Showing posts with label Cash Flow Jihad. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cash Flow Jihad. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 01, 2008

Policy Of Blockade

A. Jacksonian (A.J.) has an excellent post up tying Iran's natural gas problems with Turkmenistan with its oil problem and its internal economic woes. Let us start with this bit that A.J quotes from Reuters

Ebadollah Ghanbari, who heads the public relations unit of the national gas company, said Turkmenistan on Saturday slashed exports to Iran by half to 10 million cubic metres, before stopping deliveries completely a day later.

"In an official letter they said it was due to technical problems," he told state broadcaster IRIB. "Since yesterday evening Turkmenistan has completely cut its gas exports to Iran."

Despite its massive gas reserves, Iran has been a net importer of gas since 2002.
A.J. goes on to say:
Well, if you haven't read my previous stuff on Iran's Oil Problem and its Oil Outlook, now is the time to, because Iran just hit the wall.
Excellent advice since those articles provide excellent background.
Iran subsidizes natural gas so as to keep things running and folks happy. They don't use natural gas to rejuvenate their oil fields, which is one of the cheapest ways to do it. Instead, with non-market prices they get steep use and an increase in that use. If an energy source is cheaper than others, it gets over-utilized, just ask the folks in Iraq who don't pay monthly bills for electricity but get the 'all you can eat with a flat tax' deal from the Government. If there were meters, Iraq's power problem would diminish greatly, but that would also stall out the economic recovery so it will wait. Iran, however, is selling the natural gas at a rate cheaper than re-utilizing it for their oil fields. In theory they should have more than enough to export.

Which brings up the prime question: Why is Iran importing any natural gas?

And why is 5% of their natural gas supplies coming from imports via Turkmenistan?

This was supposed to be a money making export, as they had just finished a pipeline deal with India for natural gas. So *what* are they going to put in that pipeline? Right now the answer is NOTHING.

The folks in Turkmenistan suddenly had a great awakening: they were keeping the Iranian natural gas market afloat and NO ONE ELSE WOULD SELL TO THEM.

If you were in that position, what would *you* do?

Can you say: raise the prices?
A.J. then looks at what the Iranians can do in this situation with respect to natural gas prices.
Iran can't raise the price without causing a major recession or depression and starting to shut down some sectors of the economy. Plus, if they raise the prices for natural gas, they will be raising the cost of operating gas fired electrical facilities. A 'double-whammy' on the economy.

Iran might start 'rationing' it, but how they would do that is beyond me. Maybe start closing shut-off valves to certain neighborhoods for half-a-day at a time? That will start to cause some *serious* complaints, not just from college students or government employees, but from everyday folks.

Iran has only one solution that it tends to use for everything, and that is to shift terror operations. So Turkmenistan can expect to get its own little Hezbollah and meet-ups with the Qods forces. Which will be a blessing for Iraq and a 'holding pattern' in Lebanon. Unless, of course, Turkmenistan is *serious* in which case the next year in Iran is make or break.

And if Iran has to *pay up* a lot of terrorist cash will suddenly *dry up*.

Thank you to Turkmenistan!
I'd like to look a little further into the situation and see what the US has done to help put Iran in its current position.

A. J.,

You and I have been on the same page on this for quite some time.

I covered the Cash Flow Jihad aspect. You have been covering oil.

America is squeezing Iran by preventing them from earning income from other than oil and cutting off their cash flow from western banks. Iran's own bad policies (as you point out) are squeezing their oil income.

In other times this would be called the policy of blockade.

I posited that they had a window of opportunity for their jihad program. They lost the war in Lebanon (intended to weaken Israel - it did not). They needed an unstable Iraq (so they could take Iraqi oil fields once America left Iraq. This was an effort to stave off collapse by the usual methods. Theft.). That didn't work out either.

They are now between a rock and a very hard place. Afghanistan is their last hope. However, even if they win it they gain a liability, not an asset.

If they don't get nukes within a year (instability in Pakistan ring a bell?) they are fooked. They are screwed any way. A huge nuclear arsenal didn't save the USSR from economic collapse.

Let me add that the Iranian regime sells gasoline in Iran for under 50¢ a gallon. About 1/4 the world price.Iran raised gasoline prices by 25% last summer. It was around 34¢ a gallon previously.

In addition economic genius Ahmanutjob withdrew all the Iranian cash reserves from the world banking system to stave off disaster. It created an inflationary spike and produced nothing as the money was not invested but went to support jihad and stave off internal economic collapse.

Paying off the Shiites for the disaster in Lebanon must have cost a lot. However, without that payment Iran loses prestige and its proxy Hizbollah.

Historical precedent - Germany summer of 1918.

Another point. Perhaps the CIA leak - taking military pressure off Iran - was policy and not a rogue element in the US Government acting without authorization.

In fact it may have been in Iran's interest because by making a deal re: cutting the funding of the insurgency in Iraq in exchange for a reduction of American military pressure they reduce their cash flow strain.

My guess is that it will buy time for Iran, but not enough. So it was a good deal for us. If we reckoned that the slide had gone so far as to be irreversible.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Thursday, June 28, 2007

Price Controls

I have made one of my periodic visits to the Netscape blog where today's topic is Anger At the Gas Pump. A topic already covered here. So the topic drifts to Nixon's wage and price freeze.

We have an economic genius who says the policy was really nice but didn't last long enough. farmerman has an answer; a good one too.

Did you like the shortages and gas lines? If we don't want to buy the oil, the Chinese and others will gladly buy it. You libs can try to rewrite history, but you sure can't rewrite the rules of supply and demand.
I wouldn't be so sure. We have a Democrat Congress.

The price freeze in Venezuela is working out nicely. You cannot by food that cost more than is allowed now. There is a reason for that. All the price controlled food has disappeared from the market shelves.

Price controlled oil in America had the same effect.

It is terrible the way the price of gasoline rises and falls. Except for the fact that you can buy it when you need it. Price stability by government fiat comes at the price of availability.

Economics in one easy lesson:

A woman comes into a butcher shop. She tells the butcher she wants some chickens. But she wants to pay the same price as the butcher across the street advertises in his window. "Your prices are too high", she says. The butcher asks, "Why don't you go across the street for your chickens?" "They haven't got any", she replies.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

Gas Wars In Iran

In America a "gas war" is a price war. Fuel stations compete for customers by lowering prices. In Iran the "gas war" is caused by a government mandated sudden jump in fuel prices.

The Spirit of Man blog has a round up of the gas wars in Iran with pictures. It appears Iran is burning.

I am getting some first hand reports from inside of Iran about the situation resulted from fuel ration policy which will go into effect as of tonight midnight (local time) through out the country.

Angry people have blocked the main highway in Tehran and several serious clashes have occurred in gas stations across the capital. The amount of anger among the people is such that police forces have refused to intervene in some parts of the city where roads are blocked and people have shattered the buildings' windows. And some reports indicate that 50 petrol stations were set ablaze in Tehran alone and at least 3 people died in the clashes.
The Socialist Theocrats running Iran (into the ground) bought the favor of the population with low gasoline prices. However, with 40% of Iran's gasoline imported and gasoline prices skyrocketing it appears that the subsidy is unsustainable. The regime had to raise prices. This has made the regime very unpopular to the point of riots.

The Middle East Times reports:
TEHRAN -- Angry Iranian youths torched petrol stations in Tehran and long queues formed at fuel pumps after the government announced the start of fuel rationing, triggering nationwide protests Wednesday.

Youths set a car and petrol pumps ablaze at a service station in the residential Pounak area of northwestern Tehran, throwing stones and shouting angry slogans denouncing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

After the announcement of the rationing plan in the energy-rich nation, which affects both private cars and taxis, long queues started appearing at fuel pumps in Tehran and in the countryside.

Ahmadinejad has already come under fire over his economic policies, which a group of economists complained earlier this month were fuelling inflation and hurting the poor.

Iran, OPEC's number two oil producer, announced Tuesday that its long-awaited plan to ration petrol was coming into force at midnight, a move the government says is aimed at reducing colossal state petrol subsidies.

"From midnight tonight (2030 GMT) petrol for all vehicles and motorcycles will be rationed," state television said, quoting an oil ministry statement.

It said private cars using just petrol would be rationed to 100 liters of petrol a month while those using petrol and compressed natural gas (CNG) would only be allowed 30 liters.
Let me translate that into American. One hundred liters a month is about 25 gallons.

Basically Iran is hobbled economically by two things. A theocracy based on 7th century ideas on how to organize society and an economic policy discredited with the fall of the USSR. Ahmadinejad is an economic illiterate. He doesn't get it. He has pumped the economy full of cash. With no productive capacity to absorb the cash it has led to runaway inflation. Even though the cash is mostly imported at market prices. He should have studied what happened to Spain when they found gold in the Americas. Spain did get richer. It also got a heavy dose of inflation. Despite the fact that gold is "real" money. As with all things he may not be getting what he wants, but he is getting an education. I'm hoping he gets educated to death. Or if he is lucky, absorbs his lessons in exile.

Gateway Pundit has a round up with more pictures.

A. Jacksonian has reminded me of a bit he did on the state of Iran's Oil Sector. Very complimentary to the above.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Monday, March 26, 2007

Squeezing Iran

The Washington Post reports: Iran Feels Pinch As Major Banks Curtail Business.

More than 40 major international banks and financial institutions have either cut off or cut back business with the Iranian government or private sector as a result of a quiet campaign launched by the Treasury and State departments last September, according to Treasury and State officials.

The financial squeeze has seriously crimped Tehran's ability to finance petroleum industry projects and to pay for imports. It has also limited Iran's use of the international financial system to help fund allies and extremist militias in the Middle East, say U.S. officials and economists who track Iran.

The U.S. campaign, developed by Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, emerged in part over U.S. frustration with the small incremental steps the U.N. Security Council was willing to take to contain the Islamic republic's nuclear program and support for extremism, U.S. officials say. The council voted Saturday to impose new sanctions on Tehran, including a ban on Iranian arms sales and a freeze on assets of 28 Iranian individuals and institutions.

"All the banks we've talked to are reducing significantly their exposure to Iranian business," said Stuart Levey, Treasury's undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence. "It's been a universal response. They all recognize the risks -- some because of what we've told them and some on their own. You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to see the dangers."
What are the dangers? Any project started now could be repudiated by the next government in Iran. Who is scaring the bankers the most? Iran's President. The feller I like to refer to as Ahmanutjob.
Ahmadinejad's rhetoric -- from denying the Holocaust to comparing Iran's stock exchange to gambling -- has helped, experts say. "There is very little foreign investment in Iran not because of sanctions, but because of the atmosphere created by Ahmadinejad's crazy statements," said Jahangir Amuzegar, former Iranian finance minister and executive director of the International Monetary Fund.
In recent news a possible naval blockade due to the capture of 15 Bitish marines by the Iranians could hasten their decline.
The Bush administration has taken several other actions in recent months to contain Iran, including deploying two Navy carrier strike groups near the Persian Gulf, arresting operatives of the Revolutionary Guards' al-Quds Force in Iraq and pressing for two U.N. resolutions to punish Iran for not suspending its uranium enrichment program.
Iran is having problems with its gasoline supply. For another it is not maintaining its oil production infrastructure. Iranian net oil output is declining at better than 10% a year. By no later than 2015 its net oil output will be zero. Since oil accounts for 80% of Iran's export revenues the pinch is already starting to hurt and will only get worse.
In December, Iranian oil minister Kazem Vaziri Hamaneh acknowledged that Tehran was having trouble financing petroleum development projects. "Currently, overseas banks and financiers have decreased their cooperation," he told the oil ministry news agency Shana.
This is a regime on the decline. The question is how fast. In the early days of any blockade the pinch does not seem serious. The longer things go on the more trouble multiplies. Production is cut in industry A due to lack of resources which affects industry B which has not felt the external crimp. This cascades.
Iranian importers are particularly feeling the pinch, with many having to pay for commodities in advance when a year ago they could rely on a revolving line of credit, said Patrick Clawson, a former World Bank official now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. The scope of Iran's vulnerability has been a surprise to U.S. officials, he added.

The financial institutions cutting back business ties are mainly in Europe and Asia, U.S. officials say. UBS last year said it was cutting off all dealings with Iran. London-based HSBC (which has 5,000 offices in 79 countries) and Standard Chartered (with 1,400 branches in 50 countries) as well as Commerzbank of Germany have indicated they are limiting their exposure to Iranian business, Levey said.
America has a lock on the international banking system. Only friends get to play.

Let me add the biggest risk factor. What do socialist countries (which Iran is) do when economics gets tough? They nationalize. i.e. they steal the investment. Returns have to be very high to make such risks worth while.

H/T Captain's Quarters where ajacksonian has left a very good comment, as have others.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Sunday, March 11, 2007

Gasoline Prices To Jump 26%

Yep it is terrible. Gasoline is slated to rise from 34¢ a gallon to 43¢ a gallon in Iran.

Iranians are bracing themselves for a fresh round of belt tightening after their government voted to impose petrol rationing coupled with sharp rises in the price of fuel.

The rationing system will limit Iranians to 22 gallons (100 litres) of petrol a month, two full tanks for a typical family car. It is a direct result of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's adherence to an economic model, based on Iranian self-sufficiency, that has caused housing and other living costs to soar.

The basic price of petrol will rise by 25 per cent, but Iranians who need to use more than the permitted amount will be hit by rises of up to 450 per cent.
You know what rationing means. A black market. Nothing like a lot of corruption to keep an economy humming.

A. Jacksonian discussed Iran's oil industry in Oil Outlook. The short version - they are mining their oil industry for capital to spend on other things. Like keeping the people happy with low gasoline prices and building nuclear weapons.

If current trends prevail Iran will not be exporting any oil in less than ten years.
It's hard to know what's really going on in an Iran full of Orwellian doublespeak. The Expediency Council is pursuing a 20-year plan to create an "Islamic Economy". At a recent conference of the Elite Society of Self-Sacrificers of the Islamic Revolution, economic discussions were pretty theological with calls for "economic jihad".

And yet, behind the scenes, it is becoming clear that all is not well inside Iran, even in the middle of an oil price boom. At 3.9 million barrels a day, oil production remains stubbornly below its level at the time of the 1979 revolution.

A complete failure to invest in refining and the hostility to the use of Western technology has ensured that Iran imports much of its refined oil from the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Rather bizarrely, petrol has recently been rationed in some instances and is subject to strict government control - a whopping 86 per cent price increase has been proposed. On current trends, Iran would cease to be a net oil exporter altogether in 2015.
Let me also note that Venezuela is on a similar course.
This seems to be extraordinary economic mismanagement. Despite a 20 per cent increase in the national budget last year, Mr Ahmadinejad had to go back to Iran's parliament, the Majlis, six times to ask for more money. Government expenditure is extremely high and rising - a pledge to reduce budgetary dependence on oil supplements by 10 per cent each year has been thrown aside as the government has resorted to using the Oil Reserve Fund as its piggy bank. Commentators speculate that Iran has inadequate foreign currency reserves to negotiate the demands of the coming year.

In fact, the extent of government borrowing from Iranian banks is jeopardising the solidity of the Iranian banking system. The borrowing increased by nearly 50 per cent last year and this swollen government sector carries significant knock-on inflationary implications. The official target for inflation is 9.9 per cent but the current rate is thought to be at least 20 per cent, and rising. In certain foods it is closer to 40 per cent and some fresh vegetables are disappearing in Tehran.
I covered the vegetable problem in Tomato Plot. It appears that socialism does not work. Not even when you have huge oil reserves to back it.
Not surprisingly, criticism of government policy is mounting - and it goes right to the top. Iran's supreme leader, Ali Khomeini, made an extraordinary intervention on economic policy last week, stating that Mr Ahmadinejad's "trial period is over".

Given the theocracy which is Iran, Mr Ahmadinejad has every reason to be worried. In taking on the US, he seems to be following Shakespeare by trying "to dizzy giddy minds with foreign quarrels".
I don't think the Iranian people will be very distracted. First off they are not too happy with being an Islamic Republic. Second off many are great fans of America and Israel. Persia once had a Jewish Queen, Esther, and they have not forgotten. Even if their rulers wish they did.

Here is the story of Esther in English and Persian and a history of Hamadan, Iran, the oldest city in Iran. Esther is buried in Hamadan. Wiki has a nice bit on Esther.

In any case it boils down to this. Iran is an economy run on the socialist model with a disdain for profit. Iran's moves in the Middle East are seriously harming its economy, while America hardly notices the cost of the current war. Our economic output last year increased enough to cover the whole Defence Department with money left over. This year it looks like we will have a similar increase. In Iran it is a race between nuclear weapons and economic collapse or revolution. I'm betting that nukes will not win.

Update: Haliburton is moving its headquarters to Dubai.
Halliburton, the oil services company, said Sunday that it would soon move its corporate headquarters here from Houston, according to the chief executive, David Lesar.

Lesar said that he would relocate to Dubai from Texas to oversee Halliburton's intensified focus on business in the Mideast and energy- hungry Asia, home to some of the world's top oil and gas markets.

Lesar's announcement appears to signal one of the highest-profile moves by a U.S. corporate leader to Dubai, an Arab boomtown where free-market capitalism has been paired with some of the world's most liberal tax, investment and residency laws.
Iran is going to need a lot of oil field help in the very near future. Iraq is already in the market to upgrade its 1970s oil infrastructure. This move will place Haliburton on the scene.

H/T Captain's Quarters where A. Jacksonian has some interesting things to say in the comments.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Driving A Wedge

Hamas is accusing the US of driving a wedge between moderates and militants. Except that the difference between moderates and militants is timetable not outcome.

A senior Hamas official on Monday accused the United States of "sowing sedition" among the Palestinians, hours after US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice held a rare summit with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

Moussa Abu Marzouk, Hamas's deputy political leader, told a Palestinian rally at the Yarmouk refugee camp near this Syrian capital that US policy was based on "sowing sedition among the peoples and states of the region through dividing the Middle East into two camps: A moderate camp and a non-moderate one."
The problem is that the "moderates" get no western money if they unite with the militants and they really want that money.

Saudi Arabia has promised the Palestinians $1 billion a year. However, the real cash flow seldom matches their promises. Thus western money would cushion any shortfall.

Friday, January 12, 2007

Oil Outlook

This is a really long piece by A. Jacksonian. He wrote this as a series of e-mail exchanges with me and I edited it making some minor corrections which A. Jacksonian has approved. It covers the outlook for oil production for the next 5 to 10 years. The short version: Iran and Venezuela will probably be dropping out of the oil market as producers.

===============

The petroleum infrastructure of any Nation or company has multiple components for input, output and feedback. Economic, of course, is the main judge of the overall system, but not the only guide as to system health. The physical 'plant' component of pumps, pipes, pressure gauges, platforms, and then refineries, which are their own specialty, are critical to continued economic efficiency. That said the system is maintained by the actual people hired on to do the work and their skill base is reflected *into* the system itself. An individual, here or there at a low level, can do some OJT, but for the system to work as a whole, good management and training are essential. Economic feedback *into* this system then goes for pay, training, upkeep, exploration to replace depletion and increased demand, and keep output steady with a slow upward spiral to it. Overall the system is 'motion stable' with feedbacks to reduce wobble and instability. The numbers on the amount fed into this system, economically, will either establish/maintain stability or reduce stability. Boom/bust cyclicity is not wanted as sudden surges/declines means an unstable labor base and the physical plant suffers due to that.

The purpose of the interior system feedback dynamics, is to keep the entire system on an 'even keel' and at a steady and stable state. Deprive the system of economic input, and training suffers then basic upkeep and maintenance and then one starts on a downward decay cycle. Throwing in bursts of cash make that cycle nastier, while giving short-term gains. If you do not have the training to bring up old areas or properly scope-out new areas, then even if you bring them online you are stuck with higher overall depletion and actual loss through mismanagement. The large scale 'wobble' that is now showing up in Iranis due to the 18 months of not meeting export quotas. That is also due to National fiscal policies in Iran coming back with teeth to bite them. The Islamic world, by trying to eschew such concepts as 'compound interest' has problems dealing with the world of economics and markets. It is a key part of the mental toolbox that is missing, and even if *learned* it may be seen as an 'outsider thing'. Strong xenophobia thus exculdes key concepts for actually running a Nation and the Nation suffers and starts to see infrastructure decay.

The servo, if operated under a steady load, but designed for a small slowlyincreasing load, is a good example. A flywheel spinning up far below its design tolerances but suffering uneven control and feedback are another. Sudden changes in load, electrical input and stress will each start to put strain on the overall system. If the system is designed for such strain, small amounts of it are acceptable. A petroleum infrastructure is like a mechanical watch in that regard: you need enough winding to ensure continued operation, but getting it actually 'cleaned' for maintenance once in a great while is also necessary. Otherwise the junk builds up, friction increases and no matter how much you wind it, the poor thing stops. Works right up to the last tick!

Iran is performing the strangest form of economic suicide I have witnessed: willful degradation of a 'cash cow' the Nation depends upon so that the cow stops giving milk and then dies. Feeding the poor thing lots *now* will just stop up its guts... while it can still operate it needs a limited increase in grazing and a good, thorough exam. Soon there will be a carcass if that doesn't happen, so you won't even get steaks from it. A 'poison pill' that Iran has already swallowed... the Nation will run for awhile, but less well and it will start grabbing for high-cost solutions, like buying gasoline. And that will start a very nasty downward spiral as the motion stable system begins to slow and the wobble builds up and suddenly falls over, heading to the complete stability of death as it turns and turns and turns on the ground going nowhere, save to a stop.

The overall supply/demand and boom/bust cycle are inter-related, although the longer term trend analysis looking at reserve capacity points to a plateau in current existing supplies of oil as we have known it. Oil shale and oil sands, however, have reached a price point in which the improved technology has brought the extraction price down and the as the market price for oil has trended upwards over time. So, the 'easy to get to' first generation oil reserves are already starting to see replacement by oil sands production in Canada. And as those reserves dwarf anything in the Middle East, they have a longer-term price stabilizing component in them with the limiting factors being: capacity expansion and production capability. One of the early notes of mine on Canadacommented on this and the impact this would have in actually capping actual prices at a ceiling when Middle Eastern oil starts to hit its first real stumbles. Chevron, as an example, in 2005 alone invested $70 billion in the oil infrastructure in Canada, mainly Alberta. Canada, itself, has an interesting system of being a welfare regime at the top end, but not having any say over local resources. The central-western provinces of Canada now have a negative unemployment rate and cannot get enough Canadians to relocate there to fill these jobs. Not just in the petro-industry, but across the board for services as well. These provinces are also getting fed up with subsidizing Quebec and a few other provinces, looking to get their money out of the oil revenue stream.

Recent Israeli work on oil shales, which they have an abundance of, is now showing real promise and they do point out that even with their relatively low content oil shale it will be economical to start extracting oil from it. That report also points out that US oil shale has twice the concentation of the typical Israeli oil shale... which is why Montana is doing its first major prospecting to getting an oil shale industry up with the older technology. So the old reserves are running out, slow but sure, but the untapped future reserves will now become economical and start to change the landscape and cash flow from inefficient Middle Eastern regimes to more efficient industrial and manufacturing Nations. That, of course, will be seen as 'oppressive' by some parts of the political sphere...

Subsidies are wrecking the oil system, just as they are relatively useless in the US agricultural system. For the $13 billion the USDA pays for its subsidies and emergency support $0.5 billion is for emergencies. The rest are subsidies, 'price supports' and encouraging farmers not to farm... for all the arguments on 'cheap food in the US' we are also getting an erosion of the basis of farm labor by inefficient companies continuing to use sub-minim wage workers who do not have a part to play in society. Thus the Federal Government is paying for the erosion of National Sovereignty to get us 'cheap food'. Yet, even there, the first realms of automation are starting to be felt, with the Mondavi Vinyards, as an example, moving towards automated harvesting of wine grapes. Florida has pushed research into robotic pickers with chemical sensors that can tell by the direct analysis of fruit if it is ripe to pick or not. While still clumsy and in prototype stage, the need for this in multiple industries and drive out the cyclic costs of labor are immense. Robotic picking can be continuous, set to specifications for fruit grade and done on a 24 hour a day picking cycle. Further, such robots can be retooled for individual tree/plant maintenance during the year on that same cyclic basis. Add in GPS and wireless and farmers can now tell how much moisture they are getting and vary the harvest so that it is at 'peak' for all parts of the crop.

China is facing a problem of subsidized fuel, a shift to the middle class and yet still having a huge amount of its population living in rural conditions. Destabilization of its Western provinces by Islamic terrorists is no longer unknown. The Central provinces are facing population decline and economic collapse for the population that remains. Eastern and Southern China is now facing multi-prong threats as the Magic Kingdom of Mr. Kim has stolen food trains from China. China delivers the food 'aid' and North Korea says the trains are part of the package and confiscates them, too. Mr. Kim then turns around and says: You keep feeding my people or I will open my borders. Who would have thought that starving millions would be a political weapon? Finally China is coming face up to the fact that the Rising Sun is returning with modern equipment that makes theirs look antiquated. Japan has put the first of a new set of Aegis class ships out to sea. And with Mr. Kim going atomic, Japan has let it quietly be known they are thinking that option over, too... which, coupled with their existing space rocketry, makes them an instant global power with nuclear tipped ICBMs. China is also realizing that if Japan does that, it will have manufacturing capability to turn those out like Toyotas.

All of that while China subsidizes a 1950's base factory system with a few spotlights on high-tech here and there. They run extremely polluting factories and are seeing things like lung cancer in cities go upwards. When a city disappears from satellite due to smog, you know you have a problem. When a yellow, noxious cloud hangs over it continuously, even after rain storms, you have an immense problem. Without a market and societal based feed-back into the industrial base, that base will be non-sustainable.

Cheap gas, oil, and land have led to urban sprawl and decay, which it already had but is now spreading faster. Compress the US history between 1910 and 1960 without the sustainability of industry and you get an idea of the problems China will have. They are also getting this damned thing known as cheap telecom, which is starting to liquidize their social cohesion. Attempting to put a 'Great Firewall' in has proven that you need lots of folks to plug leaks and that some of those folks are none too trustworthy in that job. Even if that were done, the SMS cellphone capability has made distributed messages of pure text to be something easily done at nearly no cost burden at all. Add to that increasing storage capacity, processing power and cameras, and you suddenly have individuals who are their own file servers with autonomous wireless connectivity. Attempting to stop the wired internet has proven impossible *inside* China, as the low cost of computers and storage now makes redundant, off-site, fail-over possible. Pull down one server and two others will pick up at distributed locations. To end this China would have to get rid of *all* computational capability, including cellphones, which now serve as the wireless conduit onto the world. To step forward they must let go, to let go is to invite disaster, to stay authoritarian invites overthrow, and to try and buy off the population just speeds the acceptance of modern digital technology which the State is not very adept at handling.

This same scenario is playing itself out in the Middle East in spades. The Iranian 'demographic bomb' is already destabilizing enough without the added petro-insanity. Saudi Arabia has *tried* to ban all picture phones, and failed. Phone dating and exchanging nude and other pictures is now commonplace amongst the younger generation there and the social taboos cannot be enforced via a *firewall*. And as there are too many overland routes for smuggling, just outlawing the picture phones raises the nominal expenditure and puts off buying one for a couple of months. In Iraq the majority of the population now has celllphones, at least one per household if not more. One of the great things going on there is that *everyone* has their own favorite downloads, web sites and such that they share with each other. Even if the insurgents got their wish and *won* they would be face to face with a population that is alien to them. Every day that Iraq holds together is a day further off that a repressive regime can come to power without wiping out a growing percentage of the population. The Iraq we invaded is no longer the Iraq on the ground, and *we* have to face up to that in the West, too. The one bright light of Iraq is the realization that subsidies kill. They are being removed and people are facing up to having to get real jobs to survive. The Kurds, in particular, see the need to transfer to a manufacturing based economy with a strong oil sector... not a strong oil sector and a Socialist State leeching from it. Iraq will turn the corner the day electric meters start to go in on houses.

In many ways I agree with your idea of the Iran as Socialist concept, but would also say that they have had a strong anti-technology streak in certain areas. While the 'National Flower of Iraq' is the Satellite Dish, in Iran they are attempting the pure Totalitarian move of limiting all 'net access. Throttle it down and thwart it... which just means other conduits will open and distributed comms will start to increase throughput across all the networks to overcome the localized bottlenecks. The oil industry, however, is retrograde. By actively removing the educational basis for it and the economic understanding of it to fund terrorism, they are going far and beyond even a Soviet concept here... Luddite is more the concept, I think. Just bonkers. Really there is no word to describe it as even the USSR knew it had to re-invest in its oil fields. Its industrial production was junk, but the idea was in the right place. Iran has neither the industrial capacity nor the educational capacity to understand this, now. I actually expect depletion to be reaching levels where it can't increase in amount as actual reserves and ability to pump it from the ground are going down.

Perhaps pre-industrial is what this is? Used more to the concept of 'piece work' rather than industrial integration. Any way you cut it the multiple feedback mechanisms no longer work and a downward spiral will begin within the next year or so, especially if they get put out of OPEC as a reliable supplier. Without steady export output, contracts for the long term start to dry up. If that is not addressed then the oil trade slowly moves to the spot market, where daily fluctuations will destroy any Nation depending upon it.

In the petroleum industry, there are few forms of adding capacity: exploiting new fields, expanding on old fields, rejuvenating old fields. Each of these have overhead time and cost and a multi-year timeline to them. The longest is the new field area, which can be as long as a decade to finally get economic production from a field. It adds yield, but at a higher marginal cost. Expanding old fields is only a 2-5 year timeline, but that is based on the 'knowns' of subsurface configuration and expected reservoir size. This will increase depletion of the field, but has a lower marginal cost and is the easier route to go with, especially on large fields. Rejuvenation starts with the repressurizing scheme, of injecting natural gas *into* the field to raise pressure levels and force oil through the pore space. After that you start to look at some more exotic techniques, each of which cost more to do. The marginal cost is higher than expansion but lower than new field work. While we may view those from the outside as 'chunks', to the industry these are minor and discrete operations towards an operational system. Still, $70 billion by Chevron in Canada is a huge investment and they promise lots more behind them as do the other companies.

Iran is not expanding oil output via new reserves nor by expanding on existing reserves in an amount that is above domestic use. Further, their subsidized use of natural gas puts the cheapest form of rejuvenation in peril. This isn't Socialist... its asinine. Even Socialists *try* to understand industrial production cycles. This? A rare form of seppuku. Take all the regulators and sensors off your servo, feed in a 'dirty' power stream and put a large delay on any control on the system or, no control for balance and see if it can stay in place. Something has got to give. In Iran it will be the refineries which are the most complex part of a complex system. Probably not with a bang, just a sigh of relief that they aren't going to be abused any more.

The Cartels are actually only being set up to meet demand at a given price point. Their goal is to control the price point by their own supply of product. They were much more powerful when they had less competition, but their overall part of global production has been in decline for some years. And they have to be in this wonderful bind of having to either 'cover' for Iran or increase quotas and curse Iran. At some point they realize that Iran is no longer an 'Exporting' Nation that is reliable. Cartels love reliable environments and seek to manipulate those. Throw a spanner in the works and they seize up and fly apart. The question is: which spanner gets them first? Iran or Canada? My guess is Iran, based on spin-up time for the Canadian fields, and the rate of increase of Iranian problems.

It is very telling that not even Gazprom will touch Iranian production. Of course Russia has been faced with insurgents backed in the Chechen region by both al Qaeda and Iran, so they may be having an internal problem deciding exactly how to treat Iran. If I were into conspiracies, I would almost suspect Putin of encouraging the decline of the Iranian petro-industry to hand the West a long-term problem. China, of course, just wants oil, but even *they* haven't invested in the petro-industry in Iran, which is saying a lot, right there. So much for their 'Russian and Chinese friends' who will give Iran nominal cover so long as they continue to pony up and buy hardware from them. One does wonder if such 'support' will last past the point that Iran can no longer buy anything from them nor pay off its debt....

The analysis at multiple levels is difficult without knowing exact conditions. Iran, internally, is coming apart already as seen by student and worker demonstrations. Older, 19th century, divisions are reappearing *again*, with even a Monarchist faction still there. On a nearby regional basis and global basis the question is: how will Iran collapse? When is now a min/max timeline that I see starting in 2010 or so and ending at 2019, but the instabilities are now too numerous to fix a lower date anymore. From unstable regimes seen in the world prior to this, things rarely go to an extreme and often collapse before that... the American and French revolutions come to mind, while the Russian Revolutions are more towards maximum dissatisfaction being reached. They may try to put the al Qaeda management of savagery approach into play to become a distributed threat, but without a State sponsor... well that puts them on par with al Qaeda's poor rich man's road to Empire. The Persian population of Iran should prove relatively cohesive, but the multiple ethnic minorities at the periphery, those have serious problems some of them now wanting to *be* in Iran to start with.

My basic outlooks on energy independence for the US is in these following posts:

Basic energy independence policy, Review of the Popular Mechanics article, Nanotech to the rescue or not, The Stop-Gap Energy policy for the next 30 years, Dealing with Tom Vilsack and then the algae folks in the comments section .

Behind all of that is the view that the Middle East has nearly plateaued in oil production capability and they are now on a depletion curve over the next 50 years. OPEC has not only gone downwards in market share and power, but also in pure output capacity. While they have 'reserve capacity' that means that if that is used you get increased depletion of the oil fields and a shorter lifespan of them. To milk the cash cow longer, they would like to extend the life of their oil fields at the minimum necessary export amount to get them the maximal cash influx. What they have forgotten is that modern life runs on petro-chemicals and even tiny Nations like so many of the Emirates, are facing increased demand curves at home. Iran has this in spades with a huge population and subsidized fuel - a double-whammy that will get them in the end. Even if China, as I have heard, wants to put in lots of money, they may be faced with the regime actually *removing* Iranian money and depending on Chinese money, and the Chinese are unprepared to be the servants of Iran. Really, though, one Nation cannot hope to fill the multivariate needs of Iran's petro-infrastructure, and I doubt that any amount of Chinese money or skill will do more than steady the plateau or slow the downward spiral. That is at best... at worse it will be money down the drain and a rebellion changing the Nation and deciding not to pay off any debts. Funny how Socialist regimes do that and then get peeved when others do the exact same thing to them.

Venezuela has also gone bonkers. No two ways about it: by taking the socialist route and the anti-technology view towards the petro-economy, Chavez is ruining the entire system. Future projects going on hold or being cancelled are the death knell for a system that requires expansive forward capacity to keep exports stable. Stop running and the treadmill flips you off the end of it. By trying to bribe the population, allow Iran to get a terrorist base of operations and legitimacy in South America, and by buying Soviet and Chinese military hardware, he is using short term-profits to little good long-term effect. Mind you, the USSR actually was able to maintain an oil system that at least *tried* to keep up with domestic demand... and Putin's recent efforts there to take over Western oil capital goods in the way of exploration, well equipment, pipelines and so forth are heading Russia down that same path. On the South American front, the goals of Iran have been clear, even if one only bothers to peruse a half-year's worth of articles at the RFE/RL archive at Globalsecurity. What is happening is the workings of the internetworked Transnational Terrorist system with State sponsorship.

What this results in is increased terrorism and performance of terrorism on a global scale as the entire system of terrorism gets infused with money, goods, personnel and training. Much of what was seen in Lebanon this past summer bears a striking resemblance to how the FARC operate, which then looks like cross-training based on the RFE/RL reports. Iran has been working its way into the narcotics trade and other illegal goods trade in South America, looking for funding sources. It is more than ready to exploit Chavez to use any capital or legitimacy he can give so that the Iranian Foreign Legion #3 - South America, can get up and running as a going concern. Iranian equipment and training, however, will diffuse into the FARC and Shining Path, locally, and from those points back outwards globally into the internetworked terrorist system. One of the very pointed questions I put up on TTLB asks the GOP Leadership: What is the stance of the GOP towards illegal immigrants that will be ethnically hispanic, but aligned with Hezbollah? After the arrests and convictions of Hezbollah agents in the US, that is exactly what we are facing now. And those arrests point to Mexican drug lord contacts, contacts with the Asian Triads, and standard criminal and organized crime contacts. While there is some overlap between the criminal and the terrorist systems, notably FARC and North Korea, they are not one in the same, but separate systems with different global goals. Local concerns have their own goals, of course, but the system itself has a global outlook and that is spread via the common parts of each system.

So, Chavez is not only ruining the Venezuela petro-structure, its economy, and importing tons of cheap military hardware, but also helping Iran put a permanent enclave of terrorists in place to recruit locally and start to intimidate the smaller criminal and terrorist operations, like the Emerald Gangs and smaller narcotics outfits. As a resource, narcotics are far more dependable than oil, and cheaper to get, too. Low overhead, high profit. This is a major long-term destabilizing factor in South America and in the entire Western Hemisphere due to the porous nature of the US borders. Here the US 'bargain' of cheap labor to harvest goods and work in sub-minimum wage packing plants will come back heavily to bite us as that bargain will now start to have Hezbollah infiltration along with the unchecked illegals. The US is giving away National Sovereignty for cheap food and that is a recipe for disaster.

In the Middle East, so long as there is oil flow and relatively easy profits to be had, terrorism will continue onwards. The chilling part of that is the Western ability to produce cheap goods now means that terrorism can be supported by less money *and* be more effective. This strange notion of 'cheap goods' leading to freedom seems to have the contrary effect of arming the enemies of freedom and letting them operate in a more deadly fashion as time goes on. With that said within 15-20 years, the Middle East will no longer be a large minority supplier of crude oil, their global output is dropping in percentage terms as Canada starts to enter the market. Similarly Israel and the US will start to exploit oil shales and steady out demand curves over the long haul as *mining* is far more dependable than sub-surface structure analysis for oil and gas exploration. At some point the US Continental shelf will be opened to such exploration no matter how much the environmentalists squawk: the environmentalists have had three long decades to 'put up or shut up' about renewables. Their 'put up' time is nearly over and their 'shut up' time is coming. Americans will not stand for a decreased standard of living to 'save' shore birds when the companies doing such work have not seen a major spill from an oil platform in decades. A proven safety record is hard to beat. A move to nuclear power is all to the good and third and fourth generation nuclear facilities do not operate in a metastable manner requiring constant oversight. The best of pebblebed designs will shutdown if containment is breached due to the denser nature of the air vice their standard coolant. The large 'nuclear batteries' that some companies are proposing are completely self-contained and sealed with set automatic control systems and sub-critical mass elements that cannot even undergo the 'China Syndrome'.

All of that spells a marginalization of the Middle East for importance in the world, increased repression, increased terrorism and strikes against the affluent Nations for 'exploiting' them and for 'not taking the path to virtue'. Only once supply and demand curves near each other will the Middle Eastern State and rich individuals stop being able to fund terrorists. Smaller Emirates realize this and are moving into service economies: banking, trade and the such. Iraq realizes this and the long term goal is to get a manufacturing economy in place for high-skill jobs and long term increasing profits. That latter is 15 years away, at least, but the education cycle for it is already starting and the Kurds point the way towards that future.

Iraq, for all of being a desert climate today, was a lush grassland 5-6,000 years ago. The Israelite description of the Garden of Eden and the lush lands of the two rivers is modern day Iraq. The climate changed, civilizations fell and folks moved around. The soil basis and rainfall basis are gone for that sort of agriculture in Iraq, but the Israeli's have shown the way forward with plant-drip dryland irrigation techniques that yield decent crops. Syria has been trying 1960's style 'Green Revolution' concepts, but lack the water basis for that and remain in some troubles due to that. The smaller Emirates will live quite well on imports and have a cash flow, due to services, that will allow that to continue even once the oil runs out. Iran is another story, and their agricultural sector was a bright spot back in the 1960's, but that era is long dead. Recovery of an agricultural sector in Iran within the next 20 years is critical for their population so as to have the majority of the population fed by home grown goods or via a trade system. Iraq is now a net *exporter* of agricultural goods and is taking up its role along the riverine areas of becoming the 'bread basket of the Middle East'. An expansive use of dryland agriculture will be necessary for the long haul in the Middle East. Iraq should make it, and was saved in time to not only recover but get a robust system in place. Iran is dicey, and will require help from Iraq and Afghanistan to recover its agricultural industries and get them into the modern era.

If Iran implodes in the next 5-10 years, all bets for the region are 'off'. The fragmentation of Iran would be just as disasterous as that of Iraq if it happens soon. My articles on that situation in overview are addressing the tribal nature of Iraq, but is applicable across the entire Middle East, save Israel. Even Turkey is not immune from this breakdown. The closest long-term historical analogy is that of The Balkans, save they had coherent Nation States bounding them to stop the ethnic/religious/cultural divisions from splintering Europe. There are NO such bulwarks in the Middle East, thus this analogy spreads from Sinai to India, the Empty Quarter to Russia. Getting Iraq into a coherent Nation State is critical to stop that splintering and fracturing and remove them as long term faultlines of instability in the Middle East. Long term peace in that region depends upon that solution being applied over and over throughout the region. The reason that is something I see as a solution, is that it has worked before the last time religious sects went after each other. The incoherence of Islam is a main sticking point, but even without that a 'place-by-place' solution can be done but only if that Geographic Center of the Middle East has come to terms with itself. That place is Iraq. Everything of importance on the human side of the equation runs right through there. Quite a lot of commerce, transport and communications, too. All of that is necessary to a vital region and without that there will be no peace (although stability is another and only somewhat related question) there nor globally.

The last time America ran we got stuck with a huge death toll from those who depended upon us, degradation of National affinity, and a route seen to bring the United States down. In point of fact we got stuck with problems that are *not* amenable to Nation State solutions of the 20th century - if they had been we wouldn't have them. Even with some relatively coherent Nations in the Middle East, the 20th century has re-formulated pre-20th century warfare into something that Nation States gave up as warfare... all save one... as those means to fight those kinds of wars are enshrined in the Constitution, only the People of the United States may take them away. There is a State based component in this, and providing semi-capable and freer opportunities to live will help to finally curb Nation State terrorism. The other kind, the non-Nation State side which got the Soviets out of Afghanistan, is not affected by that. To do that will require the most radical altering of any Nation, that is the US actually embracing the ideals it set forth and recognizing that in an era where individuals can be a mass destructive threat, so it is only individuals who can fight those wars.

That I do not see happening any time soon.

And the world is at peril because of that oversight and the unwillingness of a Free People to embrace their Freedom.

This is a long war and the military of the United States can win wars and topple States. But only the People taking up their rightful responsibilities to *fight*, as we have set down in our Constitution, can *win this war*.

The young Republic of the 19th century could easily have coped with this and thrived.

What we have today cannot.

It is pessimistic, but also based on how these systems operate. The feedback mechanism is in place, just not engaged in the way set forth for it to be applied. Our survival depends upon it. And our willingness to take up that old cry of: "Give me Liberty. Or give me Death."

For that is the choice we are left with in the end.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Wednesday, September 06, 2006

The Alpha Male Problem

Commenter Nemesis (Owen Johnson) has published part III of his series on the Reasons for Optimism (parts I and II reviewed at A Return to Those Thrilling Days of Yesteryear....) in this third section he asks in his own round about way - how is the alpha male chosen in human society. Is the alpha male self selected - though war, coup, assasination, poison intirgue, etc. or is s/he selected by the people with the usual murderous impulses dampened if not eliminated? It is an age old question. The usual answer is natural selection. Election is in fact unnatural selection. Natural selection has predominated over human history. However, the method of murder does not maximize the productive capacities of human societies because of the insecurity of the system. Cuba these days is a prime example. There is no definite method for replacing the alpha male except tooth and claw. This makes everyone nervous when thorough death or disability the time for change arrives. The already lowered productivity of command and control societies is reduced further by uncertainty.

Nemesis discusses the failure of various unity movements in the islamic world. Under emphasised is why that unity is necessary: the low productivity of the Islamic world. Without oil to finance their wars, their influence on world affairs would be microscopic. The intelectuals of the Islamic world of course have been drawn to the command and control political inventions of the West. Marxism, Communism, Socialism, National Socialism, etc. because of the command and control beliefs that they grow up with. The thinking being that "scientific" command and control would be an improvement over the whims of the ruler. This has not proven to be significant in the long run when such societies were forced to compete with societies based on elected rulers (i.e. market based political decisions) and a market oriented economy (market based economic decisions).

In the end all war making capacity is based on economic capacity. Petrolium economies being parasitic can never match the economic capacity of the oil users. In addition, it turns out that petrolium economies are prone to command and control solutions beacuse they do not have to be over all productive. They don't have to earn their oil. Oil income can cover a multitude of sins. However, this is not possible indefinitely. So oil economies are in effect doubly cursed. Add in a belief system that encourages command and control thinking and you have a society thrice cursed. Iran these days is a prime example of that where the government has a plan to replace all secular university teachers with true believers. This will only further weaken an already weak society. Given the whipsaw nature of oil prices any significant downturn in the price of oil will put great strains on any oil economy that bases current spending on oil income. Say Iran for instance.

The whole point of the current exercise is to prevent the world of the Three Conjectures from manifesting. Nemesis looks into where Iranian Nukes might lead us. An ugly place.

I'm leaving out his main premise - which I agree with - that this phase of the war is designed to pick the Islamic alpha male to lead Islam to victory. The pokes at the west are merely to find a general or leader who can be victorious. Once that leader is found the war will get serious. Right now Iran is the main contender, but its position as Persian and Shia creates natural antagonisms. Which is why no matter what actually happened in Lebanon, Hizbollah won the war. Because if Hizballah lost the war Islam hasn't found the strong horse.

Nemesis has part IV up. I will get to it shortly. In the mean time read part III (and I and II if you missed them). Excellent work.

H/T Carol Herman for the heads up on Part III

Saturday, April 29, 2006

At War with Iran

Iran has promised to send waves of suicide bombers against Europe, America, and Israel if America goes to war with Iran.

So if we are going to war with Iran the first thing that needs to be done is preping the battlefield. You want to weaken the enemy position before attacking it. The easiest way to do that is with a spoiling attack. Such an attack is implimented against enemy formations that are massed for an attack. This disrupts the enemy while he is in the prepratory stage and as a result disorganizes or prevents anticipated attacks.

So far our spoiling attacks have been mainly focused on disrupting Iran's bank accounts and ability to disburse funds. They have been forced to work on a cash basis because their ability to use western banks to move their funds has been impeded.

I think Iran made a big mistake when it figured that America would limit itself to politics and military action, because Iran held the upper hand in the economic sphere due to its contribution to the world oil market.

And a second front in the Cash Flow Jihad is gaining as well. Law suits against terrorists. Especially terrorists supported by Iran.

...10 years after Vicki and Leonard Eisenfeld's son Matt, 25, a Yale graduate and rabbinical student, was murdered along with his fiancee Sara Duker in a No. 18 bus on Jerusalem's Jaffa Road, their dogged struggle against the Hamas terror group that killed him, and against the Iranian government that trained and financed those behind this and so many bombings, doesn't look quite so foolhardy anymore. There are even those who wonder whether it might help expedite regime change in Teheran.

"We had the choice of doing nothing or doing something," says Leonard simply, sitting alongside his wife on the sofa of their home in West Hartford, Connecticut. And that was no choice at all. So they set out to create what Leonard calls "a financial deterrent to terrorism."
It appears that Hamas has been funded and trained by Iran.

In a way this is a lot like Flight 93. Americans taking the initiative before government can get its act together. In fact it seems that at least one part of the executive branch is getting in the way. Here is a bit on a group of families having trouble with our State Department:
They've used some of that payment for charitable contributions and to fund various scholarship programs. But the three families' efforts to obtain what may now total up to $900 million in outstanding damages has been hampered in the US, again ironically, by the State Department.

Speaking by phone from Washington, Perles recounts that the legal team identified a US real-estate development firm with considerable assets that turned out to be wholly owned by the Iranian government. But the bid to seize its funds was stymied by a State Department contention that the company in question could not be held liable "since it was not managed on a daily basis by the government in Teheran," says Perles exasperatedly.
So they have taken the case to our European friends with better results:
RATHER THAN wait for the completion of the tortuous process, however, the lawyers have looked further afield of late, with remarkable success. To Europe, in fact, where Perles says the Iranian government has an estimated $50 to $80 billion in assets.

A few months back, they managed to get the Italian courts to "domesticate" the US court ruling in the case - "a procedure," says Perles, "under which the Italian court essentially adopted the judgment as its own."

Why would the Italians do that? "Because," says Perles, "they sometimes have cases of their own that need to be domesticated in the US."
Which might explain why Iran has withdrawn 700 tons of gold and $3o bn in cash from European banks. However, that is not all that is going on in the cash flow front.
And there is, appallingly, no shortage of other such potential cases. "Lots of US nationals have been killed by Iranian-backed terror," he notes grimly. "Iran is the epicenter of state terror."

In fact, he goes on, "We have a case that's been running for three or four years on behalf of 200 families of US marines killed in the 1983 Beirut bombings. We've had 800 witnesses testify to date. Iran has already lost in the battle over its liability. And we're talking seriously big numbers" in potential damages.
If the military families prevail against Iran that is going to seriously hurt Iran.

In any case I think what this is about is preliminary weaking of Iran and their proxies - either to make them say uncle or to weaken them preliminary to an attack.

The situation for Hamas re: cash is dire. Even money Iran has promised - and it is only $50 million, enough for 10 or 15 days of operation - can not be delivered due to the unwillingness of banks to handle Hamas money for fear of US action.

At some point the proxies may have to attack before their resources run out - opening themselves up to defeat in detail and thus being unable to mount spoiling attacks or counter attacks when we move on Iran.

Also see: Hamas has a banking crisis and The Gold War.

Technorati:
, , , , , , , ,

HT: Charles and the LGF Readers and ploome hineni

Friday, April 21, 2006

Hard Bargaining

Hamas says that it does not want to give up the right to violence because it needs it as a bargaining chip. ABC reports in response to Monday's murder of 9 Israelis:

Hamas leaders defended the attack as a justified response to Israeli "aggression" against the Palestinians.

Hamas's response was in line with its refusal to give up its right to violence. Hamas leaders see it as an essential bargaining chip in future negotiations, one that it believes Abbas and late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat gave up too quickly and received nothing in return.
In response the Israelis seem to be doing some hard bargaining of their own:
Israel's response to the bombing likely won't make headlines as there is no single massive military operation taking place. However, the Israeli Defense Forces and Israeli politicians are hardly idle.

For the last three weeks the IDF has fired about 4000 shells into Gaza in attempts to stop a handful of militants from firing the Qassams (homemade rockets that are mostly inaccurate) into Israel. (The last Israeli to be killed by a Qassam was in August 2005).
Further on in the article we get evidence that the Cash Flow Jihad is working. The Palestinian Authority (such authority as it has) is desperate for funds. Many Arab states have promised large sums but there seems to be a delivery problem:
It's not clear how the money will get into a place like Gaza, even with money being donated. Banking laws prohibit the transfer of funds to Hamas, which is considered a terrorist organization.

Being in Gaza this week, I saw the store shelves pretty much empty, as I am told even the shopkeepers don't have enough money to buy supplies. At some point, despite support for Hamas and democratic elections, there could be some type of protest because of the financial crisis.
Well, there are further worries about what the next Palestinian government will look like. After the civil war and all. It won't be pretty.

Hat tip: LGF and friends.

Technorati:
, , , , , , ,

The Gold War

I got the link to this story from Gary Metz of Regime Change Iran. He reports on a Financial Times article on the run on gold in Iran.

With the war of words over Iran’s nuclear programme escalating and the domestic economy stalling, Iranians are scrambling to buy gold coins, sending their value soaring by 32 per cent in the past two months.
Oil prices have never been higher and yet Iran's economy is stalling. Interesting.
“Gold coins are Iranians’ political hedge fund,” says Heydar Pourian, editor of Iqtisad Iran (Iran Economics), a monthly magazine. “We keep them at home and they make us feel secure.”
Which would indicate that the Iranians are even more sure of an impending war than Americans. Well they should know their country best. And in fact they do:
Businessmen say the rush to gold reflects both growing tension over Iran’s atomic activities and the destabilising economic policies of fundamentalist president Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad, whose government took office last August.

“The direction reverses the years of [president Mohammad] Khatami and increases the role of the state, especially in allocating resources,” says one. “It’s more like communism than Islam, and makes you think some of them want a siege economy ready for war.”
There is more of interest. Read it all.

Joe Katzman at Winds of Change has linked to some previous articles of mine on the subject of the Cash Flow Jihad (Joe's Term - I like it) along with some thoughts of his own.

Technorati:

, , , , ,

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

Hamas Has a Banking Crisis

Reuters reports:

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - The reluctance of banks to risk U.S. sanctions and lawsuits by dealing with a Hamas-led government has pushed the Palestinian Authority to the brink of financial collapse sooner than donors had expected, diplomats said.

The rapid onset of a banking crisis -- within days of Hamas's swearing-in on March 29 -- could further depress Palestinian incomes, fuel political unrest and speed the arrival of a humanitarian crisis with which donors are not yet prepared to cope, according to diplomats and Palestinian officials.

Western diplomats and private-sector experts said Hamas's troubles finding a bank has for now eclipsed Western aid cuts as the biggest immediate threat to the new government's viability.
That is interesting. The Islamics have pretty much shut down Western newspapers through the cartoon jihad. We have eliminated their cash flow (in places) through the money jihad. I'd put it down to lack of strategic thinking on the part of the Islamics.

See also my previous articles on jihadi money flow problems in Follow the Money and Follow the Gold.

, , , , , ,

Thursday, April 06, 2006

Follow the Gold

Regime Change Iran has an interesting bit on the Irainian regime withdrawing 700 tons of gold and about $30 bn in currency from variious banks.

The regime-run FARS news agency quoting the Swiss newspaper, Der Bund reported that the Islamic regime has withdrawn 700 tons of it's gold reserves worth 6 billion Swiss Francs as well as 25 billion Swiss Francs in foreign exchange (equal to $30 billion) from financial institutions in the west.

Der Bund added that the Islamic regime transferred 250 tons of it's gold reserves, valued at 5 billion Swiss Francs directly to Tehran but that the foreign exchange was transferred to Asian banks located in the United Arab Emirates, specifically Abu-Dhabi and Dubai.

Approximately 2 months ago, two of Switzerland's biggest financial institutions, U.B.S. and Credit Swiss ceased all financial transactions with the Islamic regime.
Interesting. Now couple that with this reported at LGF
The new Hamas-led Palestinian government is struggling to find a bank willing to handle its finances, casting doubt on whether it can pay staff or receive foreign aid, Western diplomats and Palestinian officials said.

“You cannot run a government without having a bank,” said a Palestinian official familiar with the Palestinian Authority’s “single treasury account”, where foreign donors deposit funds so the Authority can pay 140,000 workers and cover other expenses.

A Western diplomatic source said Hamas’s difficulties in even finding a banker could “disrupt the entire payment system”.

Officials of Hamas, which is listed by Washington and the EU as a terrorist organisation and whose charter calls for Israel’s destruction, say the banking problem is part of an international campaign against the Islamist group.
So now we may know why the Iranians are rattling their sabers. They have been badly hurt. Evidently some one has decided that a good way to attack our enemies is to Follow the Money.

Update: 04:47z 10 April '06

Joe Katzman at Winds of Change has some interesting things to say about the money flows.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, March 29, 2006

Follow the money

Joel Bainerman has this to say about the Israeli/Palestinian Conflict:

A truly objective analysis of this subject, without the baggage Jews and Arabs have been fed via their national leaderships, reveals that the Middle East conflict would have ended decades ago had foreigners not kept it alive. The continuation of the conflict serves their interests- i.e., oil supplies, recycling petrodollars, or multi-billion dollar weapons sales. The Palestinian-Israeli “situation” is thus merely a fig leaf for the FE, allowing their other agendas can be pursued undetected.

We need to devise a solution based on the actual cause for the continuation of the conflict, and not accept solutions presented via the mainstream media.
That sounds about right. The Transatlantic Intelligencer has this to say about the subject:
After the SPD/Green government came to power in September 1998, Germany became of all states the single most important supplier of funds to the Palestinian Authority. In per capita terms, no other population group in the world receives more substantial German aid. With the initiation of the Al-Aqsa-Intifada in September 2000, the influence that this financial support gave Germany took on new significance. Nonetheless, when Chancellor Gerhard Schröder visited Yasser Arafat in November 2000, he did not demand Arafat’s return to the negotiating table. On the contrary, he, in effect, gave the PLO-chief the green light for the Intifada. At the time, a member of the Chancellor’s delegation remarked: “Schröder does not want to put pressure on Arafat to return to the negotiating table. It is not sensible to link future development aid to the willingness to compromise of the Palestinians.” On that first of November 2000, a course was set. Using the leverage of German development aid, one might have been able to force Arafat to make peace with Israel und thus markedly improved the conditions of life of in particular the Palestinians. But the attempt was not even made. Instead, German development aid would, in effect, henceforth be made to keep pace with the suicide attacks: despite the rise in the latter, Germany’s financial aid for Arafat was likewise increased.
Now isn't that interesting? The Germans financing a war on the Jews. Why would they commit to such a policy?
Already in 1998, the director of the German Institute for Middle East Studies [Orient-Institut], Udo Steinbach, enthused that in light of the enormous “sympathy” that Germany “traditionally enjoys in the entire region”, the Federal Republic is “widely regarded in the Middle East as a future great power” that could “represent a counterweight to the all too dominant American exercise of power.” [43] The “traditional sympathy” in question notably comprises the today still widespread admiration of National Socialism.
Well isn't that special. The article goes on to note:
What conclusions can be drawn from this review of Road Map diplomacy? As a rule, all those involved start from the assumption that the USA is the ally of Israel, while the Europeans back the Palestinians. Even though tensions between the USA and Israel have risen in recent months, this assessment remains largely true as far as the USA is concerned. But have the Europeans really been standing up for the interests of the “Palestinians” as such? The history of the Road Map tells a different story: to date the European Union has prioritized support not for the “Palestinians” as such, but for the militant opponents of Israel among them. Of course, if it wanted to do so, the EU, as the biggest provider of funds to the Palestinians, could use its influence to strengthen the hand of the anti-terror elements in the Palestinian camp. But Germany and the EU were and are evidently not interested in doing so.
The article concludes with this caution:
Today, Europe again faces a choice: either it begins to combat radical Islamists and to support their opponents in the Muslim world. Or it gives anti-Semites the world over a sign of tacit approval, inasmuch as it accepts or encourages the jihad against Israel. There is no third way.
Will Europe give up its tired old ways? I have my doubts.

, , , , , ,