internationally 
recognized Afghanistan Government is in place. 
  
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 in both Europe and Asia. The impact of these resources on U.S. 
commercial interests and U.S. foreign policy is also significant. Without 
peaceful settlement of the conflicts in 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 U.N.-led peace process in Afghanistan. 
The U.S. Government should use its influence to help find solutions to all of 
the region's conflicts. 
  
U.S. assistance in developing these new economies will be crucial to business 
success. We thus also encourage strong technical assistance programs 
throughout the region. Specifically, we 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 export routes for Central Asian resources is a 
formidable task, but not an impossible one. Unocal and other American 
companies like it are fully prepared to undertake the job and to make Central 
Asia once again into the crossroads it has been in the past. Thank you, Mr. 
Chairman. 
  
[The prepared statement of Mr. Maresca appears in the appendix.]