U.S. INTERESTS IN THE CENTRAL ASIAN REPUBLICS - FEBRUARY 12, 1998
COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS - U.S. HOUSE
http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495&article=10389
[SNIP]
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Rohrabacher, I certainly do agree with you with respect
to the contributions and plight of the Afghan people, and also the importance
of what we have to do with respect to the Central Asian republics. I hope
that the hearing today helps contribute to what you and I will have to pursue
with our colleagues.
[SNIP]
GO HERE FOR THE FULL STORY:
http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa48119.000/hfa48119_0f.htm

THIS TELLS IT ALL, NOW WHAT?


Donna K wrote:
>
> Excuse me Sir, but your slip is showing���..
>
> Article written by Mr. E. Avatar a freelance reporter.
>
> October 12, 2001
>
>
>
> On October 12, 2001 Friday evening, nightly broadcast of the KPBS news program
> called: "The Jim Lehrer�s  News Hour" Vice President Dick Cheney gave a fairly
> long sit  down interview to Jim  Lehrer, in the office  of the Vice President.
>
> A significant  part of the interview  focused on the fact  that Mr. Cheney has
> been  at an  "undisclosed, secured  facility" and  has not appeared  in public
> together   with  the   President  for   several  days,   if  not   for  weeks.
>
> In fact he was absent for sometimes from the news.
>
> The nation  who looked for the experience and  management skills of Mr. Cheney
> to  support a somewhat  inexperienced President  in foreign policy  issues was
> getting anxious to see Mr. Cheney absent in these days of tension filed hours.
>
> Mr. Cheney  explained that due to security  considerations they have agreed to
> be  at different locations  and never  travel together since  the Presidential
> campaign was over, but never the less they are constantly in touch via secured
> high quality, video conferencing numerous times daily.
>
> During  the interview  Jim Lehrer  commented to  the Vice President  about the
> fact, that  only a few hours  after the 11th  of September attack was launched
> against  the  World Trade  Center  and  targeting the  Pentagon,  a number  of
> Government  Officials who  were contacted from  the news station  were already
> saying: "Yes  we know exactly who is responsible, we  know who is behind these
> terrorist  attacks.  We  are  certain  that  it�s  Osama  Bin  Laden  and  his
> international  terrorist  network that�s  resp  onsib le  for these  attacks."
>
> Lehrer�s question  to the Vice President was  coined "Well, Mr. Vice President
> if we knew  that Osama Bin Laden have posed such threat  to us that mere hours
> after the  attack everybody  knew who was  responsible, how come  we didn�t do
> anythin  g about  preventing it  from happening,  or trying  to stop  him from
> carrying out these attacks against us?
>
> Cheney� response was: "Well if you recall, right after the US Embassy bombings
> the Clinton  administration made an attempt to launch  a missile attack on Bin
> Laden�s  terrorist training  camp inside  Afghanistan, but  failed to  get Bin
> Laden" .
>
> Here Lehrer  did not pursue the subject but  simply continued the interview to
> focus on how the  administration functioned and how the Vice President remains
> involved  while living  in  an undisclosed  location. And  how come  that each
> Governme  nt Agency  is intensifying  the fear,  wile issuing  assurances, but
> meanwhile supplying the foreign Embassies with antibiotics and the US Congress
> with gas masks.
>
> Later,  during the  same  interview Jim  Lehrer  asked the  Vice President  to
> explain   how  the   actual   decision  making   process  worked   within  the
> administration  and  how  the  President would  be  directly  involved in  the
> decision making  process and in  the daily supervision of  a military actions.
>
> The  Vice President,  Mr.  Cheney assured  Jim Lehrer  that the  President was
> intimately  involved with  issuing  orders and  signing off  on  the different
> phases of the military  response launched against the Taliban and Afghanistan.
>
> "Almost immediately at the very beginning, starting from the 12th of September
> certain preparations  and orders of deployments  were authorized personally by
> the  President,  to start  mobilizing  the  forces and  start deployment  into
> position around Afghanistan". Cheney went on explaining.
>
> It takes  times to move forces and military assets  into position half a world
> away.
>
> A military  deployment also  requires the support of  a coordinated diplomatic
> effort, and that takes time.
>
> It is up to the President to instruct his cabinet and to dispatch Colin Powell
> and Rumsfeld  to visit certain  regions, world leaders and  have a coordinated
> diplomatic effort undertaken along with the military ones.
>
> Jim Lehrer  in my opinion has missed two of  the most obvious questions that�s
> still awaiting answers.
>
> How could everybody in the administration know that it was Osama Bin Laden who
> was responsible, only minutes or even hours after the attack?
>
> The second  very obvious but worrisome question  that awaits a proper response
> derives from Mr. Cheney�s statement when saying that the
>
> President  as early  as on the  12th of  September has already  authorized and
> issued  orders to  Cabinet  Members to  take the  necessary  steps to  get the
> military forces and logistics  mobilized against Osama Bin Laden, the Taliban,
> against Afgh anistan.
>
> On September 20, the  FBI said that it had doubts about the real identities of
> some of the hijackers, on the passenger list.
>
> On the same day  President George Bush said, "We know exactly who these people
> are  and which  governments  are supporting  them."  It sounds  as though  the
> President  known  something  that  even the  FBI  who  was  in  charge of  the
> investigation did n't know.
>
> In his September 20 address to the US Congress, President Bush
>
> said  "The enemies  of  America are  the enemies  of freedom".  "Americans are
> asking,  'Why  do they  hate  us?'  The President  continued.  "They hate  our
> freedoms -our freedom of  religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote
> and assemble a nd disagree with each other."
>
> The American people were being asked by the President, to make two giant leaps
> of  faith here.  First, to  assume that  The Enemy  of America  is who  the US
> government says  it is, even though it has  no substantial evidence to support
> that cla  im. And second, to  assume that The Enemy's  motives are what the US
> government  says  they  were,  and there's  nothing  to  support that  either.
>
> Only hours  after the names of  the hijackers were released,  two of the names
> published  prompted  two people  to  walk  into American  Embassies abroad  to
> confirm and  to verify that they were in fact  very much alive. Secondly, that
> neither one of  them were anywhere near the US on the dates when the hijackers
> struck their  targets, yet their  names age and nationality  was plastered all
> over in the US press.
>
>
> A  few days  later when  Mr. Bush  declared "Those  who are  not with  us, are
> against us".  This bold statement, in the land of free  speech had in fact has
> shut drown  any debate and challenged any "right  to disagree". It muzzled the
> rights to  question or to scrutinize the Government�s  claim or to insist that
> Mr.  Bush present  the  "evidence" to  the American  people.  In the  midst of
> fervent  flag  waiving  and  intensified patriotic  sentiment  and  relentless
> rhetoric it  became not only unpopular but outri  ght "Un-American" to ask any
> pointed questions from this Administration!
>
> But in  light of these new revelations that the  Jim Lehrer interview that was
> just aired and exposed,  quiet unintentionally I may add, some very disturbing
> facts. It  is doubly disturbing and very  troubling, that military orders were
> bein g issued to  attack Afghanistan hours after the 9/11 attack at that time,
> in the total absence of any evidence.
>
> And it  only intensifies  the lingering degrees of  persisting suspicions that
> the �classified evidence" that had not been produced to date to neither to the
> International Intelligence Community, nor  to International Leaders nor to the
> Ame rican Public is so "highly classified" for the all too obvious reasons.
>
> Now it becomes a  telltale sign, why Secretary Powel�s promise to disclose the
> "evidence" was abruptly recanted the next day by President Bush justifying the
> withholding by intelligence and national security grounds.
>
> It is surprising to  learn that an ex Chief of the Joint Chiefs of Staff would
> be less  sensitive to classified information than  an ex-Texas air cadet would
> be.
>
> While the Media is  transfixed and so fully preoccupied broadcasting the daily
> devastating  air-strikes,  missile  launches,  and bomb  attacks  obliterating
> Afghanistan, with morbid fascination, no one in the world news media probes or
> asks a  ny questions.  Even the most  obvious questions remain  conspicuous by
> there absence.
>
> Everyone is  deeply touched by the  fact, when the president  tells us that he
> intends to remain involved in reconstructing Afghanistan.
>
> I could have guessed that much.
>
> Everybody is  convinced that Afghanistan is a  devastated, dirt poor stone age
> like country. Well that�s true today.
>
> But I defy anyone  to tell me if they have even heard about OIL or NATURAL GAS
> in the MEDIA in the context of Afghanistan?
>
> Could  it be  that the  strategic significance  of Afghanistan is  perhaps the
> estimated 250 billion barrels of oil reserves located in Central Asia?
>
> Perhaps someone could ask if anyone knows about the following:
>
> U.S. INTERESTS IN THE CENTRAL ASIAN REPUBLICS HEARING
>
> BEFORE  THE  SUBCOMMITTEE  ON  ASIA  AND  THE  PACIFIC  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON
> INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS  HOUSE OF  REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED  FIFTH CONGRESS
> SECOND SESSION.
>
> FEBRUARY 12, 1998
>
> Next  we would  like  to hear  from Mr.  John  J. Maresca,  vice  president of
> international relations, Unocal Corporation. You may proceed as you wish.
>
> STATEMENT  OF  JOHN J.  MARESCA,  VICE PRESIDENT  OF INTERNATIONAL  RELATIONS,
> UNOCAL CORPORATION
>
> Mr. Maresca.  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  It's nice to see  you again. I am John
> Maresca, vice president for international relations of the Unocal Corporation.
> Unocal, as you know, is one of the world's
>
> leading energy  resource and project development  companies. I appreciate your
> invitation to  speak here  today. I believe  these hearings are  important and
> timely.
>
> I congratulate  you for focusing on Central Asia oil  and gas reserves and the
> role they play in shaping U.S. policy.
>
> I  would like to  focus today on  three issues.  First, the need  for multiple
> pipeline routes for Central Asian oil and gas resources.
>
> Second, the  need for U.S.  support for international and  regional efforts to
> achieve  balanced and lasting  political settlements  to the conflicts  in the
> region, including  Afghanistan. Third,  the need for  structured assistance to
> encourage   economic reforms  and  the development  of appropriate  investment
> climates  in the  region. In  this regard,  we specifically support  repeal or
> removal of section 907 of the Freedom Support Act.
>
> Mr.  Chairman, the  Caspian  region contains  tremendous untapped  hydrocarbon
> reserves. Just to give an idea of the scale, proven natural gas reserves equal
> more than  236 trillion cubic feet.  The region's total oil  reserves may well
> reach m ore than 60 billion barrels of oil.
>
> Some estimates  are as  high as 200  billion barrels. In 1995,  the region was
> producing  only 870,000  barrels  per day.  By 2010,  western  companies could
> increase production  to about 4.5 million  barrels a day, an  increase of more
> than 500 per cent in only 15 years. If this occurs, the region would represent
> about 5 percent of the world's total oil production.
>
> One major problem has  yet to be resolved: how to get the region's vast energy
> resources to the markets where they are needed.
>
> Central  Asia  is  isolated.  Their  natural resources  are  landlocked,  both
> geographically  and politically.  Each of  the countries  in the  Caucasus and
> Central Asia faces difficult political challenges. Some have unsettled wars or
> latent confl  icts. Others have evolving  systems where the laws  and even the
> courts are dynamic and changing. In addition, a chief technical obstacle which
> we in the industry  face in transporting oil is the region's existing pipeline
> infrastructure.
>
> Because  the region's  pipelines were  constructed during  the Moscow-centered
> Soviet period, they tend to head north and west toward
>
> Russia.  There  are no  connections  to  the south  and  east.  But Russia  is
> currently  unlikely  to  absorb  large new  quantities  of  foreign oil.  It's
> unlikely  to be a  significant market for  new energy  in the next  decade. It
> lacks the capacity to deliver it to other markets.
>
> Two major infrastructure projects  are seeking to meet the need for additional
> export capacity. One, under the aegis of the Caspian
>
> Pipeline  Consortium,  plans  to  build  a  pipeline west  from  the  northern
>
> Caspian to  the Russian Black Sea  port of Novorossiysk. Oil  would then go by
> tanker through the Bosporus to the Mediterranean and world markets.
>
> The   other   project   is   sponsored   by   the   Azerbaijan   International
>
> Operating Company,  a consortium  of 11 foreign oil  companies, including four
> American  companies,  Unocal,  Amoco,  Exxon  and  Pennzoil.  This  consortium
> conceives of  two possible  routes, one line  would angle north  and cross the
> north  Caucasus  to Novorossiysk.  The other  route would  cross Georgia  to a
> shipping terminal  on the Black Sea. This second  route could be extended west
> and south across Turkey to the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan.
>
> But  even if  both  pipelines were  built, they  would  not have  enough total
> capacity  to transport all  the oil expected  to flow  from the region  in the
> future. Nor  would they have the  capability to move It  to the right markets.
> Other export p ipelines must be built.
>
> At  Unocal, we  believe that  the central  factor in planning  these pipelines
> should be the location of the future energy markets that
>
> are  most likely  to  need these  new  supplies. Western  Europe, Central  and
> Eastern Europe,  and the Newly  Independent States of the  former Soviet Union
> are all slow growth markets where demand will grow at only a half a percent to
> perhaps 1 .2 percent per year during the period 1995 to 2010.
>
> Asia  is a  different story all  together. It  will have a  rapidly increasing
> energy consumption  need. Prior to the recent  turbulence in the Asian Pacific
> economies, we  at Unocal anticipated  that this region's demand  for oil would
> almost do uble by 2010. Although the short-term
>
> increase in demand will  probably not meet these expectations, we stand behind
> our long-term estimates.
>
> I  should  note that  it  is in  everyone's  interest that  there be  adequate
> supplies for Asia's increasing energy requirements. If Asia's energy needs are
> not satisfied,  they will  simply put pressure  on all world  markets, driving
> prices upwa rds everywhere.
>
> The key question then  is how the energy resources of Central Asia can be made
> available to nearby Asian markets. There are two
>
> possible solutions,  with several variations. One option  is to go east across
> China,  but  this  would  mean constructing  a  pipeline  of  more than  3,000
> kilometers just to reach  Central China. In addition, there would have to be a
> 2,000-kilom  eter connection to  reach the  main population centers  along the
> coast. The question then  is what will be the cost of transporting oil through
> this  pipeline,  and what  would  be  the netback  which  the producers  would
> receive.
>
> For those who are  not familiar with the terminology, the netback is the price
> which the  producer receives for his oil or gas at  the wellhead after all the
> transportation costs have been deducted.
>
> So it's the price he receives for the oil he produces at the wellhead.
>
> The second option is to build a pipeline south from Central Asia to the Indian
> Ocean. One  obvious route south would  cross Iran, but this  is foreclosed for
> American companies because of U.S. sanctions legislation. The only other possi
> ble  route  is  across  Afghanistan ,  which  has  of course  its  own  unique
> challenges. The  country has  been involved in  bitter warfare for  almost two
> decades, and is  still divided by civil war. From the  outset, we have made it
> clear tha t con  struction of the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan
> could  not  begin until  a  recognized government  is  in place  that has  the
> confidence of governments, lenders, and our company.
>
> Mr. Chairman, as you  know, we have worked very closely with the University of
> Nebraska at Omaha in developing a training program
>
> for  Afghanistan which  will be  open to  both men  and women, and  which will
> operate in both parts of the country, the north and south.
>
> Unocal foresees  a pipeline which would become part  of a regional system that
> will  gather  oil  from  existing  pipeline  infrastructure  in  Turkmenistan,
> Uzbekistan,  Kazakhstan and  Russia.  The 1,040-mile  long oil  pipeline would
> extend  south  through  Afghanistan to  an  export  terminal  that would  be
> constructed on the Pakistan  coast. This 42-inch diameter pipeline will have a
> shipping capacity of one million barrels of oil per day. The estimated cost of
> the project, which is  similar in scope to the trans-Alaska pipeline, is about
> $2.5 billion.
>
> Given the  plentiful natural gas supplies of Central Asia,  our aim is to link
> gas  resources  with  the  nearest  viable  markets.  This is  basic  for  the
> commercial  viability  of  any  gas  project.  But these  projects  also  face
> geopolitical   challen    ges.   Unocal   and   the    Turkish   company   Koc
>
> Holding  are interested in  bringing competitive  gas supplies to  Turkey. The
> proposed Eurasia  natural gas  pipeline would transport  gas from Turkmenistan
> directly across  the Caspian Sea through Azerbaijan  and Georgia to Turkey. Of
> course t he demarcation of the Caspian remains an issue.
>
> Last  October, the Central  Asia Gas  Pipeline Consortium, called  CentGas, in
> which Unocal holds an interest, was formed to develop
>
> a gas  pipeline which will link Turkmenistan's  vast Dauletabad gas field with
> markets in  Pakistan and  possibly India. The proposed  790-mile pipeline will
> open  up  new  markets  for  this  gas, traveling  from  Turkmenistan  through
> Afghanistan t  o Multan in Pakistan. The proposed  extension would move gas on
> to New  Delhi, where it would  connect with an existing  pipeline. As with the
> proposed Central  Asia oil pipeline, CentGas  can not begin construction until
> an internationally recognized Afghani stan Government is in place.
>
> The   Central   Asia   and   Caspian   region   is   blessed   with   abundant
>
> oil  and  gas that  can  enhance  the lives  of  the  region's residents,  and
>
> provide  energy  for growth  in  both Europe  and  Asia. The  impact of  these
> resources  on  U.S.  commercial  interests and  U.S.  foreign  policy is  also
> significant.
>
> Without peaceful  settlement of the conflicts  in the region, cross-border oil
> and gas  pipelines are not likely to be built.  We urge the Administration and
> the  Congress  to  give  strong  support  to  the U.N.-led  peace  process  in
> Afghanistan.  The  U.S.  Government  should use  its  influence  to help  find
> solutions to all of the region's conflicts.
>
> U.S. assistance in developing  these new economies will be crucial to business
> success.  We   thus  also  encourage  strong   technical  assistance  programs
> throughout the region. Specifically,  we urge repeal or removal of section 907
> of the  Free dom Support Act. This  section unfairly restricts U.S. Government
> assistance to  the government of  Azerbaijan and limits U.S.  influence in the
> region.
>
> Developing  cost-effective  export routes  for  Central Asian  resources is  a
> formidable  task,  but  not  an  impossible  one. Unocal  and  other  American
> companies like it are  fully prepared to undertake the job and to make Central
> Asia once  again into the  crossroads it has been in  the past. Thank you, Mr.
> Chairman.
>
> [The prepared statement of Mr. Maresca appears in the appendix.]
>
> Mr.  Maresca�s testimony forgets  to mention  the enormous Afghan  natural gas
> reserves, and other unexplored resources, such as chromium, rubies, high grade
> coal, and numerous others as well as OIL.
>
> Perhaps it�s  due to my  overly suspicious and equally  inquisitive nature but
> when I see an Administration that was heavily supported by the oil industry to
> get elected and it�s  headed by President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and Dr.
> Con dollezza Rice, all three ex oil company executives, it is difficult for me
> to imagine that these people have no knowledge about the value of the enormous
> oil and gas reserves located in Central Asia.
>
===========================================================================
Wartime Responsibility
http://disc.server.com/Indices/149495.html

Ashcroft applauds Congress' agreement on USA Act
http://disc.server.com/Indices/149495.html


Reply via email to