Coming soon: North Afghan crude

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by ssupersixfour, Mar 25, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Business Spectator article

    Reading this article piqued my interest: much like the writer I had never considered our involvement in the 'Stan to be connected to oil. I recall there being a thread on here discussing just such an issue some time ago but I couldn't find it just now.
  2. Oil & Gas !
    China should prof from this very nicely.
  3. I was expecting forthcoming pornography :(
  4. Aha! That would explain why Total have got a recruitment ad on this page (Total is recruiting - Total, a Leading Oil & Gas company is Hiring new talented Experts) "OK, you've got a degree in petrochemistry, which may come in useful in our IED detection labs, but what we really want to know is how fast you can clear a stoppage on a point 5?"

    Dope and Oil all in the same place - home from home for a Texan :D

    One has to wonder about some of the names: Sari POL is in Kash&Kari ;Bash1Kurd is probably a motto for some.

    Sorry for repeating myself.
    I do not suggest Afghanistan was directly aimed at "Rodina" (as you put it), moreover, and Russia, and India, and Iran initially supported this war...

    1. It seems US was making plans to attack Afghanistan well before 9/11:
    Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.
    Mr. Naik was told that Washington would launch its operation from bases in Tajikistan, where American advisers were already in place. Mr. Naik was told that if the military action went ahead it would take place before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest.
    He said that he was in no doubt that after the World Trade Center bombings this pre-existing U.S. plan had been built upon and would be implemented within two or three weeks. And he said it was doubtful that Washington would drop its plan even if Bin Laden were to be surrendered immediately by the Taliban.
    November 2001, a book by Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie “Bin Laden: The Forbidden Truth,” (you can buy it from Amazon for a fiver) According to a former French secret service agent, and an investigative journalist, the U.S. viewed the Taliban before August 2001 “as a source of stability in Central Asia that would enable the construction of an oil pipeline across Central Asia.” A Taliban representative opened negotiations with the freshly installed George W. Bush by taking an expensive Afghan carpet to Washington in February 2001, but U.S.-Afghan talks went poorly. “At one point during the negotiations, the U.S. representatives told the Taliban official, ‘either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs.’”

    2. From mid-90-s the US were in talks with Taliban over trans-Afghan oil/gas pipeline; the agreement fell on its face in 1998.

    3. On October 10, 2001 (third day of the bombing campaign?) the U.S. ambassador to Pakistan Wendy Chamberlain met with Pakistan’s oil minister to discuss the old Unocal deal.

    4. December 31, 2001, Bush appointed Khalilzad as his Special Presidential Envoy for Afghanistan, later as U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan. Khalilzad is a former Unocal Corporation consultant, a member of the National Security Council on Persian Gulf- and Southeast Asian-related affairs and reported to former ChevronTexaco general counsel Condoleezza Rice.

    5. What is interesting is that appointed by the US Karzai, is also a former Unocal consultant.

    6. Guardian newspaper wrote on May 31, “Gas analysts warn the project would be vulnerable to disruption by warlords unless it was buried deep enough in the ground, which would add considerable extra costs.”,00.html

    7. On August 8, 2002, the Russian state oil company Rosneft announced that it had signed an agreement with the Afghan “Mining and Industry Ministry, under which Russian specialists will study the state of [Afghanistan’s] gas fields and pipeline network over the coming month. Russian companies will finance the feasibility study and provide the Afghans with information on the work of Soviet Union specialists in Afghanistan's gas industry prior to 1988. In turn, Rosneft will participate in the development and privatization of oil and gas blocs that Afghanistan will offer in the future.” “Russian Oil And Gas Companies To Study Feasibility Of Rebuilding Afghanistan’s Gas Industry,” Associated Press, August 8, 2002.

    8. One of the Bush doctrines reads: "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbour or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime,” --- it gives a permission to attack any country (Afghanistan in this context) that US sees as “harbouring and supporting terrorists”.
    Fair enough.

    And now, my questions:

    1. If the reason for the US attack on Afghanistan was retaliation for 9/11, why did Washington plan for it months in advance? How did they know about the coming terrorist act?

    2. If the reason for US attack on Afghanistan was the desire to get rid of Bin-Laden and Al-Q, why did Washington refuse an offer by Taliban government to hand B-L over if US can present a proof he was behind 9/11? Was it because Washington had no proof of A-Q involvement? Was it because the US had the needed proof, but didn’t want to present it in fear Taliban will give them B-L and leave Bush without a “legitimate” reason to start the war in Afghanistan?

    3. Is US current displeasure with Karzai somehow connected with him cozying up to Shanghai Organisation that can if they wish so replace NATO as Karzai’s “bodyguards” and him accepting Russia’s involvement in Afghan pipeline project?

    4. Is US unwillingness to take in Russia’s “subtle hints” (Manas Air Base) somehow connected with the desire of US to put yet more military to guard a projected pipeline in an unstable country instead of accepting competition and work together with Shanghai Organisation and Russia?

    from another thread:

    1.” Construction of oil and natural gas pipelines through Afghanistan was under serious consideration during the Clinton years. In 1996, Unocal won a contract to build a 1,005-mile pipeline in an effort to exploit the vast Turkmenistan natural gas fields. The pipeline would extend through Afghanistan and Pakistan, terminating at Multan, with a proposed 400-mile extension into India. The project was halted when the Taliban regime became unmanageable. (Incidentally that happened just before the war broke out!!!) President Bush appointed Zalmay Khalilzad, a former Unocal consultant, as his special envoy to Afghanistan. Today, the US desire to control fossil fuel in this region is paramount in how the energy sector is influencing the Bush administration's policies in Afghanistan and Central Asia.”

    2. April 23, 2008 “Officials from Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, and Turkmenistan have opened a meeting in Islamabad to discuss a pipeline that would bring Turkmen gas to South Asia….
    It will cross from Kandahar and Herat. The southern cities and provinces of Afghanistan are completely unstable…”

    3. 25 April 2008 “A meeting held yesterday (Wednesday) by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) saw government officials from Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India sign an agreement for the new 1600km pipeline, which will be completed in 2012.”;Itemid=73

    4. The US continues to promote regional cooperation in Southeast Asia through the Asian Development Bank (ADB). The US, which led the effort to establish the ADB in 1965, played a vital role in developing the financial institution's organizational structure and lending practices. The ADB is seen as a tool for the US to expand its political and economic influence in Southeast Asia.

    Nothing new, same predictable the US oil/gas interests and European NATO members wanting their piece of it since NABUCCO is plagued by uncertainty.
  6. Ok Domovoy,

    So going with your theory here for a second...

    If all this oil and gas is in the North , why are we, the Dutch and Canadians fighting our arrses off in the South?
  7. Bouillabaisse

    Bouillabaisse LE Book Reviewer

    Clearly its to distract us whilst those imperialist yankees steal all the oil
  8. That makes a worrying amount of sense
  9. Well, playing devil's advocate for a moment - defending the (American-dependant) government in Kabul from their enemies over the Pak border so that they'll still be in a position to award fat contracts to their mentors in a few years' time?

    I'd be surprised indeed if British, Dutch or Canadian companies got a look in. Most likely the US with Sinopec as an outside chance. A lot depends on whether PRC can parlay their copper-mining contracts into real influence in the face of US bidding. It'll be an interesting combat indicator if they can.
  10. Bouillabaisse

    Bouillabaisse LE Book Reviewer

    Gas pipelines into the Madeupistans north of the border? You're going to need a bigger US Army presence to protect the most attractive target for the taliban within 500 miles in any direction. I suspect it's future rights based on a calmer Afghan political climate. Quite a big risk for a company to take at the moment. look for rights being bought by the Chinese or possibly some Arabic/Muslim companies that might be able to claim "brotherhood."
  11. Why South?

    In addition to what smartascarrots said, the Trans-Afghanistan pipeline suppose to run from Turkmenistan through Herat to Kandahar and into Pakistan.

    Last year The Georgian Times wrote this about the project:
    "American and Saudi Arabia governments initiated the TAP project in 1998 with active participation from a third party, Argentinean Company Bridas...

    In his April 14 interview with China Daily, Pakistan’s President General Musharraf stressed the need to diversify Central Asian energy supplies and China’s engagement in the construction of energy pipelines in Pakistan to deliver resources from Persian Gulf and Central Asian regions. ...

    TAP implementation is in the hands of US strategic national interests as it strives to achieve several important geopolitical missions for Central Asia:

     ........

     .........

     To restore American presence in the Central Asia region and promote the same geopolitical missions that has been in the South Caucasus region with supporting pure geopolitical similar projects: “Nabucco”, “Trans-Caspian Gas Project”, BTC, BTE, etc;

     To downplay Gazprom’s dominance in Central Asia and endorse a free competition race for developing the Central Asian energy reserves that make up about 8-9% of the world energy reserves. "

    Last year Russia pretty much bought Central Asian gas leaving TAP and NABUCCO a bit dry...
  12. Probably because the WTC bombing occurred years before, as did the attack on the USS Stark, as did the US cruise missile strikes on AQ bases in Sudan/Somalia and Afganistan. 9/11 was not the beginning.
  13. My uncle works for a very large global petro chemical and a few years ago they did some sideways drilling from Pakistan into Afghanistan and basically Afghan sits on a very lucrative seam of the black stuff. They have also done seismology testing although he couldnt say when these were carried out.

    Since this drilling seismology has been carried out, the various petro chemical drilling companies have been badgering the government to be the first companies into the stan when it becomes a bit more peaceful. One of the many reasons there is so many countries fighting in the stan is so that they can all have a small stake in the oil revenues which are going to be produced.