Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Iraqi Oil Wars and additional news items ......

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-22/guest-post-investing-iraqi-oil-and-gas-too-risky


Guest Post: Investing In Iraqi Oil And Gas: Too Risky?

Tyler Durden's picture
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 10/23/2012 01:22 -0400



Submitted by Jen Alic of OilPrice.com
Investing In Iraqi Oil And Gas: Too Risky?
Risk, like everything else, is relative. So, relatively speaking, Iraq is open for business and certainly a more attractive investment than, say, Libya—in part because it’s easier to see what’s coming in Iraq, while what’s coming in Libya for now is just chaos (and it’s already arrived).
First, let’s try to paint a picture of the overall security situation, which is also an exercise in relativity.
In the north, we have the territory controlled by the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG), where business is flourishing (along with corruption) and where one needn’t even engage a controversial Western private security companies to move around.
But also in the north, we have a belt of disputed territories, which lies between the KRG and the Iraqi central government, both geographically and politically. The clincher is that the KRG’s grand plans for two new pipelines that would bypass the central government and pump oil and gas directly to Turkey are to be undertaken in this disputed territory, specifically in Kirkuk.
Baghdad won’t stand for it. Already sectarian tensions are being fomented more intensely as Baghdad installs a new military operations center in Kirkuk and Iraqi and Kurdish forces begin a new showdown over security.
Business is pretty good in central Baghdad, where the security situation is fairly stable (again, relativity is necessary here), but where one doesn’t walk around without physical security. Mathematically speaking, of Baghdad’s 88 zones or neighborhoods, there are about 10 that should be considered highly dangerous. The rest are “safe”. “Safe” means that you have a 50-70% chance of coming out alive.
Then we have everything south of Baghdad, places like Anbar province and the Basra governate. Anbar is where al-Qaeda is regrouping for another round and preparing its forces to join the confrontation in Syria. Basra is Iranian territory—Iraq’s oil-rich golden egg where it is only Iranian influence that is keeping tensions on the low burn.
Throughout Iraq’s provinces, we have an increasing urge for autonomy, which would essentially render Iraq a failed state. So far, only Kurdistan has autonomy, but others are eyeing it: including DIyala, Anbar, Salahuddin, and Basra.
In terms of oil, Basra is the most important of these, and much of Basra’s population is angry with Baghdad because the provincial government does not have as much control as it would like over its natural resources and that the revenues aren’t trickling down to the locals.
ExxonMobil, for one, appears to have had enough, announcing recently that it may pull up stakes in Iraq’s south and stick to the Kurdish north, where the business arrangements are more flexible and the security situation more manageable, at least outside of Kirkuk.
So is Iraq too risky an investment? It depends how far ahead you want to look.
For the next two years, we will probably see more of the political status quo, largely thanks to Iranian intervention, which is the only thing keeping things from falling apart at the seams right now.
Further down the road, in the absence of a major increase in foreign investment and socio-economic improvement, we are likely to see the start of a failed state, a renewed civil war as more and more provinces jump on the autonomy bandwagon creating tensions among Sunnis and Shi’ites, and a bloody conflict over Kurdish independence.

and.....

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/22/usa-iraq-oil-idUSL1E8LMJPV20121022

* Exxon signed exploration deal with Kurdistan last October
* The US oil company wants to leave giant oilfield in south
* Iraq wants Exxon to stay in the south
WASHINGTON, Oct 22 (Reuters) - The Obama administration should pressure Exxon Mobil to slow down dealings with Iraqi Kurdistan as they could worsen disputes between Baghdad and the northern province, Iraq's ambassador to the United States said.
Exxon angered Baghdad a year ago by signing an exploration deal with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in the north. The KRG quickly struck similar deals with other global oil companies but the central government in Baghdad deemed all the deals null and void.
Disputed areas between partly autonomous Kurdistan and Baghdad are seen as a potential flashpoint as tensions between regions of Iraq rise.
"We need the American government to exert some pressure on this company," Jabir Habeb, Iraq's ambassador to the United States, told reporters about Exxon after a panel on Iraq's energy potential at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
The ambassador said he met with a U.S. energy official recently who told him the U.S. government could not apply a lot of pressure on Exxon because the company makes decisions that benefit its shareholders. Habeb said he told the official the issue could cause political and social problems so it should not be seen as a shareholder issue.
Exxon did not immediately return a request for comment.
The energy company is hoping to exit its flagship West Qurna-1 oilfield project in southern Iraq, diplomatic sources said last week, as profits there are thin.
But analysts have said other oil companies from Russia and elsewhere may not have the know-how and resources to maximize production from the giant Qurna field.
Habeb said Iraq wants Exxon to stay in the south.
"We prefer them to be there and I think the potential of oil in the south of Iraq there's no comparison with the north of Iraq, so I think they understand this fact."
The Paris-based International Energy Agency released a report on Iraq this month that said oil production in the south could rise to 6.4 million barrels per day by 2035 in a mid-level scenario. Output could rise to 1.6 million bpd from the north by the same time period, it said.




and it's a good thing the war is over , otherwise iraqi civilians would continue to needlessly die.... Oh wait .......





http://original.antiwar.com/updates/2012/10/22/five-killed-in-iraq-attacks-maliki-fires-another-foe-in-march-to-power/

Five Killed in Iraq Attacks; Maliki Fires Another Foe in March to Power
by , October 22, 2012
At least five Iraqis were killed and 16 others were wounded in new violence across the country. Also, critics are condemning what they describe as the latest move by the Maliki administration to consolidate his power.
While Central Bank Governor Sinan al-Shabibi was out of the country last week, the Maliki administration fired him and charged the well-regarded economist with currency manipulation. Although the administration is playing this as necessary to root out corruption, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s critics see this as another step in Maliki’s long march to power consolidation. Among those steps are the prime minister giving himself control of the country’s security apparatus, manipulating the election commission, and directing the judiciary.
In Mosul, a soldier and a civilian were killed in a blast. Gunmen killed a civilian. A bomb wounded two policemen. Clashes wounded two bystanders. Security forcesliberated a kidnap victim.
In Baghdad, one soldier was killed and three more were wounded in an attack on a checkpoint in Amiriya.
One person was killed and another was wounded when gunmen attacked them as they were leaving an orchard in the Baquba region.
Four protestors were injured when military forces fired on them in al-Salam. The group was demonstrating for better services by blocking a road in Maysan province.
A roadside bomb in Samarra wounded two policemen.
In Kirkuk, a bomb wounded a teacher. A civilian was kidnapped.
Gunmen wounded a Sahwa member in Zab.
A kidnapped girl was freed in Karbala.

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)