Re: [iwar] Afghanistan: the pipeline war?

From: e.r. (fastflyer28@yahoo.com)
Date: 2001-11-03 03:15:08


Return-Path: <sentto-279987-3753-1004786109-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com>
Delivered-To: fc@all.net
Received: from 204.181.12.215 [204.181.12.215] by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.7.4) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Sat, 03 Nov 2001 03:16:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 32498 invoked by uid 510); 3 Nov 2001 11:14:18 -0000
Received: from n26.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.76) by 204.181.12.215 with SMTP; 3 Nov 2001 11:14:18 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-3753-1004786109-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com
Received: from [10.1.4.55] by n26.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Nov 2001 11:15:05 -0000
X-Sender: fastflyer28@yahoo.com
X-Apparently-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 3 Nov 2001 11:15:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 258 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 11:15:08 -0000
Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m11.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Nov 2001 11:15:08 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO web14507.mail.yahoo.com) (216.136.224.70) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Nov 2001 11:15:08 -0000
Message-ID: <20011103111508.39503.qmail@web14507.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [64.157.190.127] by web14507.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 03 Nov 2001 03:15:08 PST
To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
In-Reply-To: <9s08tc+r2bh@eGroups.com>
From: "e.r." <fastflyer28@yahoo.com>
X-Yahoo-Profile: fastflyer28
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 03:15:08 -0800 (PST)
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [iwar] Afghanistan: the pipeline war?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The "BIG" lie tacktick seems to fall down sooner rather than later. 
Perhape you should check your sources.  The question is, do you take
the the press, or your intention in your commentary as fact.Think twice
as others do. 


--- yangyun@metacrawler.com wrote:
> 
>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1626000/1626889.stm
> 
> Monday, 29 October, 2001, 20:56 GMT BBC
> Afghanistan: the pipeline war?
> 
> [Oil pipelines]
> Some commentators have asked if it's all about oil
> By BBC Eurasia Analyst Malcolm Haslett
> 
> Some attractively original theories have been going the rounds about
> the real reasons for the Afghan war.
> 
> It is obviously much more, some columnists and political theorists
> suggest, than a simple effort to stamp out terrorism.
> 
> Apart from the popular theory (in some parts of Europe as well as the
> Middle East) that this is a war on Islam, there is also the theory
> that it is a war motivated mainly - or even purely - by long-term
> economic and political goals.
> 
> The importance of Central Asian oil and gas has suddenly been
> noticed.
> 
> The valuable deposits of fossil fuels in Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and
> Azerbaijan, previously discussed only by regional experts and
> international energy companies, are now being mulled over on the
> opinion pages of popular dailies.
> 
> Economic imperatives
> 
> The Afghan war, it has been discovered, has an economic side to it.
> 
> [Petrol filling station]
> Oil is undeniably important to the Americans
> Some writers, indeed, have gone further, suggesting that economic
> considerations provide the main, or at the very least a major,
> motivation for US and western involvement in Afghanistan.
> 
> If one discounts the more extreme and emotional versions of this
> theory, the argument boils down to this:
> 
>     * Afghanistan has been proposed by more than one western oil
> company (the US-based Unocal is often mentioned, but it is not the
> only one) as the best route by which to export the Central Asian
> republics' important output of oil and gas
>     * Given the increasing importance of finding and exploiting new
> sources of fossil fuel, governments like those of the US and the UK
> are enormously keen to gain influence in the Central Asian region in
> order to secure those supplies for the West
>     * In order to achieve that, and get those energy supplies moving
> out of Central Asia, they need to set up a pro-western government in
> Afghanistan.
> 
> Flawed theory
> 
> This line of argument falls down on a number of points.
> 
> It is undeniably true that the Central Asian republics do have very
> significant reserves of gas and oil, and that they have been having
> difficulty in getting them on to the world market on conditions
> favourable to them.
> 
> Until recently Russia had an almost total monopoly of export
> pipelines, and was demanding a high price, in economic and political
> terms, for their use.
> 
> [Saparmurat Niyazov ]
> Niyazov: main proponent
> But it simply is not true that Afghanistan is the main alternative to
> Russia.
> 
> On the contrary, very few western politicians or oil companies have
> taken Afghanistan seriously as a major export route - for the simple
> reason that few believe Afghanistan will ever achieve the stability
> needed to ensure a regular and uninterrupted flow of oil and gas.
> 
> There have been exceptions, of course, like Unocal and the Argentine
> company Bridas.
> 
> The main proponents of the Afghan pipeline idea, however, apart from
> the Taleban regime itself and its backers in Pakistan, was the
> government of the eccentric Turkmen President Saparmyrat Niyazov,
> known as "Turkmenbashi".
> 
> Caucasus route
> 
> The West, in contrast, and particularly the US, has put almost all
> its
> efforts into developing a major new route from the Caspian through
> Azerbaijan and Georgia to the Black Sea.
> 
> This had the potential advantage (from a western point of view) of
> bypassing Russia and Iran, and breaking their monopoly of influence
> in
> the region - allowing the states of the Caucasus (Georgia, Azerbaijan
> and possibly Armenia) and Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan,
> Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan) to develop a more balanced, independent
> foreign policy.
> 
> [Afghan refugees]
> The Afghans would benefit from a pipeline
> That, of course, worries many in Russia, and to a lesser degree in
> Iran.
> 
> They also now fear that the Central Asians' willingness to entertain
> US forces on their territory could substantially increase US
> influence
> in the region.
> 
> Such a scenario, however, is far from certain.
> 
> The western powers have caused considerable annoyance among the
> authoritarian regimes of Central Asia by harping on human rights
> abuses - particularly, incidentally, against Muslims - and the need
> for greater democratisation.
> 
> It seems highly unlikely, moreover, that the US-led "Coalition
> against
> Terrorism" has any illusions about how "pro-western" any potential
> new
> Afghan Government would be.
> 
> The main prerequisite for the survival of a new administration in
> Kabul, is that it win wide acceptance among the various ethnic and
> political groupings in Afghanistan itself.
> 
> No US stooges
> 
> And very few of those groups are exactly pro-western.
> 
> Western influence in Afghanistan would, at best, remain shaky.
> 
> In addition, if peace and stability were to return to Afghanistan,
> and
> a new pipeline to Central Asia was to be built, the principal
> beneficiaries would undoubtedly be the Afghans, as well as Pakistan,
> Turkmenistan, and the other Central Asians.
> 
> In brief, then, considerations of economic and political influence
> will undoubtedly play a part in western strategies in Afghanistan.
> 
> It would be strange if they did not. But the argument that these are
> the main motivations behind US actions, not the desire to stamp out
> international terrorism, will probably find support mainly among
> those
> who already have a fondness for conspiracy theories.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-12-31 20:59:58 PST