http://www.rudaw.net/english/kurds/3779.html
Opposition and ruling party representatives meeting in Erbil. Photo Rudaw.
Sulaimani officials say land reforms and investigations announced by Kurdistan Region President Massoud Barzani in March have begun in their province.Following weeks of demonstrations, Barzani announced in March a series of reforms to fight corruption and improve government efficiency. Part of the president’s plan was to review and investigate questionable projects, including land allocated to businesses.Announcing the results of his reforms, Barzani said that so far 118 pieces of land have been revoked, adding that 1,025 donums of land have been returned to the government. Rudaw has learned that only seven of those plots of land are in Sulaimani province.Aziz Saeed, head of projects at the Investment Board Association in Sulaimani, said inspectors have visited him only once, but he expects Sulaimani to be more vigorously inspected in the coming weeks.Muhammad Hajji, head of Sulaimani province’s contracts department, said the reform committee established by Barzani is in direct contact with all government institutions.“Kurdistan’s presidency summons our teams for inquiry and so far we have made one visit,” said Hajji.
Twana Jalal, Sulaimani province reconstruction manager, said none of their projects have been cancelled, though he admitted that the presidential reform team has so far not visited their sites.The head of Sulaimani’s tourism department, Yasin Faqe Saeed, said two of their projects have been cancelled and 70 more are under review.“Any project that the team doesn’t approve will be revoked,” Saeed said.The reform project includes reclaiming agricultural land that was taken illegally.Faraydoon Omar, head of Sulaimani’s agricultural department, said in response to a request from Barzani, they have sent a list of all agricultural land that has been allocated for projects.“The team will decide how many donums should be reclaimed by the government,” Omar said.According to Omar, citizens and officials seizing agricultural land is a major issue in Sulaimani province. He hopes the reform project can return the land to the government.So far, Duhok and Erbil have been most affected by the reform plan. But Azad Malafandi, whom Barzani appointed to lead the reform committee, said his investigations will also include Sulaimani, where around 130 projects are already under review.Malafandi said the reform plan is comprehensive.“Anyone who is supposed to be investigated will be investigated,” he said. “No one will be spared.”“If the opposition doesn’t want to be in the government, then they must be patient about the implementation of their demands”Separately, talks between the ruling parties and the opposition continued with no signs that the stalemate between the two sides will soon end.Kurdistan’s two ruling parties, the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) have asked the opposition to join the cabinet.“If the opposition doesn’t want to be in the government, then they must be patient about the implementation of their demands,” said Jaafar Ibrahim, a member of KDP’s politburo.Yusif Muhammad, who is representing the opposition Change Movement in talks with the ruling parties, said the opposition will decide whether to join the cabinet after the parties respond to the opposition’s reform demands.Muhammad agreed that Change might be able to speed up reforms if they were in the cabinet, he argued that an impartial and technocrat government would bring about better results.The opposition has demanded that technocrats, or experts, fill cabinet posts while the ruling parties have called for a coalition government that includes leaders of opposition and ruling parties.Muhammad Faraj, a senior official with the Islamic Union of Kurdistan, took a tough stance on the opposition’s demands for reform.“If Prime Minister Barham Salih’s government can implement the recommendations of the opposition then he should stay in power,” he said. “Otherwise, we will have to discuss the formation of a new [government].”
===
Profith old news.
Thu 06:10
KRG Website-oil exports and payments
GKP.L
17
KRG.org 22:32:58 22 Jun. 2011
KRG Representative urges greater economic partnership with US companies
http://www.krg.org/articles/detail.asp?smap=02010100&lngnr=12&rnr=223&anr=40460
» Qubad Talabani
New York - USA (KRG.org) - The Kurdistan Region in Iraq continues to grow and strengthen economically and remains a prime opportunity for investors to find a profitable home in the Middle East, Qubad Talabani, the KRG’s Representative to the United States, told investors in Manhattan yesterday.
Addressing an audience at the 10th annual hedge fund symposium sponsored by Institutional Investor, Mr Talabani said, “The Kurdistan Region is the place where those seeking to invest – from some of our newest friends like the Koreans to neighbors like Turkey – find our new economy vibrant, promising and full of opportunity.”
Mr Talabani noted that while there has been significant progress, Kurds expect more progress and continued growth. “We have progressed beyond the humanitarian development of the 1990's and are now utilising our vast human and natural resources to take our economic development to a higher level.” he added.
While lauding the strengthened partnership between the KRG and US-based oil companies, Mr Talabani said, “I know that the US has more to offer than expertise in oil and gas. Kurds would like to see more Americans, from other sectors, particularly the financial services sector, partner with us as we develop our infrastructure.”
Mr Talabani informed the audience that energy production, tourism and IT services remain key opportunities for economic growth in Kurdistan. “Not only will our emerging private sector require IT services, but I strongly believe that Kurdistan -- with its unique geographic location, neighbouring Arabic, Persian and Turkish-speaking countries, and with its large and mostly young, multilingual and educated population -- can serve as an exciting hub for IT development and IT services in the future,” Mr Talabani said.
Highlighting the recent progress between the Federal and Regional governments regarding oil exports and payments, Mr Talabani urged investors to join in the Kurdistan Region’s economic growth. “2011 looms to be a year of change in the Middle East, and Kurdistan is way ahead of the game,” he said.
===
Sherri Kraham
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sherri Kraham is the Deputy Vice President for Policy and International Relations at the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC). She was born and reared in Coral Springs, Florida where she attended Coral Springs High School. She holds a Political Science bachelor’s degree from Florida Atlantic University, and in 1999, Kraham received an International Business and Trade certificate and law degree from George Mason University School of Law.[1] She is a member of the Virginia Bar Association. Sherri lives in Washington DC with her husband Qubad Talabani.
Before joining MCC in 2004, she worked at the U.S. Department of State for seven years. In 2003, she served a year-long assignment in Iraq for the Coalition Provisional Authority as part of the first civilian team dedicated to reconstruction efforts. Before serving in Iraq, she served as an adviser to an Under Secretary of State, where she oversaw various U.S. foreign assistance programs of approximately $5 billion annually, which focused on development, humanitarian assistance, democracy promotion, human rights, peacekeeping and security. From 1998–2001, she worked as the Iraq Desk Officer developing and implementing grant programs related to Iraq.
In a 2004 interview with United States Institute of Peace, Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training (ADST), Kraham said of her duties in Iraq that coordination between the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) and the military was very poor because they didn't speak the same language. She also said that inter-agency conflict in Washington impacted work in the field.[2]
===
Subject U.S. foreign policy and the Kurds:
Votes for this Posting
Message
Saturday, 25 June 2011, 09:27 GMT
U.S. foreign policy and the Kurds: The evolution of U.S.-Kurdish relations
http://www.kurdishglobe.net/display-article.html?id=1E57E87BCB698A1347CCBDBEF1C070B0
The Kurdish Globe
by Muhammad M. Saleh
Mohammed Shareef Msc., Ph.D., FRAS, talks to the Globe about the history, current and future of relations between Kurdistan and the U.S.
Globe: Is there any date you can refer to as the date Iraqi Kurds started to build relations (either formal or informal) with the U.S.?
Shareef: Kurdish contacts with the U.S. started primarily in the early 1960s. This came after the overthrow of the Iraqi monarchy and the birth of the Iraqi republic. Kurdish attempts, however, to upgrade the interactions from contacts to a relationship started in earnest only with the beginning of the September 1961 Revolution led by Mulla Mustafa Barzani. In 1962, representatives of the Kurdistan Democratic Party in Baghdad, and on behalf of the Kurdish movement, attempted to start a relationship to get political support from the U.S. This, however, came to no avail as the U.S. showed no interest in a formal relations nor offered any support other than expressing sympathy. So, the reality of the matter is that any U.S.-Kurdish interaction that can be described as a relationship can only be traced back to the official but covert relationship that started in June 1972. Essentially, U.S.-Kurdish interaction evolved from contacts to a covert relationship and later to an overt relationship after Operation Provide Comfort in 1991 cemented eventually in an overt and institutionalized relationship after Saddam Hussein's overthrow in 2003.
Globe: There have been ups and downs in U.S.-Kurdish relations. Is there no consistency or a recurring pattern in these relations?
Shareef: Lord Palmerston, a former British foreign secretary, once said: "We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." This is the context within which U.S.-Kurdish relations should be seen and it is on this basis U.S. relations with the Iraqi Kurds should be understood. There is a profound continuity in U.S. foreign policy towards Iraq and the larger Middle East based on remarkably consistent and largely unchanged foreign policy objectives and interests. In this respect, the only recurring pattern is the role Kurds play when America deems it necessary as part of U.S. strategy to advance U.S. foreign policy in Iraq and the larger Middle East region. Essentially, the value of the Kurds in U.S. foreign policy fluctuates based on the status of U.S. relations with Baghdad, U.S. relations with regional powers and finally how the U.S. sees its long-term role in the Middle East.
Globe: What is the best description for the current state of relations between the Iraqi Kurds and the U.S.? How important are these relations for the future of the Kurdish issue in Iraqi Kurdistan?
Shareef: U.S.-Kurdish relations evidently exist, yet to describe them accurately they must be characterized as de facto, unpronounced and undeclared. U.S. policy towards the Kurds of Iraq is a component of U.S. Iraq policy, a policy at the sub-national level and within the framework of U.S. relations with Iraq. Having said that, these relations are invaluable, as they embody a strategic partnership between the U.S. and the Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq. Current relations between the U.S. and the KRG are strong and steady. It is worth noting, however, no strong relationship is guaranteed unless there are mutual interests. Both the U.S. and the KRG have to feel they are gaining considerably from this relationship. Considering the KRG is adapting and cementing its existence as a relatively new entity in a largely hostile region, it seeks to ensure that it has favorable relations with the U.S. It is a relationship that the KRG esteems very highly. The only issue here, however, is that the U.S. knows the KRG needs them more than they need the KRG, consequently the KRG makes an effort at pleasing the U.S., which puts the KRG in an awkward position when it comes to asserting itself and its interests.
Globe: Is it possible that what Kurds call betrayal in 1975 repeat itself in different ways?
Shareef: A repetition of the 1975 betrayal is highly unlikely as the nature of the relationship from 1972-1975 was different. Although it was an official relationship, it was covert, framed within the context of the Cold War and U.S. Iran policy and U.S. policy towards Iraq. Moreover, it was more of a reluctant relationship initiated only as a favor to the shah of Iran who wanted to maintain pressure on the Baath Regime in Baghdad at the time. Current U.S.-Kurdish relations are now strategic, formal and institutionalized. This is a major shift in U.S. strategy.
Globe: Why is the U.S. always pressuring Kurds for concessions more than the other components of Iraq?
Shareef: The U.S. does not want to be seen as partial to any component of Iraq. For this reason, it attempts to maintain the impression of neutrality, even towards its Kurdish allies. More importantly, it wants to establish stability in Iraq. In this respect, the U.S. sees the Kurds as a strategic partner to achieve this goal.
Globe: What are the dangers of losing American support for Kurds and what will be the dangers for the U.S. if Kurds stop supporting American plans in Iraq?
Shareef: That would not be a wise strategic move on either side, as both have mutual interests and need each other to advance their separate agendas. The major concern of the U.S. after it toppled Saddam Hussein was the stabilization of Iraq. For this reason, the U.S. is dependent on Kurdish assistance for the stabilization of Iraq, and any alienation of the Kurds would jeopardize stability in the country.
Globe: Recently, the world has witnessed attempts by the Obama administration to solve the long-standing problems in the Middle East, especially the Palestinian problem and the issue of totalitarian Arab regimes. Is there a shift in U.S. policy towards the region and what is the best policy to be adopted by Kurdish leadership both internally and externally in this new era?
Shareef: U.S. mediation to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not new to the Obama administration. Nor with regard to the recent unrest in the Middle East I believe is there a shift in U.S. policy, but rather a shift in strategy. U.S. policy has remained mostly consistent, as U.S. interests in the region have remained largely the same. The U.S. recognizes that regional totalitarian regimes are largely responsible for the legitimate grievances of the people of the Middle East. They also know that the recent unrest sweeping the region will bring about inevitable change and new regimes will take the helms of power, so it would not be in their interest to be on the wrong side of history. The U.S. also recognizes that for more than six decades it pursued stability at the expense of democracy in the Middle East, and it achieved neither. So, American support for the aspirations of these people will most likely bring about mildly democratic regimes, potentially favorable to U.S. interests.
With regard to Iraqi Kurdistan, serious internal reforms by the KRG would be welcome in Washington as it feels the KRG has been reluctant at worst, and sluggish at best. In this respect, the U.S. would also welcome serious and constructive talks between both major Kurdish parties (KDP and PUK) and the Kurdish parties in opposition, namely the Gorran Movement, Kurdistan Islamic Union and Islamic Group of Kurdistan. Externally, better KRG relations with regional powers would also be welcome, especially with the new and upcoming regimes that are replacing the totalitarian regimes of the region, since with these interactions comes the potential of the KRG and Iraq becoming positive democratic models to be replicated.
Globe: Is it a wise policy for Kurds to place all their eggs in the basket of the U.S. and the West and ignore the regional powers? What is the ideal policy to be pursued by Kurdish leadership in dealing with these regional and international powers?
Shareef: It would be completely unwise for the Kurds to tilt in favor of one group over the other, such as Western powers over regional countries. The KRG is undoubtedly between a rock and a hard place. The Kurdish leadership has to maintain constructive and friendly relations with U.S. on the one hand. Realism in international relations also dictates that the KRG must maintain good relations with all regional powers, Turkey and Iran included. This is not to say that the U.S. is happy with KRG-Iran relations. There is discomfort and even distrust in Washington with the KRG's strong relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran. There seems to be a perception in Washington that the KRG cannot be trusted when it comes to Iran. Testimony to this was when U.S. forces raided the Iranian consulate office in Erbil on Jan. 11, 2007 and arrested five diplomats. The U.S. had neither consulted the KRG nor sought its permission.
Globe: How have recent events in Kurdistan influenced U.S.-Kurdish relations and how has the U.S. played its role in this regard?
Shareef: In a region where the U.S. has few friends -- the Kurds being one of the most pro-American populations in the Middle East -- the U.S. would not want to be seen as an ally of a repressive KRG regime. On the other hand the U.S. does not think the current issues plaguing the KRG, serious as they are, merit the overthrow or dismantling of the KRG. The U.S. encourages reform and would advise the KRG to adopt serious reforms to address the peoples, legitimate grievances. Simultaneously, they would not want the unrest to continue nor would they approve of any encouragement of unrest by Kurdish opposition parties, leading to the destabilization of the Kurdistan Region -- the most prosperous and stable region in Iraq.
Globe: When will the U.S. be ready to support the independence of Iraqi Kurds and what must be done by the Kurdish leadership to achieve this goal?
Shareef: I do not think Kurdistan can achieve independence right now, as there is no support for such a move in Washington. But the ground has been prepared for independence. Washington understands this is what Iraqi Kurdistan really wants. Washington is also psychologically accepting that Iraq has the potential of breaking up. So, in terms of previous American thinking that an independent Kurdistan is impossible, that barrier has been crossed and this is a huge step forward. Right now, however, the international environment is not suitable. Independence in the future is likely to be achieved through some sort of velvet divorce between Arab Iraq and the Kurdistan Region. The U.S. may play a role to negotiate this secession. Kurdistan is already self-sufficient with its own army and is developing its own oil resources.
Many elements of independence are existent. However, the Kurdish leadership must be clear in Washington about the Kurdish peoples, desire for independence. They should also state clearly that as pragmatic leaders they have no intention of declaring independence right now, but as democratic leaders this is an inevitability since this is what Kurdish people really want. Internally, the KRG must demonstrate that an independent Kurdistan will be a viable entity; this can be demonstrated through good governance and economically sound policies by the KRG. Externally, the KRG must guarantee that regional stability will be maintained and that an independent entity will not upset regional U.S. allies and threaten their territorial integrity. This can be achieved through security agreements and the establishment of excellent trade and diplomatic relations with regional states.
==
June 28, 2011 6:24 pm
Collapse of crude spreads catches traders
By Javier Blas in London
Many traders and hedge funds are nursing losses after a whiplash reversal in one of the biggest commodity trading trends of the year – a bet on a widening spread between different types of crude oil. Whip-lash: The lash of a whip. An injury to the cervical spine caused by an abrupt jerking motion of the head, either backward or forward.
Traders say the unexpected release of the Western countries’ petroleum strategic stocks last week left many in the oil market wrong-footed, particularly those that had traded on the relative price differential of Brent crude and Dubai crude.
The price difference has narrowed sharply between the lower quality, heavy sour Dubai crude, the benchmark for Middle East supplies, and the premium quality, light sweet Brent, the North Sea’s benchmark.
The spread has plunged to a six-month low, dropping nearly 50 per cent in just four days, traders said.
So far companies have not disclosed any losses but given how widespread the bet on widening spreads had been, the move would have hit many traders hard.
“When you see markets break like this you know there is going to be a lot of pain on the street,” Michael Guido, associate director of hedge fund sales at Macquarie in New York, said, echoing a widely held view within the industry.
The loss of production from Libya pushed up spreads between Brent and Dubai crude to a six-year high earlier this month as refiners bid up the North Sea benchmark crude, which is of a quality similar to the output from the North African nation. Traders also sold off Dubai because Saudi Arabia has announced it would boost its production.
The spread touched a session high of $9.20 a barrel on June 15, the highest since October 2004.
But the IEA’s release suddenly altered the supply and demand balance of the market. Instead of a flood of heavy, sour oil from Saudi Arabia, the market is now braced for the release of light, sweet oil from the emergency reserves. As a result, the spread plunged to $3.30 on Monday, down nearly 65 per cent from a fortnight ago.
The release has also hit the time-spreads, or the difference between the cost of crude oil for immediate delivery and its forward price. Betting on time-spreads are a popular trade among hedge funds.
A week ago, the premium of spot Brent over the two-year forward was of nearly $4.5 a barrel. But by Tuesday, it had flipped upside down to a 11 cents discount.
The collapse of the differential indicates that the release of the strategic reserves is not only lowering the headline cost of oil, but also the premiums that refineries were until a week ago paying to secure scarce supplies of high quality, light sweet oil.
Additional reporting by Gregory Meyer in New York and Jack Farchy in London
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c7a6d84c-a1a2-11e0-b9f9-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1QbgOj698
==
KRG.org 16:53:58 28 Jun. 2011
http://www.krg.org/articles/detail.asp?rnr=223&lngnr=12&smap=02010100&anr=40531
Forum calls on UK business to make the most of Kurdistan: Iraq’s business gateway to the world
Many UK companies such as BTWShiells, HSBC, Land Rover and Mothercare have already joined international brands such as Carrefour, Coca-Cola, Diesel, Ecco, Lafarge, Pepsi, Lafarge, Levi’s and Mango in Kurdistan but there are many more opportunities for UK companies, in a surprisingly wide range of sectors in the Region.
With 71 companies now operating in the Kurdistan Region, the UK has the third highest number of foreign companies registered in Kurdistan, but it is in a distant third place, behind Turkey (868 companies) and Iran (193). There is therefore plenty of opportunity for more UK companies to invest in an economy which is expected to grow at over 7% this year and which avoided the global debt crisis.
Sinan Celebi, KRG Minister for Trade and Industry said, “Economics is about meeting demand with supply. That is why the Kurdistan Region is such a promising opportunity for British investors. To put it simply the Region is in need of everything. Years of neglect and destruction have created a gap in our ability to supply a modern economy. However, thanks to plentiful natural resources, our share of Iraq's budget translates into long-term fiscal wealth, which combined with growing demand, presents huge opportunities for those UK businesses which are able to supply us with expertise, skills and products.”
Bayan Sami Abdul Rahman, Kurdistan Region High Representative to the UK, told the forum, "We wish to renew our economy so that we can create jobs, provide better services and increase the prosperity of our people. And we recognise that we can best do that with the help of our friends in countries like the UK who have the expertise, the products and services that we need."
Setting out plans for more investment in the Region’s tourist infrastructure, including new hotels, parks and even ski resorts, Samir Abdullah Mustafa, KRG Minister for Municipalities and Tourism, stressed that the popular view that growth in Kurdistan was all based on oil and gas is mistaken, saying, “The tourism sector is as important to Kurdistan’s future as its oil and gas sector. Many companies already offer package visits to Kurdistan so we do know that tourists love our Region when they visit. However, to make the most of our natural, archaeological and religious tourist potential, as well as our growing reputation as a ‘go-to’ destination for retail visitors, will take a great deal of investment. The rewards for UK businesses, our Region and ultimately the tourists who visit will be huge.”
Nadhim Zahawi, MP for Stratford-upon-Avon and Co-Chair of the All Party Kurdistan Group, told the conference, “Even before the UK-led efforts to install the ‘no-fly zone’ over Kurdistan in 1991, the Kurdistan Region and the UK have shared a special friendship. Beyond friendship though, the Kurdistan Region now offers extraordinary opportunities for UK business. Many businesses are already thriving but there are plenty of opportunities for others to invest. Carrefour may be the first Western supermarket in the Family Mall in Erbil but there is no reason why Tesco and Sainsbury’s couldn’t set up in Erbil too. The recent announcement by Mothercare is very welcome and proves this.
“There are many reasons for these opportunities: the people want to learn, they are friendly, the banking sector was not exposed to the global crisis and the economy is becoming increasingly business friendly but perhaps most importantly Kurdistan, as I saw on my recent visit, is now a healthy, stable and secure democracy ready to capitalise on its role as Iraq’s business gateway to the world.”
===
Reidar Visser best views and analysis about Nujayfi’s Separatist Threat and the Reactions
| Tuesday, 28 June 2011 18:50 at 18:50 |
Although there have been growing calls in the Sunni-majority areas for territorially based concessions over the past year or so – many demand more rights for the governorates and some call for the establishment of federal regions – Nujayfi’s hint about a possible fully-fledged separation “of the Sunnis” is unprecedented.
Firstly because separation in itself is rarely alluded(To make an indirect reference:) to by others than the Kurds, and even they like to be a little circumspect(Heedful of circumstances and potential consequences; prudent.) when it comes to using that term.
Secondly, the idea of combining the Sunni-majority governorates to a single “Sunni region” is not consonant with the limited pro-federal activity that has taken place over the past year, which has been mostly governorate-focused (as in the cases of Anbar and Salahhaddin).
Indeed, any would-be Sunni separatists would face exactly the same problem as ISCI did in 2005 (and as Amin al-Charchafchi in 1927) when they tried to conjure up images of some kind of Shiite region: What should they call the new entity? Because exactly like ISCI’s “Region of the Centre and the South”, the Sunni region enjoys no historical precedent. Probably the only historical competitor to the concept of Iraq in this area would be the "Jazira region" – in which case Mosul (but not necessarily all parts of Anbar) might try to absorb parts of northeastern Syria like Dayr al-Zur and even Raqqa to carve out a new state. Good luck.
Perhaps more significant than Nujayfi's separatist threat itself are the reactions that materialised today. Nujayfi allies in Mosul like Abdallah al-Yawer criticise the statement and say it is “against the constitution”. Shakir al-Kuttab says that Nujayfi’s statement said should not be used to construe a desire on the part of Iraqiyya to work for any kind of “Sunni region”. Muhammad al-Kalidi denies that Nujayfi called for the creation of a Sunni region and “the partition of Iraq”, adding that the parliamentary speaker said what he said simply to illustrate the seriousness of the current situation. Safiya al-Suhayl, formerly with Iraqiyya, then State of Law and now an independent, detects a “regional dimension” in Nujayfi’s threat. Obviously, members of Nuri al-Maliki’s State of Law alliance are beyond themselves in happiness over this latest propaganda coup: They spin it as if Nujayfi has finally been exposed as a separatist, as do members of the Iraqi Islamic Party (a Sunni Islamist party frequently accused of being the party that has spearheaded the drive for decentralisation among some local Sunni politicians.)
It is obvious that many in Iraqiyya are unhappy about the way things are unfolding in Iraq right now, but there must be better ways of addressing this than dreaming up alliances with ISCI and the Sadrists or threatening with the creation of new states that would barely know what to call themselves.
====
Iraq’s Sunnis reject secession, religious authority says
6/29/2011 11:51 AM
BAGHDAD / Aswat al-Iraq: A prominent Iraqi religious authority, commenting on a threat by the Parliament Speaker, Usama al-Nujeify, that Sunnis might be forced to establish a Sunni Region, said on Wednesday that Sunnis in Iraq understand well that their real and active presence cannot be achieved through projects of secession and division.
“The Iraqi people, with all their fraternal components, strongly reject any step to ignore the national principles, mainly the unity of Iraq,” Hussein al-Muayad told Aswat al-Iraq news agency.
“Sunnis in Iraq understand well that their real and active existence can’t be achieved through projects of secession and division, but through cohesion towards Iraq’s unity,” he said.
Al-Iraqiya bloc, led by Iyad Allawi, to which Nujeify belongs, had said that his call during his recent visit to the United States, for the establishment of a Sunni Region in Iraq had been “mere statements, that were distorted.”
“The Iraqi crisis, so long as it escalates, it shall develop a deep and delicate understanding for the Iraqi National Project, as well as the necessity to build the political process based on its elements.
This makes all Iraqis keen on the unity of their social weaving, national unity and common interests, away from narrow interests that push them into sectarian and racist conflicts,” Hussein al-Moayad said.
Hussein al-Moayad is an Iraqi religious authority, representing Shiite reformists, who is well known to be an activist in the field of creating closeness among religious sects, thing that stands counter to the Iranian political positions inside Iraq.
==
Al-Iraqiya Coalition rejects any sectarian division in Iraq, Spokeswoman says
6/29/2011 10:28 AM
BAGHDAD / Aswat al-Iraq: Al-Iraqiya Coalition’s Spokeswoman, Maysoun al-Damaloujy, has said on Wednesday that her Coalition “stands firmly against any attempt to divide Iraq on hateful sectarian basis.”
“The current marginalization of citizens does not cover a certain Iraqi province, as bad public services, unemployment and poverty cover everybody, without exception, and those benefiting from Iraq’s fortunes are a handful of people, that don’t represent a certain sect or sectarian principle,” Damaloujy told Aswat al-Iraq news agency.
Commenting on recent media reports, quoting distorted statements about the establishment of Regions in some of Iraq’s western provinces, Damaloujy said: “the attempts to divide Iraq are not new, and the Iraqi people have always stood against them with courage.”
“Basra people have expressed a real patriotic example on Iraq’s unity, when they refused such attempts, reiterating that “Iraqis in other provinces were not less keen on the safety of Iraq and its unity, including the honest people of Basra, all understanding the size of conspiracies, planned against our dear people, such conspiracies making benefit from the weakening and dividing Iraq.”
“The achievement of the national partnership and genuine compromise, based on commitment to the national project, represented by al-Iraqiya Coalition, is the sound course to raise Iraqi citizens in all provinces, away from sectarian or racial origins, being the only guarantee for Iraq’s unity, progress and prosperity,” she said.
Iraq’s Parliament Speaker, Usama al-Nujeify, had stated during a recent visit to the United States, that there is “a Sunni frustration in Iraq, and in the event of its non-ending quickly, the Sunnis might think of secession and demand the establishment of their own Region.”
==
Kurdistan Coalition supports establishment of Iraqi Regions on constitutional and not sectarian basis, official
6/29/2011 9:27 AM
BAGHDAD / Aswat al-Iraq: The Leader in northern Iraq’s Kurdistan Coalition, Mahmoud Othman, has said on Tuesday that his Coalition “supports the establishment of Regions in Iraq on constitutional and not sectarian basis.”
Othman told Aswat al-Iraq news agency that “his Kurdistan Coalition supports the establishment of regions in Iraq, not on sectarian, but on constitutional basis, as cited in the Iraqi Constitution,” stressing that “the Constitution did not include an item on the establishment of Sunni or Shiite regions.”
The Iraqi Parliament’s Speaker, Usama al-Nujeify, had stated during his recent visit to the United States, that “there is a Sunni frustration in Iraq, and if it won’t be treated quickly, the Sunnis might think of secession and demand the establishment of their own Region.”
Othman pointed out that “Nujeify’s statement might create a fuss, adding that it could be linked to the old project by the U.S.
Civil Administration Official of Iraq, Joe Biden in this respect.”
Othman wondered if “Nujeify’s statement had been personal or representing the opinion of his (al-Iraqiya) Coalition.”
Noteworthy is that there is only one region in Iraq, represented by north Iraq’s Kurdistan Region, enjoying self-rule, covering Arbil, Sulaimaniya and Dohuk Provinces.
==
Please don't go, Iraqi Kurds tell U.S. troops
30 Jun 2011 11:27
Source: reuters // Reuters
* Kurds worry over territorial claims without U.S. presence
* Gov't critics say U.S. troops halt authoritarian trend
By Namo Abdulla
BAGHDAD, June 30 (Reuters) - More than eight years after the U.S. invasion, Iraqis are debating whether to ask American troops to stay on past a planned withdrawal, a sensitive question that is testing its fragile power-sharing government.
Kurdistan is a potential flashpoint for tensions among ethnic Kurds, Turkmen and Iraqi Arabs, and most of its residents say U.S. troops should remain after the end of this year to keep apart rival groups making claims on the oil-wealthy territory.
But the semi-autonomous region's opposition leaders and government critics also say U.S. troops will halt a creeping return to the authoritarian past. Kurdistan's ruling parties sent troops in April to smother protests demanding political change and more democratic freedom.
"The withdrawal of U.S. troops will bring nothing but disaster," said Asos Hardi, director of Awene, an independent newspaper in Kurdistan. "There is a danger of civil war, there is a danger for some forces to return to the past."
The remaining 47,000 U.S. troops in Iraq are scheduled to leave by the end of this year when a security pact finishes and U.S. officials say Iraq's government must ask soon if they want the troops to stay on.
Violence in Iraq has fallen sharply from the bloody days of sectarian slaughter in 2006-2007. Iraq says local forces can contain a weakened but stubborn Sunni insurgency and Shi'ite militias, although they acknowledge there are gaps in their capabilities.
But tensions are high along Kurdistan's "Green Line" between Iraq and the semi-autonomous region, where U.S. troops have organized joint checkpoints with Iraqi Arab soldiers and Kurdish Peshmerga troops in an attempt to build confidence.
The two forces have clashed in the past only to pull back after the intervention of U.S. forces.
"This issue is about the future of Iraq," Nechirvan Barzani, deputy chairman of the co-ruling KDP party, told London-based Arabic newspaper, Asharq Al-Awsat.
SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP
Kurds have enjoyed special ties with the United States since Washington and other Western powers provided a no-fly zone to protect them in 1991 after Saddam Hussein's genocidal campaign against the minority group during the 1980s. Since then the Kurds have enjoyed a de facto independence that was bolstered when Saddam was ousted in the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, allowing them a larger share of the country's oil wealth in the north. Compared with the rest of Arab Iraq, Kurdistan's capital Arbil has more U.S.-style shopping malls, fast-food restaurants and five-star hotels because the region enjoys greater economic stability than the rest of the country.
Kurdish leaders say they have more to lose should U.S. troops depart without Iraqi Kurdistan's status within Iraq being clearly defined.
"As long as there is no political solution, which will not be anytime soon, these tensions could easily escalate into a serious conflict. I think it would be better for the U.S. military to stay, but they are not going to stay," said Joost Hiltermann at the International Crisis Group in Brussels.
Inside Kurdistan, local opposition leaders say a continued American presence would halt what they regard as the growing authoritarianism of the KDP party of Kurdish President Massoud Barzani and the PUK party of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani.
In April, the Kurdish government sent troops to quell a two-month-long protest that called for more democracy. At least 10 people died in the protests. Rights groups criticised Kurdish authorities for using excessive force against protesters.
"Until Kurdish security forces become institutionalised and are run by the Kurdish government, rather than the political parties, there is always a chance of these forces being used by the ruling parties against their rivals," Shorsh Haji, a senior leader of the Kurdish main opposition party of Gorran.
"Establishing a U.S. military base would be good for the future of Kurdistan and defend it from outside forces," he said, referring to neighbours Iran and Turkey who have shelled Iraqi Kurdish borders in the past to hit Kurdish rebels.
Abubakir Ali, a member of the Kurdistan Islamic Union, the area's most popular Islamic party, said its Islamic ideology did not prevent it from having political ties with the U.S. government. He said Washington was an essential ally. For others like Hardi, a prominent Kurdish writer who has founded two independent newspapers in Kurdistan, U.S. troops guarantee a certain freedom.
"Even with the presence of Americans our freedoms are being curtailed," he said. "Imagine what will happen if they leave." (Editing by Patrick Markey and Robert Woodward)
==
Thursday, 30 June 2011, 11:59 GMT
KRG officials and UK MPs hail Kurdistan's progress at annual London reception
http://www.kurdishglobe.net/display-article.html?id=ACE1F6932925AA5E458E51D8ED4810F3
Press Photo
KRG
The Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) hosted on Tuesday its 7th annual reception in the Houses of Parliament to thank British and international friends for helping Kurdistan with the significant economic and democratic progress it continues to make.
The reception coincided with a visit by a delegation of business leaders from the Kurdistan Region in Iraq, who are visiting London, Edinburgh and Belfast this week, to promote friendship through commerce and to build stronger cultural and trade ties with the British devolved nations.
The delegation, which attended the reception, is led by Sinan Celebi, Minister for Trade and Industry, and Samir Abdullah Mustafa, Minister for Municipalities and Tourism.
Minister Falah Mustafa Bakir, the head of KRG?s Foreign Relations, and Bayan Sami Abdul Rahman, the KRG?s High Representative to the UK, welcomed the guests who included the Minister of State for Energy and Climate Change Charles Hendry, Rt Hon Ann Clwyd MP, Meg Munn MP, Lord Clement-Jones, Baroness Nicholson, Robert Halfon MP, Lord Denis Rogan, Robert Walter MP and others. The reception was also hosted by Mr Dave Anderson MP, Secretary of the Kurdistan Region All Party Parliamentary Group and Chairman of Labour Friends of Iraq.
Ms Abdul Rahman told guests, ?I am pleased to say that after a slow start, Britain is beginning to make its mark in Kurdistan?s business landscape. Britain now leads Europe and America in the number of companies with a presence in Kurdistan ? a lead that I hope Britain will maintain." She also said, ?By strengthening our commercial ties, both sides can serve their people by creating jobs and increasing prosperity."
Ms Abdul Rahman also spoke about Kurdistan's democratic progress and referred to Sir John Major's recent address to the Kurdistan Parliament in which he said Kurdistan and Iraq could set the example for their near neighbours in the Middle East in their ongoing revolutions. Ms Abdul Rahman added: "We have achieved much in Kurdistan, and we have further to go ? in strengthening our institutions, enhancing our democratic practices and doing more to promote women?s rights. We have made strides in all these areas and I?m delighted to report that our parliament has just passed a law against domestic violence and FGM."
The annual reception, held inside the British parliament, also welcomed diplomats, representatives of Scotland and Northern Ireland, companies and universities, the UK?s Kurdish and Iraqi community, and friends who are involved in cultural, educational and commercial exchange with the Kurdistan Region in Iraq.
Minister Bakir, said in his speech, ?I wanted to be here today especially to thank all our friends in Britain, old and new, for the hard work and support given to us over the years, and in particular to thank the British government for the recent upgrade of the British office in Erbil to a full consulate general, which will strengthen political, economic and cultural ties between the Region and the UK. There is still a lot we can do together, for the people of our region and the rest of Iraq, who all deserve better future.?
Nadhim Zahawi MP, Co-Chair of the All Party Group on the Kurdistan Region, which visited Kurdistan twice this year, also spoke at the reception, saying, ?On our last visit to Kurdistan we were able to see not just the great progress that Kurdistan has made, but in our meetings with parliamentarians and the different groups in parliament, we were able to discuss openly the many challenges they are facing at the moment and how we can learn from each other in overcoming the challenges and doing better politics.?
The business delegation this week also participated in a Kurdistan trade, investment and business forum in London. The forum was an opportunity for the Kurdish business leaders to meet British firms and explain how business is done in Kurdistan, and for the British companies to be updated about the investment opportunities in the region, including energy, tourism and infrastructure. The visit was organised by the KRG UK Representation.
In an earlier meeting of the delegation with Meg Munn MP, chair of the All Party Group, Ms Munn said, ?It is obvious to us as members of the APPG that Kurdistan and Britain should have more trade. We have been giving that a big priority; we have regularly lobbied ministers and talked about it in parliament. People are really starting to understand. I have been to Kurdistan three times in 18 months. What a transformation Kurdistan has gone through just in that time.?
==
Following is a very promising article found on ADVFN and posted by DFGO at 22.12 yesterday, 01.07.11.
RM (One of the silent watchers)
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/69789d60-9da0-11e0-9a70-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1Qs0vvrog
Major oil groups circle Kurdistan Iraq as ‘blacklist’ threat takes back seat
By Ed Vinales
This article is provided to FT.com readers by dealReporter—a news service focused on providing insightful intelligence on event driven situations to investors. www.dealreporter.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several of the oil industry’s biggest players are looking to make their first foray into Kurdistan Iraq suggesting they have become less wary of reprisals from Baghdad, according to dealReporter. However, their interest may actually be due to Iraq’s need to increase oil revenues rather than further indication tensions between the two regions are easing.
Although the oil majors have never publicly said so it is widely accepted they have previously avoided Kurdistan for fear of losing business handed out by Iraq’s central government, which controls access to the vast majority of the country’s 143bn barrels of proven oil reserves.
Schlumberger [SLB US] and Halliburton [HAL US], the two largest oil field services firms globally, may shortly follow smaller rivals Weatherford and Baker Hughes by becoming active in Kurdistan, according to local sources. There is increased talk Exxon Mobil [XOM US], Royal Dutch Shell [RDSA LN] and TNK-BP [TNBP RU] are also looking at opportunities in the region.
When asked about its involvement with Kurdistan, Halliburton said its “geographical footprint is primarily driven by its customers’ activity. As a global oilfield services provider we are fully committed to supporting customers in areas that make prudent business sense.”
Schlumberger, which entered central Iraq last year, said increasing its activity in Iraq would be governed by contract gains and security assurance. In 2006 the group brought back former employees who had been active in Iraq prior to the first Gulf War to re-establish contacts with Iraqi officials.
Security not a problem in ‘top travel’ destination
A country manager at a Kurdistan focused oil company received a call from two senior Schlumberger people in 2008 who wanted to talk about Kurdistan. “They claimed the security situation was why they were not yet operating in the region and I hadn’t heard from them again until another call two months ago. But the company is active here now,” he said believing the real reason for the delayed entry related to concerns it would be blacklisted from operating in the south.
Exxon and Shell, both heavily involved in central Iraq, declined to comment on “speculation and rumour” of their potential interest in Kurdistan although Russia focused TNK-BP said it is assessing possibilities in the Middle East.
Having now gained a foothold in the south, Schlumberger and other oil groups would be hard pressed to maintain security issues as the reason they are not interested in Kurdistan, which has tens of billions of barrels of proven or potential oil reserves. National Geographic cited the region as one of its top 20 travel destinations this year and the US, UK and French governments all currently state the security risk in the region is far below the remainder of Iraq.
Regardless, Baghdad’s blacklist threat has so far held the biggest players at bay. Several companies, such as Korea National Oil Corporation, reportedly signed deals with the KRG and subsequently had export contracts in the south of the country cancelled. Furthermore, no oil company currently active in the north managed to both qualify and win oil service contracts during central Iraq’s long awaited 2009 and 2010 oil field auctions. China’s Sinopec and Marathon Oil both initially qualified for the auctions but subsequently entered Kurdistan and have no presence south of the Kurdistan border.
Sinopec acquired its interest in Kurdistan’s producing Taq Taq field when it bought Addax Petroleum in a deal that drew the wrath of Hussain al-Shahristani, Iraq’s former Oil Minister. Meanwhile, Marathon acquired several blocks in Kurdistan last year despite the US government advising against the deal in the absence of clearance from Baghdad.
Any company that signs contracts with the KRG without approval from central government will compromise chances of getting future opportunities in Iraq, al-Shahristani repeatedly stated in the run up to the licensing rounds. Now Deputy Prime Minister for Energy Affairs, al-Shahristani continues to be a key political player in Iraq and one of the main obstacles to Kurdistan’s oil contracts being officially recognised in Baghdad, which feels the KRG contracts give too much away to the oil companies.
Baghdad and Irbil pointing in same direction
A source at a technical consultancy active in Iraq said: “The Iraqi oil ministry’s comments seem to have been enough for all the oil majors and one or two of the larger oilfield services firms to take a step back from entering Kurdistan.” Prior to becoming the first oil major to win a contract in the south, BP reportedly refused to allow TNK-BP to invest in Kurdistan after taking advice from the US government. TNK-BP’s Russian shareholders ultimately invested in the region through their own independent venture Norbest.
Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne, chairman of the Iraq Britain Business Council, which counts Exxon and Shell amongst its membership, said “Regional differences need to be resolved at both a political and parliamentary level before contracts [in Kurdistan] can be taken up.” Iraq has for years failed to agree upon and put into the legislate its draft hydrocarbon law.
However, the formation last year of a KRG-Baghdad government, in which the Kurdish parties agreed to support Nuri al-Maliki’s re-nomination as Iraq’s prime minister, signals that both power centres are starting to point in the same direction, said Nicholson. Although there has been no official comment to support this view it appears restrictions on companies operating in both regions are reducing, added the source at the technical consultancy.
Further evidence tensions between the two regions are lessening came in May when Baghdad followed up an earlier order for Kurdistan to start oil exports by agreeing to pay the region’s oil producers for their costs. Whilst the payment is the clearest signal yet that the government is set to recognise the KRG’s production sharing contracts it may only do so on a case by case basis to save face, said Zaineb Al-Assam head of MENA forecasting at Exclusive Analysis.
Prime Minister al Maliki said the triggering of the oil payments mechanism signifies the commitment to resolve the outstanding issues between Erbil and Baghdad and will add impetus to discussions over a long-delayed raft of federal oil and gas related legislation.
Government cash flows hit as majors’ reach initial targets
However, it is not clear whether the payment that took place in early May corresponds to the terms of the production sharing agreements signed between the KRG and the foreign operators, said Al-Assam. The May payment is also considered by some as part of Baghdad’s political strategy and falls short of establishing a legal framework towards this end, she added. It will be important to see whether the payment continues in the months ahead, continued Al-Assam.
Al-Assam also noted that Baghdad may need the KRG’s exports to keep the country’s 2011 budget in balance. Baghdad, which had targeted 2.4m bopd production for 2011, produced just over 2m bopd last month. The KRG has said it hopes to achieve around 200,000 bopd production by end of 2011.
The entire country’s oil exports account for more than 90% of its revenue all of which flows to the central government, which then redistributes 17% of the national budget to Kurdistan. Based on the numbers it is in the KRG’s clear financial interest to ramp up its production especially as the halting of domestic sales prior to the start of exports will have reduced the amount of oil smuggled by truck into Iran. This was allegedly a good source of income for the KRG and was well documented right up until last summer despite its claims it was cracking down on the problem. The KRG has publicly denied oil has been smuggled into Iran or that it profited from it.
Financial necessity could indeed be behind Baghdad’s decision to order Kurdistan to resume oil exports, said an oil and gas banker covering the region. “Oil majors are hitting the initial thresholds demanded by their oil service contracts and starting to bill the government for their costs,” said the banker. In March Exxon and Shell announced they had hit a service contract target for a 10% increase in production for the West Qurna Oil field, the world’s second largest.
Baghdad is unable to counter the drag on its cash flows by increasing oil exports from central Iraq as the water infrastructure needed to boost production is severely lacking, added the banker. Central Iraq remains at least six to nine months from seeing an increase in the “incidence of engineering procurement contracts” as the IOCs need more time to better understand how to achieve the plateau production targets set by Baghdad, the technical consultancy source said.
Baghdad may be playing long game
Furthermore, the central government recently confirmed what has been long been known by the industry that its expected oil production plateau targets are going to be closer to half the original target of 12m bopd by 2017 and therefore run for twice as long.
As a result of the financial pressures it seems quite possible that Baghdad has asked Exxon and the other oil groups to move into Kurdistan to help accelerate the region’s oil productivity and pipeline infrastructure development, said the banker. Kurdistan’s main two oil producing companies Sinopec and DNO [DNO NO] are shortly to be supported by Gulf Keystone Petroleum [GKP LN] as the region attempts to achieve production targets of 1m bopd in 2014 set by Ashti Hawrami the KRG’s oil minister.
“By asking oil groups with contracts in the south to move into Kurdistan, Baghdad will have some leverage over these companies and therefore the region in the future,” speculated the banker. At the moment the KRG has a window of opportunity to press its various oil, land and power disputes with Baghdad as it knows its oil is important to developing central Iraq’s infrastructure. But in two years or so when the infrastructure in the south is further developed the relationship may change, added the banker.
It is in the global economy’s interest to see the current accord between Baghdad and Irbil, Kurdistan’s capital, maintained especially in light of OPEC’s recent shock failure to agree on an increase in oil production that would have lowered crude prices. Analysts at JP Morgan last week said Iraq will be “critical” to OPEC’s incremental supplies of crude through next year.
=====
Saturday, 13 August 2011, 08:43 GMT
The economic cancer of Kurdistan
http://www.kurdishglobe.net/display-article.html?id=F09BFC118E9926C3C7234415AD11D05F
Transparency International corruption perceptions map for 2010./ PRESS PHOTO
The Kurdish Globe
By Swara Kadir
Kurdistan, also known as the "other Iraq," is the stable and prosperous Iraq that has shown the success the rest of the country dreams about. But what about the dark side of the "other Iraq"? Is it as perfect as it seems? Unfortunately, corruption distorts this almost-perfect picture and it is holding Kurdistan back from fulfilling its economic potential.
What is done about this problem will determine whether Kurdistan will be another Philippines or become a sustainable, growing economy that has been cured of this disease.
In 2010, Transparency International, an international organization, published a worldwide Corruption Perceptions Index which ranked Iraq as the fourth most corrupt country after Somalia, Myanmar and Afghanistan. The statistics, gathered from several reliable sources, proved enlightening. Regionally, Middle East and North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa were the most corrupt. The least corrupt countries included Scandinavian countries like Denmark, Sweden and Finland. Singapore and New Zealand were also classified as very "clean." When looking at corruption from a worldwide perspective, one comes to the realization that corruption is an international problem, not limited to Iraq and Kurdistan Region. Nearly three- quarters of the 178 countries surveyed by Transparency International scored poorly on the Corruption Perceptions Index. Kurdistan -- welcome to the club.
Transparency International noted that newly independent states are more corrupt than long- established states. Although Kurdistan is not a newly independent state, it's a newly independent region that was formed officially in 2002/2003 after the change of the dictatorial Iraqi regime. Its inevitable that the nascent and relatively new Kurdistan Regional Government needs time to grow and gain experience. In addition, establishing the proper civil institutions takes time and effort. Training and preparing qualified personnel in the government does not happen in the blink of an eye. So, newly independent states are, by their nature, more corrupt and the phenomenon is not limited to Iraq and Kurdistan Region. The wealth of natural resources adds to the problem.
The massive flood of oil wealth into the country has literally drowned the country with easy petro-dollars. Iraq and Kurdistan were under economic sanctions for more than a decade after the failed Kuwait invasion in the early 1990s. Oil, the main source of national revenue, was being exported in smaller quantities and under strict control in exchange for food and basic necessities under the United Nations provision. The country became poor and living standards dropped dramatically. All that changed after the toppling of the Baathist regime when the oil floodgates were opened and Iraq started to freely export oil. Last year, Iraq's oil revenue was estimated at $50 billion, 17 percent of which went to the Kurdistan Region. By the end of 2011, national oil revenue should be around $80 billion, with production rates nearing 2 million barrels per day at around $75 per barrel. It takes a wise leadership to steer a country on the right economic path despite the temptations.
The Philippines serves as a good example of the direct relationship between corruption and economic growth. Shortly after World War II, Ferdinand Marcos became the president of a country that was rated the second wealthiest country in East Asia after Japan. Shortly after he assumed power, Marcos exploited his power for private gain and his family members and cronies stole money from the country's treasury and monopolized the economy. Corruption was everywhere and it brought the country's economy to its knees. Corruption was so prevalent that to this day, no one knows exactly how much public money Marcos embezzled. From the second wealthiest nation in the 1940s, Philippines became one of the poorest in the region, by the mid 1980s, its national debt rose to around $28 billion. In 1986, an angry population ousted the president in what is called the Philippine People Power Revolution.
Economies crippled by corruption in the Middle East caused its people to reach boiling point and demonstrators this spring poured into the streets in Tunisia, and other Middle Eastern and Arab countries, which in turn influenced Kurdistan. Dictators who have been in power for too long, like Zein al-Abideen Bin Ali and Hosni Mubarak are soon to be followed by Moammar Gadhafi of Libya and Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen. In countries were the government and its leadership became corrupt beyond redemption, the regime was toppled and the public refused superficial anti-corruption reforms. In regions like Kurdistan, where corruption hasn't yet completely taken over, and there is still wide support from people, regimes have been able to stay and weather the storm by making sincere anti-corruption changes and taking genuine transparency measures.
Kurdistan President Massoud Barzani pledged to make a series of reforms and combat corruption in a public speech February, his speech was soon followed by a series of actions that have helped restore the people's faith in the government:
-Direct removal of several officials who were widely perceived to be corrupt and have abused their power.
-A review all large investment projects, particularly lucrative housing projects. A special committee was set up for this purpose. Quite a few projects were suspended and deemed to be illegal, and the legitimate and lawful projects were allowed to proceed.
-The establishment of a judiciary anti-corruption committee that has the power to put on trial any person, VIP or otherwise, for corruption and injustice.
-The return of buildings previously occupied by the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan.
-Reducing the number of Peshmarga bodyguards for officials. It has been officially set to four guards per MP as a step in reducing public spending.
-The outlawing of tinted car windows, which may not seem important, but has been one of the most visible and hated features of Kurdish officials' cars. Transparency now includes cars. There has been a crack down on this trend, which helps break down the physical and psychological barriers between officials and civilians.
Is there a relationship between literacy, education and level of corruption in a country, Education and literacy in a country is another factor that may affect the level of corruption. Due to the lack of proper infrastructure and the former Iraqi regime's purposeful negative educational policy when it came to the Kurdistan Region, there is still a high illiteracy rate and low educational standards. This situation is spread within the government and the Kurdish people. A straightforward demonstration of the relationship between the two is the number of newspaper readers. Currently, readership is low in Kurdistan, particularly when it comes to newspapers. A rough estimate of newspaper readership per week would amount to no more than 30,000 based on the number of newspapers being sold each week. Lack of public awareness and low readership leaves corruption unnoticed under the sleeping eye of the public. The importance of press freedom is meaningless without a reading public. .
It's a fact in this part of the world when government officials receive gifts, bestow favors or look out for acquaintances and relatives, it's not altogether frowned upon. This is one of the reasons why corruption is rife in this country; it is the implicit acceptance of common corruption practices that has become the norm. This is prevalent amongst Middle Eastern and developing countries. Where there is so much red tape and bureaucracy to go through before one can get anything done. The giving of a gift or the asking for a favor becomes the shortcut to getting the job done. The system and the inefficient way in which government departments operate keeps the corruption virus alive. If the whole way in which citizen services are conducted by the government is made more effective, efficient and simple, petty bribes would be largely unnecessary. Easy as it is to put the onus on the government to wipe out corruption, things are rarely that simple. It takes two to tango and it takes government and the public to eradicate corruption. ======== Hedge Fund An pooled investment fund, usually a private partnership, that seeks to maximize absolute returns using a broad range of strategies, including unconventional and illiquid investments. Hedge fund nominates slate to AOL board Slate: A list of the candidates of a political party running for various offices. Fri, Feb 24 14:26 PM EST Feb 24 (Reuters) - Activist hedge fund Starboard Value LP nominated a slate of five candidates to AOL Inc's board, saying discussions with the company in the past two months had not yielded desired results. Starboard, which together with its affiliates owns 5.2 percent of AOL's stock, said it had been approached by several third parties who believes AOL's patent portfolio could produce over $1 billion of licensing income if properly monetized. The hedge fund said AOL had valuable intellectual property, such as patents related to secure data transfers, e-commerce, and navigation, among others. In December, Starboard reported a 4.5 percent stake in AOL and pushed for a meeting with the Internet company's board to address what it called strategic failings. The fund said in a statement that it did not intend to seek to replace a majority of AOL's board. == Kurdistan begins independent crude exports Trucks at the weighing station before loading crude at Gulf Keystone's Shaikan extended well test production facility in Iraq's Kurdistan region. (SEBASTIAN MEYER/Metrography/Iraq Oil Report) By Ben Lando and Staff of Iraq Oil Report Published July 11, 2012 Iraq's semi-autonomous Kurdistan region has begun exporting crude oil to Turkey, receiving limited diesel and kerosene to feed power plants in a significant barter exchange, breaching Baghdad's claim to export sovereignty. The independent fuel trade violates the central government's claims of sole authority over crude exports, and represents an escalation in the ongoing conflict between Kurdistan and Baghdad over how to balance the powers of the state. The central government has not forma... === Date posted Wednesday 21:30 Subject Re: Jurassic OWC & +7 billion barrels OIP View parent message Votes for this Posting Voted 26 times. Message "Shaikan-6 which will complete the Shaikan appraisal programme". Are Mirabaud suggesting that Shaikan is 'done'? What about SH-7 (cough cough). The sooner GKP releases an RNS on SH-6 the better. Can someone going to the AGM please raise the question WHY the analysts and brokers know about the OWC and pi's 'officially' do not. What's so farquing hard about releasing a simple prelim RNS on SH-6 stating that the OWC was found 150m below the predicted level. More data to follow once tests are complete. It's criminal to not disclose this info to all shareholders imho. Why are Mirabaud using a 'merger' as a potential benchmark valuation for GKP? "Another, more conservative approach would be a look at the terms of the Vallares-Genel merger, which equated to an EV per resource barrel of US$1.5/bbl, implying a valuation of 290p/shr. Taking everything into account we set our TP at 275p/shr." END. Firstly - every cat and dog knows that Hayward and co had the wildest smiles in Kurdistan after bagging Genel so 'cheap'. Even Mehmet admitted that the deal was not the best offer he had been given - but he was willing to take a massive drop in the Genel valuation based on gaining a london listing and a top corp governance bloke like Hayward etc. Mehmet took a hefty discount in exchange for a share of the fruits but in a listed company. Why would GKP shareholders expect to get a similar value to that discounted number seen on genel Merger. Furthermore - the valuation is a 'merger' deal. It mean Mehmet still has the upside potential to come. If GKP sold Shaikan for an equivalent price to the genel offer - the assumption is that it would be a cash offer. Hence there is no upside value to come. Unless Mirabaud think GKP is going to merge their business - then the example is utterly pointless. Then there's this comment thrown in... "Funding the near-term build out of test facilities and the associated export pipeline is where the company may come up short. In recognition of this, GKP is in advanced negotiations to sell its minority stake in Akri Bijeel, which management hopes will fetch around US$300m. A sum of this order would be sufficient to bridge the funding gap in our model, but the timing and proceeds from any deal is subject to uncertainty." END. Considering GKP have already stated that they hope for $500mln for the AB asset suggesting a price PB based on 200mln barrels etc of around $2.50pb. Yet here we are again and Mirabaud seem to be using $1.50pb to arrive at $300mln. Then there's the comment that GKP might come up short on the funding (due to timing) even with the AB sale. Someone pinch me - is this not a clear statement that the 100mln shares due to be passed will indeed be coming to the 'mates market' in the future! How farquing convenient! You couldn't make this up. So today we get several conditioned broker notes that basically say - whatever news is coming - you aint going past 300p as we have some mates we need to load up with stock soon and it will be done sub 300p. Correct me if I am wrong, but GKP are supposed to be doing 40kbopd by year end. With that cash flow plus the $300mln from AB sale - how can they have any gaps to bridge lol!? Mirabaud and GKP BoD's should be embarrassed by this note. No detail valuation indicators on cash generation apart from some minor comment stating that the 100kbopd plans 'may' be funded via cash flow from 40kbopd rev. mmm. So GKP do an investor roadshow and brokers issue notes with targets mostly lower than they were before the roadshow. Well done TK! Will your bonus share awards be pegged to these broker notes - eg revised down too? HUB And one further point that I forgot to add was that the farquing Genel merger happened BEFORE (yes BEFORE) Exxon moved into kurdistan. Even Hayward has gone on record as saying that Genel can NO longer afford the high prices in asset values in Kurdistan due to the Exxon effect. Here's his quote... "The thing that changed it most is Exxon arrived. 100 percent inflation in six months. DNO has doubled, GKP has doubled," Hayward said. END. Too right Mr Hayward. Too right. So perhaps MiraBaud might want to take that Genel discounted merger figure of $1.50pb and double for starters. Then lets remove the silly discount that Mehmet took based on Hayward and london listing. GKP are already listed - so lets add back in a $1pb for good measure. Then lets add in 50% upside on the merger deal as Mehmet is set to benefit from any future revenue as he still owns 50% of the biz or thereabouts. So he's still got plenty to look forward to in the future. $4 + 50% upside = $6pb. Which is roughly where we should be. So Mirabaud (you bunch of utter t00ls) you can quadruple your pathetic $1.50pb based on the Genel benchmark. It's daylight robbery - it leaves me speechless sometimes at the audacity shown here. I'll stick a less 'fuming' post on thesharehub and if anyone wants to point Mirabaud to the article - then by all means do so. new article should be up on thesharehub in 30mins (minus the swearing!) nest of rampers - COVE is a good example. BUt the real scam by the II's and city boys came after the second offer. Shell bid 195p and all the brokers were 'yeah that's great offer' Cove shareholders should take it etc etc. Then the second bidder came in at 220p and the sp jumped to 225p. The city went quiet for a couple of days and then as if from no where a story broke that COVE could be hit by major tax issue like that seen by Heritage etc. The price plummeted to 180p if I recall before bouncing back to 200p and then 210p. Then as if by magic the market suddenly got their head around the tax issue which wasn't an issue at all - just the usual 10% or so that all had expected. The sp jumped to 230p. The sp is now 272p. Admittedly - Cove has made operational advances since the 195p offer, but it's the city boy tactics on the tax slur/panic that was the disgrace. Any analyst worth their salt would have known the tax issues at the time of the Shell bid never mind the second offer. It was a smash and grab based on mis-information imho and the FSA did nothing about it. So a word of warning for all. If Shaikan is announced as being sold - be wary of false rumours on surprise Kurdistan one off taxes. The city will do anything to steal money from you - even manipulating the libor rate seemed par for the course for the last 8 years. They'll stop at nothing and these recent 'poor' broker notes just proves it. lets be clear here - when the sp was 420p range, a bunch of brokers brought out notes with targets at 280p and 210p to name just two. The sp was not slow in arriving at these levels. It's clear that certain brokers appear to be 'managing' shareholders expectations. Or was that 'manipulating share price situations' lol! Sounds similar! Someone needs to bang these woeful analysts up as it's tantamount to 'mis-information'. I thought after the HSBC rogue note - that the brokers would have been more careful. Quite the opposite. The arrogance of these people is a marvel for all to see. I know most of the 'talented' analysts have farqued off to geneva or the asia. But surely the city can muster up some backroom staff with more brain cells than these rodney's. HUB === Mirabaud imply £9 per share conser... SilksDream I see today that GKP's house broker Mirabaud are on record stating that a valuation of GKP by way of comparison with the terms of the Vallares-Genel merger would be conservative. I agree that this approach would be conservative - for all the reasons outlined by Hub in his earlier posts on the matter. But the approach does have its advantages: * It is very simple to apply! * It requires no explicit assumptions about recovery factors (other than the implicit assumption that the RF on GKP's acreage will be broadly similar to that on Genel's) * Once the maths is done it cannot be frigged to achieve the desired result by the application of arbitrary discount factors, NPV/DCF calculations etc. So, once the maths has been done correctly (as ably pointed out by HWD earlier), the approach yields the following valuations, based on GKP's currently published mean resource figures. Shaikan: 10.5b x 54.4% x $1.50 = $8568m / $1.55/£ / 876.2m shares = £6.31 per share Sheikh Adi: 1.9b x 80% x $1.50 = $2280m / $1.55/£ / 876.2m shares = £1.68 Behr Bahr: 1.5b x 40% x $1.50 = $ 900m / $1.55/£ / 876.2m shares = £0.66 AkriBijeel: 2.4b x 12.8% x $1.50 = $ 461m / $1.55/£ / 876.2m shares = £0.34 A total of £9 per share, not including gas or cash. These are the valuations that Mirabaud would consider conservative. By which I take it they mean would easily be achieved and probably exceeded in any asset/company sale. Given the current SP I can live with that view for now, especially in the light of the upside we hope is around the corner. For example applying the same analysis to an upgraded Shaikan OIP of say 18b barrels gives £10.80 per share for Shaikan, £13.50 for the whole. Or to the BBBS button (100b barrels all told) a nice round £46 per share! Good luck all holders. Silks ===
No comments:
Post a Comment