Category: Iraq

  • KRG congratulates President-elect Barack Obama

    KRG congratulates President-elect Barack Obama

    Official KRG Statement
    The Kurdistan Regional Government congratulates Senators Barack Obama and Joseph Biden on their election as the next President and Vice President of the United States. We join America and nations and people from around the world in hailing this historic election.

     

    The next Administration, like the present one, can continue to count on the partnership of the Kurdistan Regional Government to bring progress to Iraq. The Kurdistan Region remains America’s best friend and ally in support of a democratic, federal Iraq. We are proud to have fought side-by-side American and coalition forces to remove a tyrannical dictator.

    We deeply appreciate the many sacrifices of the US military and the American people in Iraq. No American soldier or civilian has been killed or wounded in the Kurdistan Region since the liberation of Iraq in 2003. And all the while, we have demonstrated that a democracy based on human rights and economic opportunity can thrive in the Middle East.

    The Bush and Obama Administrations, and the present and future US Congress, can be assured that we will remain resolute in our efforts to finalize a strategic framework agreement between Iraq and the United States. We will also continue working with our partners in Baghdad to pass a hydrocarbons and revenue sharing law, guided by our nation’s constitution. Furthermore, we will embrace opportunities for a strategic dialogue with the Obama-Biden Administration regarding its Iraq policy and to facilitate a better understanding of the unique needs and potential of Iraq’s Kurdistan Region.

    We offer a warm acknowledgment to Senator John McCain, an American hero and long time friend to Iraq and the Kurdistan Region, and our most sincere congratulations to President-elect Obama. And as always, we offer our best wishes to the people of the United States of America.
    -KRG-

     
  • Shell-Iraq gas company is a monopoly, secret agreement shows

    Shell-Iraq gas company is a monopoly, secret agreement shows

    By BEN LANDO, UPI Energy Editor

    A secret document obtained by United Press International reveals a planned joint venture company between Royal Dutch Shell and the Iraqi Oil Ministry would give the company a 25-year monopoly on the gas industry of southern Iraq.

    Shell and the ministry are currently negotiating the terms of the joint venture company. On Sept. 22 the two signed what’s known as a “Heads of Agreement,” basically a rough draft of the contract, a legal framework establishing the management team and the scope, purpose and other details of the company.

    Though it’s non-binding, the confidential document is telling.

    If the joint venture company is finalized as outlined in the HOA, it would give Shell the largest role in Iraq’s oil and gas sector since the 1960s, when the world’s Big Oil firms were kicked out after 40 years of virtual control of exploration, production, exports, and payments to the government.

    The joint venture will be the “sole gas company engaged in business,” as outlined in the HOA, “and providing gas for domestic and export markets and generating revenues from gas marketing activities.”

    At the time of the HOA signing, Shell and ministry officials pitched the future joint venture company’s role as utilizing for domestic needs the natural gas currently being wasted in Basra province. Iraq would own 51 percent and Shell 49 percent.

    Developing Iraq’s gas resources is important for delivering basic services like electricity and fuel to citizens and business. Iraq’s once top-shelf state-run oil and gas industry was devastated by Saddam Hussein’s misuse, sanctions and nearly three decades of war. Infrastructure and equipment were harmed, and new technology and training were shut out.

    More than 60 percent of Iraq’s natural gas production is burned or released into the air or reinjected into the ground because of insufficient infrastructure to transport and utilize the gas. The gas would be helpful for Iraq’s power and other industries currently, and more so as the economy grows. Electricity last week supplied only 58 percent of demand, according to the U.S. State Department’s Iraq Weekly Status Report.

    The oil and gas sector is in need of new and modern investment, though there’s a dispute over how to proceed: rebuild the once prominent domestic oil and gas industry or allow foreign companies to re-enter the sector.

    A new oil and gas law is supposed to set post-Saddam guidelines and regulations for developing the oil and gas industry, but a draft of the law has been stalled for nearly two years. A top roadblock: to what extent foreign companies should be allowed to invest. The oil unions say it should be limited to contracts to help rebuild the Iraqi sector. Others, a decidedly smaller group, favor an all-out reversal of the nationalism that saw Shell and others booted out of the country 40 years ago.

    The Shell joint venture is an attempt by the Oil Ministry to walk the fine line, relying on remaining Saddam-era laws, though some have complained the Parliament should have more of a say and the contract should not have been a private negotiation with one company.

    According to the previously unseen HOA, “the joint venture will off-take and purchase all Raw Gas produced in the South of Iraq by either the South Oil Co. or any other producer.” The HOA defines “South of Iraq” as the southernmost province — and oil and gas capital — of Basra, though a map appendix to the HOA shows the contract territory extending for an unknown distance into the Persian Gulf “and any other areas as may be agreed by (Shell and the Oil Ministry).”

    The joint venture would not focus solely on gas currently being produced in the agreed upon area. As oil production increases, as expected by the ministry, so will the gas; most of Iraq’s gas production is what’s called “associated gas,” found during oil production.

    Iraq has the world’s 10th-largest proven gas reserves, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, most of it located in southern Iraq. Two to three times more reserves could be found when it is fully explored, and much more expected to be “non-associated” gas, reservoirs independent of the oil.

    “The Parties acknowledge that access to non-associated gas is essential to ensure that the aims of the Joint Venture are met,” the HOA states, adding one of the objectives of the company is to “pursue development of non-associated gas fields in southern Iraq according to respective rules and regulations for field development in Iraq.”

    According to the HOA, the joint venture will purchase the raw gas from producers — mostly state-owned companies — and process it into products used in domestic and foreign markets.

    The agreement does not stipulate whether Iraq’s residents and industries would have first dibs on the gas.

    Shell, which has proposed to the Iraqi government a nationwide gas master plan, will create a “high-level evaluation of dry gas export schemes.”

    Shell would have the rights to all liquefied natural gas. Although Iraq currently does not have LNG facilities, the HOA tasks Shell with assessing the “feasibility of an early LNG export project.”

    All other products, such as fuel for cooking and heating, would be sold to the Oil Ministry, directly to domestic consumers and bypassing the ministry, or exported.

    “The products will be sold at prices linked to international market prices,” the HOA states, and the joint venture would pay for the raw Iraqi gas with “a fixed percentage of the revenues received by the Joint Venture for selling products.”

    While the HOA does not bind the ministry and Shell to create the joint venture, it is a legal contract for 12 months — with a six-month automatic extension — during which it restricts the Iraqi Oil Ministry from negotiating with any other company or carrying out any work that could be interpreted as competing with the Shell joint venture.

    “The ministry shall not pursue any discussions with the intention of entering into a project with a similar scope to that set out in this HOA with any third parties,” the HOA states.

    The joint venture would be “of a long term (25 years extendable),” according to the HOA. Iraq and Shell would split the revenue dividends and required investment 51/49 percent, respectively. The joint venture would owe the state a 15 percent tax as well.

    Both sides, however, have equal representation on the six-member Joint Management Committee, which was to begin work Oct. 22. All of the JMC decisions must be unanimous, though only one person each from the ministry and Shell is required for quorum.

    The JMC will determine “activities” of the joint venture, and Shell and the Oil Ministry will work together “in good faith with each other and shall not participate in any similar activities with any third parties.”

    Shell has the option of offering a part of its stake to a third party, and UPI understands Shell is in talks with Chevron. All equipment and “technical and operational support” will be purchased by Shell, which “has developed a strategic alliance with General Electric (NYSE:GE) for the benefit of the Joint Venture.” Mitsubishi Corp. (OTCPK:MSBHF) and other companies are negotiating “strategic alliances” as well.

    (e-mail: [email protected])

  • Talabani dismisses US base offer

    Talabani dismisses US base offer

       

    Barzani, left, said Kurdistan’s people and government would welcome US military bases [AFP]

    “It is not possible for US troops to stay in Kurdistan without the approval of the central government,” Talabani said in an interview with state television Al-Iraqiya late on Sunday.

    “Kurdistan is part of Iraq, and all of the country’s constitutional laws apply to it.”

    ‘Warm welcome’

    Barzani, who heads the Kurdish administration in the country’s north, had offered his region as an alternative for US military bases if the status of forces agreement being negotiated between Washington and Baghdad fell through.

    Iraqi newspaper Khabat quoted Barzani, who has strongly backed the controversial proposal, as saying during a recent visit to Washington that his regional government would “welcome” the setting up of US military bases.

    “All the attempts are going right now to sign the pact, but if the pact is not signed and if US asked to keep their troops in Kurdistan, I think the parliament, the people and government of Kurdistan will welcome this warmly,” he said at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies.

    Supporters of Muqtada al-Sadr, a Shia leader, criticised Barzani for his comments.

    “We reject the statement by Massud Barzani,” Sheikh Saleh al-Obeidi, a spokesman for the group, told the AFP news agency.

    “This position reminds us that Kurds want to separate … There is a constitution in this country and they have to respect it.”

    Proposed changes

    The US government – after initially balking at making any changes demanded by the Iraqi government in the draft pact – is now expected to respond in the next few days.

    The agreement is supposed to outline the framework under which US forces will stay in Iraq beyond 2008.

    The signing of the pact was delayed after the Iraqi cabinet sought key changes, including greater legal jurisdiction over US troops and guarantees that US soldiers would not launch attacks on other countries from Iraq.

    The pact is unpopular among Arab Iraqis who have seen the bulk of violence and destruction since the US-led invasion in 2003, and who see the pact as nothing more than another form of occupation.

    Al Jazeera’s Hoda Abdel Hamid reporting from the Kurdish city of Irbil, said that Kurds felt safer having US troops around given the distrust between the Kurds and the Arabs.

    Kurds have also been spared the worst of the violence since 2003 and many actually feel that their lives have improved over the last five years, with foreign investments and a flourishing local economy, our correspondent said.

    The final draft of the proposed pact must be endorsed by the Iraqi parliament after the amendments are finalised by both Washington and Baghdad.

    Iraq’s president has dismissed Kurdish leader Massud Barzani’s invitation to the US to set up military bases in the Kurdish region if a proposed security pact with Baghdad fails.

    Jalal Talabani, himself a Kurd, said Washington could set up bases in the country – even in the Kurdish region – only with Baghdad’s approval.

  • Kirkuk needs a surge, report says

    Kirkuk needs a surge, report says

    WASHINGTON, Oct. 30 (UPI) — An organic effort along the lines of the Anbar counterinsurgency strategy is needed to calm the security situation in Iraq’s province of Kirkuk, a study says.

    A study published Thursday by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy says Kirkuk has not felt the benefits of the counterinsurgency strategy employed in Anbar and central Iraq in early 2007.

    The level of violence in Kirkuk remains static, with only a 29 percent drop in deadly attacks since 2007, compared to a 91 percent decline in Baghdad. Taken on a per capita basis, however, the number of attacks in the city of Kirkuk is double that in Baghdad, the report says.

    The durability of the Sunni-led insurgency in the north suggests a failure to employ the strategy of forming multi-ethnic security forces in the region. Unlike the south, northern security forces are predominately Kurdish-led, leaving many of the forces from Baghdad viewed with disdain.

    Furthermore, with U.S. forces dropping below the U.N.- and NATO-recommended ratio of one soldier to 50 civilians ahead of an anticipated 2009 redeployment, a final but temporary U.S. troop surge may be needed in Kirkuk.

    The region is one of Iraq’s most economically viable, leaving Kirkuk as one of the last places left for U.S.-led forces to have a positive influence on security matters.

  • Oil for Soil: A Grand Bargain on Iraq and the Kurds

    Oil for Soil: A Grand Bargain on Iraq and the Kurds

    Kirkuk/Brussels, 28 October 2008: Rising acrimony over disputed territories will undermine still fragile progress in Iraq unless a package deal is reached over oil, revenue sharing, federalism and the constitution.

    Oil for Soil: Toward a Grand Bargain on Iraq and the Kurds,* the latest report from the International Crisis Group, offers a bold proposal for resolving the long-festering conflict over Kirkuk and other disputed territories that threatens to disrupt Iraq’s relative peace.

    “In its ethnically-driven intensity and its ability to drag in regional players such as Turkey and Iran, the Kirkuk issue can have a devastating impact on efforts to rebuild a fragmented state”, says Joost Hiltermann, Crisis Group’s Middle East Deputy Program Director. “This conflict potentially matches or even exceeds the Sunni-Shiite divide that spawned the 2005-2007 sectarian war”.

    Despite some progress, Iraq’s legislative agenda is bogged down primarily by a dispute over territories claimed by the Kurds as historically belonging to them territories that contain as much as 13 per cent of Iraq’s proven oil reserves. Stymied in their quest to incorporate these territories into the Kurdistan region by constitutional means, due mainly to the suspicions of Iraq’s Arab majority that their real goal is independence, Kurdish leaders have signalled their intent to hold politics in Baghdad hostage. At the same time, the Iraqi government’s growing military assertiveness is challenging the Kurds’ de facto control over the territories.

    The current piecemeal approach should be discarded in favour of a grand bargain involving all core issues: Kirkuk and other disputed territories, revenue-sharing and the hydrocarbons law, as well as federalism and constitutional revisions. A sober assessment of all sides’ core requirements suggests a possible package deal around an “oil-for-soil” trade-off: in exchange for at least deferring their exclusive claim on Kirkuk for a decade, the Kurds would obtain demarcation and security guarantees for their internal boundary with the rest of Iraq, as well as the right to manage and profit from their own mineral wealth.

    This package demands painful concessions from all sides, which they are unlikely to make without strong international involvement. The UN mission (UNAMI) will need stronger backing from the U.S. and its allies. Washington should make it a priority to steer politicians toward the grand bargain, while securing it through political, financial and diplomatic support.

    “There is little time to waste. As U.S. forces are set to draw down, Washington’s leverage will diminish, as will chances for a workable deal”, warns Robert Malley, Crisis Group’s Middle East & North Africa Program Director. “The likeliest alternative is a new outbreak of violent strife over unsettled claims in a fragmented polity governed by chaos and fear”.


    Contacts: Andrew Stroehlein (Brussels) +32 (0) 2 541 1635
    Kimberly Abbott (Washington) +1 202 785 1601

    To contact Crisis Group media please click here
    *Read the full Crisis Group report on our website: http://www.crisisgroup.org
  • INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP – NEW REPORT Oil for Soil: A Grand Bargain on Iraq and the Kurds

    INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP – NEW REPORT Oil for Soil: A Grand Bargain on Iraq and the Kurds

     

    Kirkuk/Brussels, 28 October 2008: Rising acrimony over disputed territories will undermine still fragile progress in Iraq unless a package deal is reached over oil, revenue sharing, federalism and the constitution.

    Oil for Soil: Toward a Grand Bargain on Iraq and the Kurds,* the latest report from the International Crisis Group, offers a bold proposal for resolving the long-festering conflict over Kirkuk and other disputed territories that threatens to disrupt Iraq’s relative peace.

    “In its ethnically-driven intensity and its ability to drag in regional players such as Turkey and Iran, the Kirkuk issue can have a devastating impact on efforts to rebuild a fragmented state”, says Joost Hiltermann, Crisis Group’s Middle East Deputy Program Director. “This conflict potentially matches or even exceeds the Sunni-Shiite divide that spawned the 2005-2007 sectarian war”.

    Despite some progress, Iraq’s legislative agenda is bogged down primarily by a dispute over territories claimed by the Kurds as historically belonging to them territories that contain as much as 13 per cent of Iraq’s proven oil reserves. Stymied in their quest to incorporate these territories into the Kurdistan region by constitutional means, due mainly to the suspicions of Iraq’s Arab majority that their real goal is independence, Kurdish leaders have signalled their intent to hold politics in Baghdad hostage. At the same time, the Iraqi government’s growing military assertiveness is challenging the Kurds’ de facto control over the territories.

    The current piecemeal approach should be discarded in favour of a grand bargain involving all core issues: Kirkuk and other disputed territories, revenue-sharing and the hydrocarbons law, as well as federalism and constitutional revisions. A sober assessment of all sides’ core requirements suggests a possible package deal around an “oil-for-soil” trade-off: in exchange for at least deferring their exclusive claim on Kirkuk for a decade, the Kurds would obtain demarcation and security guarantees for their internal boundary with the rest of Iraq, as well as the right to manage and profit from their own mineral wealth.

    This package demands painful concessions from all sides, which they are unlikely to make without strong international involvement. The UN mission (UNAMI) will need stronger backing from the U.S. and its allies. Washington should make it a priority to steer politicians toward the grand bargain, while securing it through political, financial and diplomatic support.

    “There is little time to waste. As U.S. forces are set to draw down, Washington’s leverage will diminish, as will chances for a workable deal”, warns Robert Malley, Crisis Group’s Middle East & North Africa Program Director. “The likeliest alternative is a new outbreak of violent strife over unsettled claims in a fragmented polity governed by chaos and fear”.


    Contacts: Andrew Stroehlein (Brussels) +32 (0) 2 541 1635
    Kimberly Abbott (Washington) +1 202 785 1601

    To contact Crisis Group media please click here
    *Read the full Crisis Group report on our website: http://www.crisisgroup.org

    The International Crisis Group (Crisis Group) is an independent, non-profit, non-governmental organisation covering some 60 crisis-affected countries and territories across four continents, working through field-based analysis and high-level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict.