“Operation Libya” and the Battle for Oil - The geopolitical and economic implications of a US-NATO

Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research

The geopolitical and economic implications of a US-NATO led military intervention directed against Libya are far-reaching.

Libya is among the World’s largest oil economies with approximately 3.5% of global oilreserves, more than twice those of the US.

“Operation Libya” is part of  the broader military agenda in the Middle East and Central Asia which consists in gaining control and corporate ownership over more than sixty percent of the world’s reserves of oil and natural gas, including oil and gas pipeline routes.

“Muslim countries including Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Yemen, Libya, Egypt, Nigeria, Algeria, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, possess between 66.2 and 75.9 percent of total oil reserves, depending on the source and methodology of the estimate.” (See Michel Chossudovsky, The “Demonization” of Muslims and the Battle for Oil, Global Research, January 4, 2007) .

With 46.5 billion barrels of proven reserves, (10 times those of Egypt), Libya is the largest oileconomy in the African continent followed by Nigeria and Algeria (Oil and Gas Journal). In contrast, US proven oil reserves are of the order of 20.6 billion barrels (December 2008) according to the Energy Information Administration.  U.S. Crude Oil, Natural Gas, and Natural Gas Liquids Reserves)

---

Note

The most recent estimates place Libya’s oil reserves at 60 billion barrels. Its gas reserves at 1,500 billion m3. Its production has been between 1.3 and 1.7 million barrels a day, well below its productive capacity. Its longer term objective is three million b/d and a gas production of 2,600 million cubic feet a day, according to figures of the National OilCorporation (NOC).

The (alternative) BP Statistical Energy Survey (2008) places Libya’s proven oil reserves at 41.464 billion barrels at the end of 2007 which represents 3.34 % of the world’s proven reserves. (Mbendi Oil and Gas in Libya – Overview).

---

Oil is the “Trophy” of US-NATO led Wars

An invasion of Libya would serve the same corporate interests as the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq. The underlying objective is to take possession of Libya’s oil reserves, destabilize the National Oil Corporation (NOC) and eventually privatize the country’s oilindustry, namely transfer the control and ownership of Libya’s oil wealth into foreign hands.

The National Oil Corporation (NOC) is ranked 25 among the world’s Top 100 Oil Companies. (The Energy Intelligence ranks NOC 25 among the world’s Top 100 companies. – Libyaonline.com)

The planned invasion of Libya, which is already underway is part of the broader “Battle forOil”.  Close to 80 percent of Libya’s oil reserves are located in the Sirte Gulf basin of EasternLibya. (See map below)

Libya is a Prize Economy. “War is good for business”. Oil is the trophy of US-NATO led wars.

Wall Street, the Anglo-American oil giants, the US-EU weapons producers would be the unspoken beneficiaries of a US-NATO led military campaign directed against Libya.

Libyan oil is a bonanza for the Anglo-American oil giants. While the market value of crude oilis currently well in excess of 100 dollars a barrel, the cost of Libyan oil is extremely low, as low as $1.00 a barrel (according to one estimate). As one oil market expert commented somewhat cryptically:

“At $110 on the world market, the simple math gives Libya a $109 profit margin.” (Libya Oil, Libya Oil One Country’s $109 Profit on $110 Oil, EnergyandCapital.com March 12, 2008)

Foreign Oil Interests in Libya

Foreign oil companies operating prior to the insurrection in Libya include France’s Total, Italy’s ENI, The China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC), British Petroleum, the Spanish Oilconsortium REPSOL, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Occidental Petroleum, Hess, Conoco Phillips.

Of significance, China plays a central role in the Libyan oil industry. The China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC) had until its repatriation a Chinese workforce in Libya of 30,000. British Petroleum (BP) in contrast had a British workforce of 40 which ahs been repatriated.

Eleven percent (11%) of Libyan oil exports are channelled to China. While there are no figures on the size and importance of CNPC’s production and exploration activities, there are indications that they are sizeable.

More generally, China’s presence in North Africa is considered by Washington to constitute an intrusion. From a geopolitical standpoint, China is an encroachment. The military campaign directed against Libya is intent upon excluding China from North Africa.

Also of importance is the role of Italy. ENI, the Italian oil consortium puts out 244,000 barrels of gas and oil, which represents almost 25 percent of Libya’s total exports. ( Sky News: Foreign Oil firms halt Libyan operations, February 23, 2011).

Among US companies in Libya, Chevron and Occidental Petroleum (Oxy) decided barely 6 months ago (October 2010) not to renew their oil and gas exploration licenses in Libya. Did they have advanced knowledge of the insurrection? (Why are Chevron and Oxy leaving Libya?: Voice of Russia, October 6, 2010). In contrast, in November 2010, Germany oil oil company, R.W. DIA E signed a far-reaching agreement with Libya’s National Oil Corporation (NOC) involving exploration and production sharing. AfricaNews – Libya: German Oil firm signs prospecting deal – The AfricaNews,

The financial stakes as well  as “the spoils of war” are extremely high. The military operation is intent upon dismantling Libya’s financial institutions as well as confiscating billions of dollars of Libyan financial assets deposited in Western banks.

It should be emphasised that Libya’s military capabilities, including its air defense system are weak.

Libya Oil Concessions

 

Redrawing of the Map of Africa

Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa. The objective of US-NATO interference is strategic: it consists in outright theft, in stealing the nation’s oil wealth under the disguise of a humanitarian intervention.

This military operation is intent upon establishing US hegemony in North Africa, a region historically dominated by France and to lesser extent by Italy and Spain.

With regard to Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria, Washington’s design is to weaken the political links of these countries to France and push for the installation of new political regimes which have a close rapport with the US. This weakening of France as part of a US imperial design is part of a historical process which goes back to the wars in Indochina.

US-NATO intervention leading to the eventual formation of a US puppet regime is also intent upon excluding China from the region and edging out China’s National Petroleum Corp (CNPC). The Anglo-American oil giants including British Petroleum which signed an exploration contract in 2007 with the Ghadaffi government are among the potential “beneficiaries” of  the proposed US-NATO military operation.

More generally, what is at stake is the redrawing of the map of Africa, a process of neo-colonial redivision, the scrapping of the demarcations of the 1884 Berlin Conference, the conquest of Africa by the United States in alliance with Britain, in a US-NATO led operation.

The colonial redivision of Africa. 1913

Libya: Strategic Saharan Gateway to Central Africa

Libya has borders with several countries which are in the French sphere of influence including Algeria, Tunisia, Niger and Chad.

Chad is potentially an oil rich economy. ExxonMobil and Chevron have interests in Southern Chad including a pipeline project. Southern Chad is a gateway into the Darfur region of Sudan. China has oil interests in both Chad and Sudan. The China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC) signed a farreaching agreement with the Chad government in 2007.

Niger is strategic to the United States in view of its extensive reserves of uranium. At present,France dominates the uranium industry in Niger through the French nuclear conglomerate Areva, formerly known as Cogema. China also has a stake in Niger’s uranium industry.

More generally, the Southern border of Libya is strategic for the United States in its quest to extend its sphere of influence in Francophone Africa, a vast territory extending from North Africa to Central and Western Africa. Historically this region was part of France and Belgium’s colonial empire, the borders of which were established  at the Berlin Conference of 1884.

Source www.hobotraveler.com

The US played a passive role in the 1884 Berlin Conference. This new 21st Century redivision of the African continent, predicated on the control over oil, natural gas and strategic minerals (cobalt, uranium, chromium, manganese, platinum and uranium) largely supports dominant Anglo-American corporate interests.

US interference in North Africa redefines the geopolitics of an entire region. It underminesChina and overshadows the influence of the European Union.

This new redivision of Africa not only weakens the role of the former colonial powers (including France and Italy) in North Africa. it  is also part of a broader process of displacing and weakening France (and Belgium) over a large part of the African continent.

US puppet regimes have been installed in several African countries which historically were in the sphere of influence of France (and Belgium), including The Republic of the Congo and Rwanda.  Several countries in West Africa within the sphere of France (including Côte d’Ivoire) are slated to become US proxy states.

The European Union is heavily dependent on the flow of Libyan oil. 85 percent of its oil is sold to European countries. In the case of a war with Libya, the supply of petroleum to Western Europe could be disrupted, largely affecting Italy, France and Germany, which are heavily dependent on Libyan oil. The implications of these disruptions are far-reaching. They also have direct bearing on the relationship between the US and the European Union.

Concluding Remarks

The mainstream media through massive disinformation is complicit in justifying a military agenda which, if carried out, would have devastating consequences not only for the Libyan people: the social and economic impacts would be felt Worldwide.

There are at present three distinct war theaters in the broader Middle East Central Asian region: Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq. In the case of an attack on Libya, a  fourth war theater would be opened up in North Africa, with the risk of military escalation.

Public opinion must take cognizance of the hidden agenda behind this alleged humanitarian undertaking, heralded by the heads of state and heads of government of NATO countries as a “Just War”. The Just War theory in both its classical and contemporary versions upholds waras a “humanitarian operation”. It calls for military intervention on ethical and moral grounds against “rogue states” and “Islamic terrorists”. The Just war theory demonizes the Ghadaffi regime while providing

The heads of state and heads of government of NATO countries are the architects of war and destruction in Iraq and Afghanistan. In an utterly twisted logic, they are heralded as the voices of reason, as the representatives of the “international community”.

Realities are turned upside down. A humanitarian intervention is launched by war criminals in high office, who are the guardians of the Just War theory.

Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo,… Civilian casualties in Pakistan resulting from US drone attacks on town and villages, ordered by president Obama are not front page news, nor are the 2 million civilian deaths in Iraq. There is no such thing as a “Just War”.

The history of US imperialism should be understood. The 2000 Report of the Project of the New American Century entitled “Rebuilding Americas’ Defenses” calls for the implementation of a long war, a war of conquest. One of the main components of this military agenda is: to“Fight and decisively win in multiple, simultaneous theater wars”.

Operation Libya is part of that process. It is another theater in the Pentagon’s logic of “simultaneous theater wars”.

The PNAC document faithfully reflects the evolution of US military doctrine since 2001. The US plans to be involved simultaneously in several war theaters in different regions of the World.

While protecting America, namely “National Security” of the United States of America is upheld as an objective, the PNAC report does spell out why these multiple theater wars are required. The humanitarian justification is not mentioned.

What is the purpose of America’s military roadmap?

Libya is targeted because it is one among several remaining countries outside America’s sphere of influence, which fail to conform to US demands. Libya is a country which has been selected as part of a military “road map” which consists of “multiple simultaneous theater wars”.  In the words of former NATO Commander Chief General Wesley Clark:

“in the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan…. (Wesley Clark, Winning Modern Wars, p. 130).

 

Darkpolitricks.com

Libya’s economy – all about money and oil in Libya – The best oil around the world

Libya’s economy is heavily reliant on oil exports.
Libya relies on oil and natural gas to satisfy energy consumption demand. Economic growth in Libya is dependent on the hydrocarbon industry. According to the World Bank, the country’s hydrocarbon exports account for over 95 percent of total merchandize exports and revenues from the oil and natural gas sectors amount to over half of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP). Since the United Nations and the United States lifted sanctions over Libya in 2003 and 2004, respectively, oil majors have stepped up exploration efforts for oil and natural gas in the country. Likewise, companies have tried using enhanced oil recovery (EOR) techniques to increase production at maturing fields. Over the next six years, Libya would like to see oil production capacity increase by 40 percent from 1.8 million barrels per day (bbl/d) to 3 million bbl/d by 2013.

Oil

Libya has the largest proven oil reserves in Africa. The country hopes to increase oil production capacity through increasing exploration and EOR projects.
Libya, a member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), holds the largest proven oil reserves in Africa, followed by Nigeria and Algeria (see graph below). According to Oil and Gas Journal (OGJ), Libya had total proven oil reserves of 41.5 billion barrels as of January 2007, up from 39.1 billion barrels in 2006. About 80 percent of Libya’s proven oil reserves are located in the Sirte basin, which is responsible for 90 percent of the country’s oil output. Libya remains "highly unexplored" according to reports by Wood Mackenzie, and only around 25 percent of Libya is covered by exploration agreements with oil companies. The under-exploration of Libya reflects the impact of former sanctions and also stringent fiscal terms imposed by Libya on foreign oil companies.

Production

According to the International Crude Oil Market Handbook, Libya’s National Oil Company (NOC) would like to raise oil production from 1.80 million bbl/d in 2006 to 2 million bbl/d by 2008 and to 3 million bbl/d by 2010-2013. In large part, NOC’s production goals depend on its ability to finance its share of development costs. Future foreign investment into the oil sector is likely, especially with the improved investment climate that stems from the United Nations and United States lifting sanctions. Previously, sanctions had caused delays in a number of field development and EOR projects and had deterred foreign capital investment. Overall, Libya is considered a highly attractive oil province due to its low cost of oil recovery (as low as $1 per barrel at some fields), the high quality of its oil, and its proximity to European markets.

Exports

With domestic consumption of 284,000 bbl/d in 2006, Libya had estimated net exports (including all liquids) of 1.525 million bbl/d. According to 2006 official trade data as reported to the Global Trade Atlas, the vast majority of Libyan oil exports are sold to European countries like Italy (495,000 bbl/d), Germany (253,000 bbl/d), Spain (113,000) bbl/d and France (87,000 bbl/d). With the lifting of sanctions against Libya in 2004, the United States has increased its imports of Libyan oil. The United States imported an average of 85,500 bbl/d of total Libyan oil exports in 2006, up from 56,000 bbl/d of oil imports in 2005.

Libyan oil is generally light (high API gravity) and sweet (low sulfur content), but can also be thick and waxy. The country's nine export grades have API gravities that range from 26o – 44o. While the lighter, sweeter grades are generally sold to Europe, the heavier crude oils are often exported to Asian markets. Most Libyan oil is sold on a term basis, including to the country's Oilinvest marketing network in Europe; to companies like Agip, OMV, Repsol YPF, Tupras, CEPSA, and Total; and small volumes to Asian and South African companies.

Field Development and Exploration

With state-operated oil fields undergoing a 7-8 percent natural decline rate, Libya's challenge is maintaining production at mature fields, while finding new oil and developing new discoveries. In November 2005, Repsol YPF (operator) announced that it had discovered a significant new oil deposit of light, sweet crude that extends over two licenses in the Murzuq Basin. Industry experts believe the discovery to be one of the biggest made in Libya for several years. The discovery is partly located in license NC-186, which currently produces around 60,000 bbl/d. Production on the license is expected to increase over the next 4-year period (2007-2011) by 100,000 – 150,000 bbl/d as oil from the discovery comes online. Repsol YPF is joined by a consortium of partners that includes OMV, Total and Norsk Hydro.

Also located in Murzuq Basin is Eni’s Elephant field. In October 1997, an international consortium led by British company Lasmo, along with Eni and a group of five South Korean companies, announced that it had discovered large recoverable crude reserves (around 700 million barrels) at the NC-174 Block, 465 miles south of Tripoli. Lasmo, which was purchased by Eni in 2001, estimated that production from the field would cost around $1 per barrel. Elephant began production in February 2004 at around 10,000 bbl/d. In 2006, Eni indicated that Elephant was producing at around 125,000 bbl/d, and the company was hoping to see the field reach full capacity of 150,000 bbl/d by 2008.

Waha Oil Company’s (WOC) Waha fields currently produce around 350,000 bbl/d, down from around 1 million bbl/d in 1969 and 400,000 bbl/d in 1986. However, WOC expects to increase Waha output by around 200,000 bbl/d over the next couple of years. In 2005, ConocoPhillips and co-venturers reached an agreement with NOC to both return to its operations in Libya and to extend the Waha concession by 25 years. ConocoPhillips operates the Waha fields with a 16.33 percent share in the project. NOC has the largest share of the Waha concession 59.17 percent, and additional partners include Marathon (16.33 percent), and Amerada Hess (8.17 percent).

Refining and Downstream

Libya’s refining sector needs upgrading after years of sanctions.
According to OGJ, Libya has five domestic refineries, with a combined capacity of 378,000 bbl/d. Libya's refineries include: 1) the Ras Lanuf export refinery, completed in 1984 and located on the Gulf of Sirte, with a crude oil refining capacity of 220,000 bbl/d; 2) the Az Zawiya refinery, completed in 1974 and located in northwestern Libya, with crude processing capacity of 120,000 bbl/d; 3) the Tobruk refinery, with crude capacity of 20,000 bbl/d; 4) Brega, the oldest refinery in Libya, located near Tobruk with crude capacity of 10,000 bbl/d; and 5) Sarir, a topping facility with 8,000 bbl/d of capacity.

ibya's refining sector reportedly was impacted by UN sanctions, specifically UN Resolution 883 of November 11, 1993, which banned Libya from importing refinery equipment. Libya is seeking a comprehensive upgrade to its entire refining system, with a particular aim of increasing output of gasoline and other light products (i.e. jet fuel). As of early June 2007, NOC was evaluating investment proposals for upgrading the Ras Lanuf refinery. Total cost of the upgrade is estimated at $2 billion. NOC is also expected to re-tender an engineering, procurement and construction contract for upgrading the Az Zawiya refinery. In addition to refinery upgrades, Tamoil Africa and Occidental Petroleum Corporation reportedly have plans to build new refineries near Melitah.

Overseas Investment

In addition to its domestic refineries, Libya has operations in Europe through its overseas oil retail arm, Tamoil. Through Tamoil, Libya is a direct producer and distributor of refined products in Italy, Germany, Switzerland, and Egypt. Tamoil Italia, based in Milan, controls about 7.5 percent of Italy's retail market for oil products and lubricants, which are distributed through 3,000 Tamoil service stations. Libya's ability to increase the supply of oil products to European markets has been constrained by the fact that Libya's refineries are in need of upgrading, specifically in order to meet stricter EU environmental standards in place since 1996. In June 2007, United States-based Colony Capital reached a agreement to take over 65 percent of Tamoil, while the Libyan government will retain 35 percent. Libya will continue to control Tamoil Africa, which operates retail stations in Egypt and Burkina Faso among other African nations.

Sector Organization

Libya's oil industry is run by the state-owned National Oil Corporation (NOC), along with smaller subsidiary companies, which combined account for around half of the country's oil output. Of NOC's subsidiaries, the largest oil producer is the Waha Oil Company (WOC), followed by the Arabian Gulf Oil Company (Agoco), Zueitina Oil Company (ZOC), and Sirte Oil Company (SOC). In addition to NOC’s subsidiaries, several international oil companies are engaged in exploration and production in Libya including Repsol YPF (Spain), Eni (Italy), OMV (Austria), and Total (France).

United States-based oil companies, after the lifting of sanctions in 2004, were allowed back into Libya. In September 2003 the UN Security Council officially lifted its sanctions over Libya. On February 26, 2004, following a declaration by Libya that it would abandon its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs and comply with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NNPT), the United States rescinded a ban on travel to Libya and authorized U.S. oil companies with pre-sanctions holdings in Libya to negotiate on their return to the country if and when the United States lifted economic sanctions. On April 23, 2004, the United States eased its economic sanctions against Libya, and the White House issued a press release stating that: “U.S. companies will be able to buy or invest in Libyan oil and products. U.S. commercial banks and other financial service providers will be able to participate in and support these transactions." On the same day, Libya’s NOC announced its first shipment of oil to the United States in over 20 years. On June 28, 2004, the United States and Libya formally resumed diplomatic relations, severed since May 1981. Finally, on September 20, 2004, President Bush signed Executive Order 12543, lifting most remaining U.S. sanctions against Libya and paving the way for U.S. oil companies to try to secure contracts or revive previous contracts for tapping Libya’s oil reserves. The Order also revoked any restrictions on importation of oil products refined in Libya, and unblocked certain assets.

Licensing Rounds

On January 30, 2005, Libya held its first round of oil and natural gas exploration leases since the United States ended sanctions against the country. In October 2005, Libya held a second bidding round under EPSA IV, with 51 companies taking part and nearly $500 million worth of new investment flowing into the country as a result. In December 2006, Libya held its third bidding round; however, production-sharing agreements (PSAs) awarded in the round were still being signed by NOC as of April 2007. Industry experts noted that the third round attracted smaller players, including ones from Russia, as opposed to larger international oil companies (IOCs), which participated in the previous two rounds. In July 2007, Libya plans to announce its fourth round, which is likely to focus on natural gas assets.

Winners of Libyan exploration acreage are determined largely based on how high a share of production a company is willing to offer NOC. Whichever companies offer NOC the greatest share of profits is likely to win. In addition, oilfield developers initially bear 100 percent of costs (exploration, appraisal, training) for a minimum of 5 years, while NOC retains exclusive ownership. Also included in Libyan licensing rounds is open competitive bidding and transparency, joint development and marketing of non-associated natural gas discoveries, standardized terms for exploration and production, and non-recoverable bonuses.

Natural Gas

Libyan natural gas production and exports are increasing, with the opening of the “Greenstream” pipeline to Europe in late 2004.
Expansion of natural gas production remains a high priority for Libya for two main reasons. Libya aims to use natural gas instead of oil domestically for power generation, freeing up more oil for export. Second, Libya has vast natural gas reserves and is looking to increase its natural gas exports, particularly to Europe. Libya's proven natural gas reserves as of January 1, 2007 were estimated at 52.7 trillion cubic feet (Tcf ) by OGJ. Some Libyan experts believe, with more exploration, reserves may reach possibly 70-100 Tcf. Major producing fields include Attahadi, Defa-Waha, Hatiba, Zelten, Sahl, and Assumud. To expand its natural gas production, marketing, and distribution, Libya is looking to foreign participation and investment.

Production
Libya’s natural gas production has grown substantially in the last few years. According to EIA, Libya produced 399 billion cubic feet (Bcf) in 2005, while consuming 206 Bcf. In 2006, IHS Energy reported Libya produced 985 Bcf of natural gas, more than two times the amount produced in 2005. Of the 985 Bcf, 474 Bcf was export to Italy and Spain, 385 Bcf was used in oilfield recovery projects, and the remaining 146 Bcf was used in the generation of electricity in Libya.

Exports

Libyan natural gas exports to Europe are increasing rapidly, with the Western Libyan Gas Project (WLGP) and the $6.6 billion, 32-inch, 370-mile "Greenstream" underwater natural gas pipeline, which came online in October 2004. Previously, the only customer for Libyan natural gas was Spain's Enagas. However, the WLGP -- a 50/50 joint venture between Eni and NOC -- has now expanded these exports to Italy and beyond. Currently, 280 Bcf per year of natural gas is being exported from a processing facility at Melitah, on the Libyan coast, via Greenstream to southeastern Sicily. From Sicily, the natural gas flows to the Italian mainland, and then onwards to the rest of Europe. Greenstream is 75 percent owned by Eni, with first flows coming from the Wafa onshore field near the Algerian border and the Bahr es Salam offshore field near Tripoli. Throughput on the Greenstream line reportedly can be boosted to 385 Bcf per year.

Italy's Edison Gas has committed, under a "take-or-pay" contract, to taking around half (140 Bcf per year) of this natural gas, and to use it mainly for power generation in Italy. Besides Edison, Italy's Energia Gas and Gaz de France have each committed to taking around 70 Bcf of Libyan natural gas. Another 70 Bcf per year of natural gas is to be produced from WLGP for the domestic Libyan market (feedstock or power generation) or possibly for export to Tunisia.

Pipeline projects

In 1997, Tunisia and Libya agreed to set up a joint venture in order to build a natural gas pipeline from the Melitah area in Libya to the southern Tunisian city and industrial zone of Gabes. As of November 2006, the joint venture was in the preparation phase for issuing a tender for an engineering, procurement and construction contract to build the pipeline. Construction on the pipeline is estimated to take 18 months, and the pipeline could come online as early as 2010 if all goes according to plan. Previously, Tunisia and Libya signed an agreement for around 70 Bcf of natural gas per year to be delivered from Libyan gas fields to Tunisia.

Eni also has promoted linking the reserves of both Egypt and Libya to Italy by pipeline. An agreement in principle to link Egypt and Libya's natural gas grids was reached in June 1997, following a visit to Libya by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. In 2001, a joint venture agreement was reached between NOC and Egypt's EGPC for construction of a pipeline to carry Egyptian natural gas to Libya (for power generation, water desalination, and possible export) and for another to carry Libyan oil to Alexandria, Egypt for refining and consumption there). The joint venture company is called "Arab Company for Oil and Gas Pipelines," or ACOG.

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)

In 1971, Libya became the second country in the world (after Algeria in 1964) to export liquefied natural gas (LNG). Since then, Libya's LNG exports have remained low, largely due to technical limitations which do not allow Libya to extract liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) from the natural gas. Libya's LNG plant, at Marsa El Brega, was built in the late 1960s by Esso and has a nominal capacity of about 125 Bcf per year. However, US sanctions prevented Libya from obtaining needed equipment to separate out LPG from the natural gas, thereby limiting the plant's output to about 15 percent of nameplate capacity, all of which is exported to Spain (Enagas).

Now that sanctions have been lifted companies are looking to invest in Libyan LNG projects. In May 2005, Shell agreed to a final deal with NOC to develop Libyan oil and gas resources, including LNG export facilities. The deal came after lengthy negotiations on the terms of a March 2004 framework agreement. Reportedly, Shell is aiming to upgrade and expand Marsa El Brega and possibly build a new LNG export facility as well at a cost of $105-$450 million. In addition to Shell, other companies like Repsol YPF are also interested in developing Libya's LNG export potential.

Electricity

Libya needs to invest billions of dollars in new generating capacity to meet increasing demand.
As of January 2004, Libya had electric power production capacity of about 4.7 gigawatts (GW). In 2004, Libya generated 19.4 billion kilowatthours (Bkwh) of electricity, while consuming 18.1 Bkwh. Most of Libya's existing power stations are being converted from oil to natural gas, and new power plants are being built to run on natural gas, primarily to maximize the volume of oil available for export purposes. Libya is also looking at potential wind and solar projects, particularly in remote regions where it is impractical to extend the power grid.

Libya's electric power demand has grown rapidly over the past few decades, with current plans calling for a doubling in power generating capacity by 2010. Libya's state-owned General Electricity Company (GECOL) is building several new power plants. One factor leading to rapid power demand growth is the fact that electricity is heavily subsidized, at perhaps one-third the market cost of 12 cents per kilowatthour. Currently, Libya's power grid consists of around 8,000 miles of 220-kV lines and 13,000 miles of 66-kV and 30kV lines. Libya also is looking at increased links with the Tunisian and Egyptian power grids.

Profile

Country Overview

Location/Size
North Africa/1,775,500 sq km (685,524 sq mi), slightly larger than Alaska

Independence
December 24, 1951 (from Italy)

Population (7/2006E)
6 million

Languages
Arabic; Italian and English widely understood in major cities

Religions
Sunni Muslim (97%)

Economic Overview

Secretary of the General People's Committee for Economy and Trade
Ali Abdul Aziz al-Isawi

Currency/Exchange Rate (6/8/2007)
1 Libyan Dinar (LYD) = $0.7803 USD

Inflation Rate (2006E)
3.5%

Gross Domestic Product (GDP, 2006E)
$50.2 billion

Real GDP Growth Rate (2006E)
5.8%

Unemployment Rate (2004E)
30%

External Debt (2006E)
$4.5 billion

Merchandise Exports (2006E)
$38.5 billion

Exports - Commodities
Petroleum, chemical and petrochemical products, fruits and nuts, carpets

Exports - Partners (2005)
Italy 38%, Germany 15%, Spain 9.3%, Turkey 6.2%, France 6.2%, United States 5.2%

Merchandise Imports (2006E)
$10.4 billion

Imports - Commodities
Industrial raw materials and intermediate goods, capital goods, foodstuffs and other consumer goods, technical services, military supplies

Imports - Partners (2005)
Italy 21.2%, Germany 10.2, Tunisia 5.9%, Turkey 4.8%, United Kingdom 4.8%, France 4.7%, South Korea 4.6%, China 4.5%

Current Account Balance (2006E)
$24.4 billion

Energy Overview

Secretary of the General People's Committee for Electricity, Water and Gas
Umran Ibrahim Abu-Kra’aa

Proven Oil Reserves (January 1, 2007E)
41.5 billion barrels

Oil Production (2006E)
1.80 million barrels per day, of which 95% was crude oil.

Oil Consumption (2006E)
284 thousand barrels per day

Net Oil Exports (2006E)
1,525 thousand barrels per day

Crude Oil Distillation Capacity (2006E)
378 thousand barrels per day

Proven Natural Gas Reserves (January 1, 2007E)
52.7 trillion cubic feet

Natural Gas Production (2005E)
399 billion cubic feet

Natural Gas Consumption (2005E)
206 billion cubic feet

Recoverable Coal Reserves (2004E)
None

Coal Production (2004E)
None

Coal Consumption (2004E)
None

Electricity Installed Capacity (2004E)
4.7 gigawatts (all oil and natural gas)

Electricity Production (2004E)
19.4 billion kilowatt hours

Electricity Consumption (2004E)
18.1 billion kilowatt hours

Total Energy Consumption (2004E)
0.75 quadrillion Btus*, of which Oil (71%), Natural Gas (29%)

Total Per Capita Energy Consumption (2004E)
133 million Btus

Energy Intensity (2004E)
24,158 Btu per $2000-PPP**

Environmental Overview

Energy-Related Carbon Dioxide Emissions (2004E)
50.2 million metric tons, of which Oil (74%), Natural Gas (26%)

Per-Capita, Energy-Related Carbon Dioxide Emissions (2004E)
8.9 metric tons

Carbon Dioxide Intensity (2004E)
1.6 Metric tons per thousand $2000-PPP**

Environmental Issues
Desertification; very limited natural fresh water resources; the Great Manmade River Project, the largest water development scheme in the world, is being built to bring water from large aquifers under the Sahara to coastal cities

Major Environmental Agreements
party to: Biodiversity, Climate Change, Desertification, Endangered Species, Hazardous Wastes, Marine Dumping, Ozone Layer Protection signed, but not ratified: Environmental Modification, Law of the Sea

Oil and Gas Industry

Organization
The Ministry of Energy was abolished in 2000. At that time, the National Oil Company was given full control over the country’s oil sector. The Energy Ministry was re-established in 2004. Oil rights in Libya are awarded under Exploration and Production Sharing Agreements (EPSAs) based on the 1955 Hydrocarbon Law. Downstream investment is covered by the 1997 Foreign Investment Law.

Major Oil Terminals
Es Sider, Marsa el-Brega, Tobruk, Ras Lanuf, Zawiya, Zuetina

Foreign Company Involvement
Amerada Hess, Canadian Occidental, ChevronTexaco, CNPC, Eni, Husky Oil, Indian Oil Corp., Liwa (UAE), Medco Energy (Indonesia), Naftogaz Ukrainy, Nimr Petroleum (Saudi Arabia), Norsk Hydro, Occidental, OMV, ONGC, Pedco (South Korea), Petrobras (Brazil), PetroCanada, Petronas (Malaysia), Red Sea Oil Corp. (Canada), Repsol, Shell, Total, Verenex (Canada), Wintershall (Germany), Woodside (Australia)

Major Oil and Gas Fields
Al Jurf , Amal, Beda, Bouri, Bu Attifel, Defa-Waha, El Sharara, Elephant, Ghani, Gialo, Hofra, Intisar, Kabir, Mabruk, Murzuq, Nafoora, Nasser, NC-41, NC-186 fields, Omar, Sarah, Sarir, Wafa, Zella, Zenad, Zueitina

Major Pipelines
Amal-Ras Lanuf; Defa-Nasser; Hammada el Hamra-Az Zawiya; Intisar-Zueitina; Intisar -Hatiba; Messla-Ras Lanuf; Nasser-Hatiba; Nasser (Zelten)-Marsa el Brega; Sarir-Marsa el Hariga; Waha-Es Sider

Major Refineries (capacity, bbl/d)
Ras Lanuf (220,000 bbl/d), Az-Zawiya (120,000 bbl/d), Tobruk (20,000 bbl/d), Brega (10,000 bbl/d), Sarir (10,000 bbl/d)

* The total energy consumption statistic includes petroleum, dry natural gas, coal, net hydro, nuclear, geothermal, solar, wind, wood and waste electric power. The renewable energy consumption statistic is based on International Energy Agency (IEA) data and includes hydropower, solar, wind, tide, geothermal, solid biomass and animal products, biomass gas and liquids, industrial and municipal wastes. Sectoral shares of energy consumption and carbon emissions are also based on IEA data.
**GDP figures from OECD estimates based on purchasing power parity (PPP) exchange rates.

http://www.eia.doe.gov

Libya intervention: What's the endgame? Many in Washington remain uneasy

Allied forces have imposed a no-fly zone over Libya, Pentagon officials say. But many in Washington remain uneasy about an engagement whose objectives seem less than clear.

Combat jets from the US, France, and Britain today rule the skies over Libya. The forces of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi – battered by coalition air power – have retreated. Rebel fighters are regrouping and moving to retake ground recently lost.

What happens now?

Days after US military forces struck in a third recent conflict overseas, many in Washington remain uneasy about a Libya engagement whose objectives seem less than clear and that began as Mr. Qaddafi appeared on the verge of regaining his iron grip on the country.

IN PICTURES: Libya no-fly zone

US officials insist that the purpose of the Libya intervention is protection of civilians, per United Nations Security Council resolution. It is a humanitarian operation, they say, not a move to pick sides in Libya’s developing civil war.

That’s a point of view backed by surrounding Arab nations, who supported the initial strikes.

But some allies – notably France – have talked tougher and may push for an endgame that includes military cooperation with the rebels and Qaddafi’s ouster. For the Obama administration, managing diplomatic conflicts over Libya strategy may prove more difficult than managing warplanes in Libyan airspace.

“If you are not exquisitely clear on what you are trying to accomplish, powerful forces within that alliance will tend to really complicate matters pretty quickly,” says William Martel, associate professor of international security studies at the Fletcher School of Tufts University in Medford, Mass.

On Monday, Pentagon officials said that the ad hoc coalition had effectively imposed a no-fly zone over Libya in the wake of weekend airstrikes. There were no indications, they said, that Libyan forces had attempted to fly any aircraft in recent hours.

“We judge these strikes to have been very effective in significantly degrading the regime’s air defense capability. We believe his forces are under significant stress and suffering from both isolation and a good deal of confusion,” said Navy Vice Adm. William Gortney, staff director for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at a Pentagon news conference.

Gortney and other US officials said that Qaddafi himself is not a target of the aircraft enforcing the no-fly zone, despite a large explosion that hit his personal compound Sunday in the closing hours of the initial round of bombing.

The US clearly believes that the mandate of the UN Security Council resolution does not extend to direct attempts at regime change. But in the past, President Obama has called directly on Qaddafi to go. What happens if Qaddafi survives the next few weeks and the Libyan conflict hardens into a prolonged civil war? Will the US participate in a no-fly zone that stretches for years, as it did over Iraq in the wake of the 1990-91 Gulf War?

Would the US accept a cease-fire agreement that leaves Qaddafi in place? Would it look weak of it did?

“The credibility of the US policy hangs on the departure of Qaddafi, and right now that looks like far from a foregone conclusion,” says Professor Martel.

What happens if France pushes for an escalation in the airstrikes? After all, France has already recognized the opposition leadership, based in Benghazi, as the true Libyan government.

Yet Mr. Obama has ruled out use of US ground troops and spoken of an operation that lasts days, not weeks. And Arab League secretary-general Amre Moussa has publicly deplored the scope and intensity of military actions that have already taken place.

“These differing objectives amongst the newly formed coalition do not augur well for a well-coordinated alliance, especially one that the United States explicitly does not want to lead,” writes Robert Danin, Council on Foreign Relations senior fellow for Middle East and Africa studies, in anonline analysis.

All this uncertainty has led to criticism of the operation from senior Republican lawmakers in Washington.

In a statement, House Speaker John Boehner said that the Obama administration “has a responsibility to define for the American people, the Congress, and our troops what the mission in Libya is” and how it will be accomplished.

On Sunday, former presidential candidate Sen. John McCain (R) of Arizona said that he hoped the no-fly zone had not come too late to prevent Qaddafi from regaining his power.

“Obviously, if we had taken this step a couple weeks ago, a no-fly zone would probably have been enough. Now, a no-fly zone is not enough. There needs to be other efforts made,” said Senator McCain on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

Peter Grier

Dennis Kucinich: Obama's Libya Attack An Impeachable Offense

A number of Democratic and Republican lawmakers are concerned about the White House's air assault on Libya, but Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) raised the rhetoric to 11 on Monday, suggesting President Obama should be impeached.

"President Obama moved forward without Congress approving. He didn't have Congressional authorization, he has gone against the Constitution, and that's got to be said," Kucinich said in an interview with Raw Story."It's not even disputable, this isn't even a close question. Such an action -- that involves putting America's service men and women into harm's way, whether they're in the Air Force or the Navy -- is a grave decision that cannot be made by the president alone."

According to Kucinich, Obama's decision "would appear on its face to be an impeachable offense," though he questioned whether Congress would ever move forward with a trial in practice.

As reported earlier by Politico, Kucinich raised the specter of impeachment in a conference call with Democratic lawmakers on Saturday.

Presidents have initiated many military conflicts without congressional approval since World War II, including President Clinton's air assault on the Milosevic regime in Serbia in 1999, President Bush's intervention in Somalia in 1992, and President Reagan's own attack on Qaddafi in 1986. The War Powers Act -- passed in reaction to the Vietnam War and mostly ignored by Presidents since then -- requires the president to inform Congress that he is committing U.S. forces abroad within 48 hours and to request approval within 60 days.

Benjy Sarlin/talkingpointsmemo.com

UK/War in Libya: Protesters outside the Ministry of Defence in London

Protesters outside the Ministry of Defence in London show their opposition
to the international coalition's involvement in Libya.
Photograph: Toby Melville/Reuters

Downing Street is battling to hold together the international coalition opposing Muammar Gaddafi's actions amid signs of Arab unease at the scale and impact of western-led military operations in Libya, divisions within Nato over the no-fly zone, and a rising tide of global criticism.

A spokesman for David Cameron said the prime minister had spoken by telephone to Amr Moussa after the Arab League's secretary general expressed concern about civilian casualties caused by British, American and French air attacks which, he suggested, exceeded their UN mandate. The Gaddafi regime claims dozens of civilians have been killed and hundreds wounded in the past two days.

Cameron and Moussa "agreed that the protection of civilians was paramount", the spokesman said, adding that Cameron had assured Moussa the coalition was "working with targeting to avoid civilian deaths".

The foreign secretary, William Hague, said he was also in touch with the Arab League chief: "I think too much was made of Amr Moussa's comments. I will be talking to him again today. I talked to Arab foreign ministers yesterday. I did not detect in them any weakening of their commitment."

Speaking in Cairo after a meeting with Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary general, Moussa said he respected security council resolution 1973, passed last week, which authorised the creation of a no-fly zone over Libya and the use of "all measures necessary" to ensure Gaddafi halted attacks on civilians.

The resolution was agreed by a majority vote after the 23-member Arab League endorsed calls for a no-fly zone. Diplomats say Arab support was crucial in persuading the US and other countries to back the resolution - co-sponsored by Britain and France - and in ensuring China and Russia did not veto it.

Moussa said: "The Arab League position on Libya was decisive and from the first moment we froze membership of Libya ... Then we asked the United Nations to implement a no-fly zone. We respect the UN resolution and there is no conflict with it, especially as it indicated there would be no invasion but that it would protect civilians from what they are subject to in Benghazi."

But reprising his previously expressed concerns about the impact of the air strikes on civilians, Moussa added: "We will continue to work on the protection of civilians. We urge everybody to take this into consideration in any military action."

Despite evident pressure to tone down his remarks, Moussa confirmed he had called an emergency meeting of Arab League ambassadors on Tuesday to discuss Libya. He reiterated his view that while the league had backed a no-fly zone, it had not supported attacks on Gaddafi's armed forces and military and communications infrastructure, as carried out during Operation Odyssey Dawn over the weekend.

Concern about the depth and longevity of Arab commitment to the Libyan intervention also focused on the failure, so far, of any Arab country to directly contribute personnel and military hardware, despite earlier assurances of support.

Qatar's state news agency reported that the Gulf state would contribute four jet fighters to the no-fly operation but they have yet to show up in theatre. Other Arab states, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which have said they are supportive, have declined to say what if anything they are doing to help.

Egypt, the Arab world's most populous state which is still grappling with the effects of its recent revolution, has said it will not get involved - although there have been unconfirmed reports that it has allowed the smuggling of arms to Libyan rebels across its western border.

Firing another warning shot across the coalition's bows, Abdul Rahman bin Hamad al-Attiyah, secretary general of the six-nation Gulf Co-operation Council, stressed the aim of the Libyan operation must be limited to protecting civilians - and that it should not be seen as an invasion of an Arab country.

"What is happening now is not an intervention. It is about protecting the people from bloodshed," he said.

Worries among Britain's Arab allies that a hidden agenda lies behind the attack on Libya have been underscored the comments of Liam Fox. The defence secretary said an attempt to kill Gaddafi was "potentially a possibility". Demands by Cameron, Barack Obama and the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, that Gaddafi stand down have also been widely interpreted as support for regime change.

Speaking en route to Russia, the US defence secretary, Robert Gates, distanced himself from Fox's comments, saying it was unwise to make promises that might not be deliverable.

Gates's remarks underlined another potential headache for Downing Street - Obama's determination to hand over direction and implementation of military operations in Libya to European and Arab countries, and possibly Nato, as soon as possible.

"It is pretty clear that we agreed to use our unique capabilities and the breadth of those capabilities at the front end of this process, and then we expected in a matter of days to be able to turn over the primary responsibility to others," Gates said. "We will continue to support the coalition. We'll be a member of the coalition. We will have a military role in the coalition, but we will not have the pre-eminent role," he said.

Asked who would be in charge once American commanders stood down, Gates said: "I think that there are a couple of possibilities. One is British and French leadership, another is the use of the Nato machinery, and I think we just have to work out the command and control that is most accommodating to all of the members of the coalition."

Efforts to give Nato a lead role in operating the no-fly zone remained in difficulty after Turkey, the only majority Muslim Nato member, effectively blocked an agreement on alliance participation on Sunday.

Speaking in Mecca on Monday, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister, elaborated his country's misgivings.

"Our biggest desire is for this operation to be finished as soon as possible," he said. "Our biggest desire is for the Libyan people to determine their own future ... Now the issue is, is Nato going into operation? If Nato is going into operation, we have some conditions. Nato should recognise that Libya belongs to the Libyans, not for the distribution of its underground resources and wealth."

The Turkish foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, raised legal objections. "There are legal procedures for the establishment of a coalition in an international operation. We take the view that for Libya, these were not sufficiently respected."

Erdogan's suggestion that western actions were influenced by interest in Libya's oil wealth reflected suspicions voiced by Arab commentators and Gaddafi himself, who has accused Britain and other countries of seeking to re-colonise Libya.

Erdogan said he had spoken to Gaddafi three times during the crisis. Turkey, which has investments in Libya reportedly worth $15bn (£9.2bn), has represented British interests there since British diplomats were withdrawn as the crisis worsened.

Other Nato countries oppose British and French policy in Libya, notably Germany and Poland. Speaking before European Union talks in Brussels, Guido Westerwelle, the German foreign minister, said the Arab League's criticism of the operation had vindicated Berlin's stance.

"If we see that three days after this intervention began, the Arab League already criticises it, I think we had good reasons ... for our concern," he said. "This does not mean that we are neutral, it does not mean we have any sympathy with Gaddafi, but it means we see the risks."

Complicating matters further, France is opposed to giving Nato an active role. It argues that the alliance's reputation has been damaged by Afghanistan. France has long resented Washington's leading role in Nato. Italy, in contrast, said it wanted greater Nato involvement, as a way of locking in the US. "No decision has been taken. Nato is continuing its work," a French foreign ministry official said as talks continued in Brussels.

Downing Street has not found much enthusiasm for its Libyan offensive within the broader EU, either, which is split like Nato on the issue. Catherine Ashton, the EU foreign policy chief, clashed with Cameron at an EU summit this month, suggesting he "hold his horses" over an intervention which, she predicted, would lead to loss of civilian life.

The EU foreign ministers' meeting on Monday focused instead on boosting humanitarian assistance and isolating Gaddafi. "We are looking at what more we can do in terms of economic sanctions, what more we can do for planning. The most obvious issue is humanitarian support," Ashton said.

Adding to the growing pressure on Britain and France, which were beginning to look slightly isolated, Russia's prime minister, Vladimir Putin, a long-standing critic of the west, joined China, India, Brazil and other leading developing countries in criticising the intervention. His comments appeared deliberately designed to inflame Arab and Muslim opinion.

"The [UN] resolution is defective and flawed. It allows everything. It resembles medieval calls for crusades," he said.

China, also highly critical, called a new meeting of the UN security council later on Monday to take a second look at Libya.

Questions continued to be raised about the duration of the allied engagement in Libya, how success will be defined, and when British forces might come home. Compounding Downing Street's discomfort, Henry Guaino, a senior adviser to Sarkozy, indicated there was no end in sight. The intervention, he said, was likely to last "a while".

Guardian.co.uk

Líbia/Guerra: Carta ao Presidente americano Barack Husseim Obama, de Kingamba Mwenho

Caríssimo Barack Husseim Obama,
aceite as minhas melhores saudações!

Enquanto escrevo estas linhas o sangue de pessoas inocentes escorre pelas artérias de Tripoli e outras cidades da Líbia. A intervenção militar que estais levando a cabo é ilegal, é colonialista e é injusta. De ti, Senhor Presidente Obama, ninguém esperava uma decisão do género: uma guerra oportunista pelo petróleo e outros recursos naturais e por espaços aonde instalar novas bases militares. Até mesmo a possibilidade de dividir a Líbia é suja quanto sanguinária considerando as consequências dessa acção militar e económica.

Quando fostes eleito, todos viram na tua eleição uma esperança real para o mundo, esperamos para América uma nova época de decisões políticas ponderadas, de bons exemplos em termos de respeito entre as nações, iniciativas de grande respiro que poderiam ate mudar o modo de fazer política em muitas partes do mundo.  Tu eras uma pequena esperança deste mundo, muitos viram em ti o “escolhido”, aquele que sempre se esperou para mudar as actuais sortes do mundo: a começar dos problemas crónicos dos Estados Unidos que infelizmente são espelho de muitas realidades globais.  Mas analisando o que fizestes até agora, se vêm mais desilusões que elementos de esperança. Nestas horas estás acabando de matar as nossas esperança,  estas  mutilando  as nossas aspirações estás queimando tudo aquilo que sempre afirmastes: a luta por um mundo melhor, um mundo aonde o direito e a dignidade dos povos é mais importantes do que os negócios das grandes lobbies internacionais.

Cada  hora que passa as acções do grupo de “oportunistas sob a tua liderança” está ceifando vidas e não salvando-as, está complicando a situação económica e político-militar do Norte África e não melhorando. Aquilo que se vê é uma grande vontade de ocupar a Líbia e repartir-se as suas riquezas porque são muitas as interrogações sem respostas. Eis algumas:

1) Como explicar a lentidão do processo diplomático - por parte das Nações Unidas e das várias potências ocidentais com interesses em Líbia - no momento em que Muammar Gaddafi se encontrava em dificuldades? Se a “Diplomacia da ONU” estivesse em favor do líbios teria aproveitado aquele momento para instaurar um processo de paz no qual Muammar Gaddafi acabava saindo da política e o país marcharia para uma nova era,  íntegro e com dignidades.

2) Como justificar a aceleração nunca vista das decisões das Nações Unidas em vista das acções militares em Lìbia? Todas as guerras são inúteis: vimos no Iraque e em muitos outros países. Se a intenção é tirar Muammar Gaddafi do poder a guerra não é a solução, nunca será, porque o post-Gaddafi será mais complicado acabando por levar mais vidas do que aquelas que lá se foram ate ao momento. Um elemento não menos importante: é absurdo que o presidente de um país diga ao Chefe de uma outra nação para deixar o poder. O que dizer então de George Bush Jr. quando após os potentes bombardeamentos e ocupação do Iraque viu que a guerra continuava, que as motivações da guerra eram falsas, que as suas acções e decisões aumentaram as mortes e não instauraram uma democracia... não se demitiu, mas é um sanguinário e o mundo pedia a sua testa.

3) Como explicar a elaboração da Resolução 1979 das Nações Unidas que institui uma “No fly zone” com termos vagos e chacal/colonizadores mesmo sabendo que nenhum dos beligerantes quer a presença militar Ocidental em solo líbio? Esta resolução foi feita com a maior abertura de interpretação e muitas armadilhas lexicais  que nos levam a crer que a invasão de terra também já fora preparada com antecedência. Nem a Liga Árabe, nem a União Africana, nenhuma outra organização aceitou uma opção do género, mas as forças ocidentais as prepararam e as estão a aplicar.

4) Como explicar a presença de uma centena de militares ingleses (Cfr. notícias da Ansa/BBC/The Times) em Líbia três semanas antes da aprovação da Resolução das NU sobre a “No fly zone”? A Coroa inglesa antecedeu tudo enviando mais de cem homens das suas brigadas especiais a fim de ajudar os rebeldes (pura violação do solo líbio e muitas convenções das Nações Unidas). Isto me leva crer que as potências ocidentais prepararam a guerra com antecedência tendo em conta todos os detalhes para eliminar Gaddafi e ate mesmo a divisão do país.

5) Como explicar o rápido reconhecimento, por parte das potências ocidentais em causa, do Grupo de rebeldes sem referências e com possíveis infiltrações terrorítiscas num cenário de política internacional no qual um legítimo Governo decide de resolver os seus problemas internos?

6) Como explicar os debates sobre a divisão das riquezas líbias que as televisões, rádios e jornais ocidentais estão levando a cabo? Hoje é mais claro que nunca que o controlo do petróleo líbio é a primeira intenção desta intervenção, esta é a primeira conclusão de todos os debates mediáticos. Diz-se que um elefante não se esconde atrás de um caniço... o mesmo sobre esta guerra.

São muitas as questões sem resposta. Não encontro explicações sobre a quantidade de meios militares acumulados entorno a Líbia, tudo é surreal, é triste porque si afirma mais uma vez o direito da força e não a força dos direitos humanos.

Senhor presidente, se a vossa intenção era marcar a história com um timbro de fogo benigno, o intervenção em Líbia constitui um passo falso, é uma das tuas piores decisões e te recordarás para sempre. Serás recordado como presidente cuja a BOA fama foi maior que as suas reais acções e sobretudo como um político tele-Guiado que em vez de levar a esperança em África, utilizou as Nações Unidas para permitir a infiltração dos poderes fortes do petróleo e do gás em Líbia. As guerra de ocupação são sanguinárias, são tristes, são perigosas para inteira comunidade internacional, são terríveis e restam na memória histórica dos ocupados.

Senhor Presidente, estás ainda em tempo, e tens todo o poder para pôr fim (TO STOP) a máquina infernal da guerra, e diga a aos teus amigos que o solo líbio pode tornar-se num outro Afghanistan, senão uma outra Somália. Não queremos um outro Estado fantasma em terras africanas (Cfr. Somália), não queremos outras ocupações em estilo colonizador (Cfr. Iraque). Todos os povos querem sistemas de governo democráticos, mas como sabemos que esta não se EXPORTA, quem quiser ajudar comece financiando as organizações sociais que se batem para o efeito. A formação, a formação antes de tudo é o caminho para a democracia, a violência provoca violência e não leva a lado nenhum.

Sobre guerra o General William Sherman disse uma vez  que somente aqueles que nunca deram um tiro, nem ouviram os gritos e os gemidos dos feridos, é que clamam por sangue, vingança e mais desolação. A guerra é o inferno. Esta aventura vai terminal mal para os pobres, para os civis e bem para as potências ocidentais já prontas para aumentar a produção do petróleo.

Cordialmente,
Kingamba Mwenho!

 

Historical Silver Eagle Prices: Remembering When The American Silver Eagle Commanded A 400% Premium

Did you know that American Silver Eagles can command extraordinary premiums, in certain situations? Read and find out about the time when these coins were fetching premiums up to 400% more than other silver bullion coins...

I recently published an article on Ezinearticles entitled, "2011 American Silver Eagle: 5 Reasons Why You Should Buy This Silver Coin! " extolling the virtues of this lovely silver bullion coin. One of the five reasons I listed as a good reason to buy was the excellent profit potential, even with the price of silver trading over $30 an ounce (the price of silver has since pulled back a bit).

Since the time I published that article, an incident happened that really got me excited, even more, about the investment potential of American Silver Eagles.

I was in my local coin shop recently, browsing through their trays of various silver rounds. With the price of silver off its recent highs, I thought this would be the perfect time to add to my silver stock!

I happened to overhear a conversation between the coin shop owner and another customer. It went something like this:

Owner: "Hey, Bill, you ordered any 2011 Silver Eagles yet?"

Bill: "Hadn't thought about it. They're a bit pricey. Thought I'd just stick with buying a bag or two of junk silver when I have some extra cash."

Owner: "Junk is always good but I like Eagles, too. Some folks I know made some serious money on them back in '99.

Bill: "Really?"

Owner: "Yeah, back during that whole Y2K scare period. When everyone thought the world was going to end at the stroke of midnight on January 1st. " (He laughed). "People were paying crazy prices for those coins - double the spot price of silver!"

Bill: "You're joking?"

Owner: "I'm serious! It was crazy, man! I guess people figured if the whole banking system shut down or something, those silver eagles would come in handy."

Bill: "Yeah, but why the Eagles?"

Owner: "Guess it was because Silver Eagles are so well-recognized. And they have that U.S. government guarantee."

Bill: "Man! I had no idea! I thought silver was silver..."

A this point in the conversation, I moved away (lest they think I was eavesdropping, LOL!). When I got home that day, I did a little research on Silver Eagles and it turns out what the shop owner told the customer was true.

At the end of 1999, at the height of the Y2K scare American Silver Eagles were fetching HUGE premiums. The spot price of silver at that time was around $6.50. But Silver Eagles were commanding prices up to $12.50 an ounce!

Meanwhile, the Canadian Silver Maple leaf coin, an equally lovely silver bullion coin with a higher silver purity, was only commanding prices of $7.50 on the market.

Like the coin shop owner said, the reason investors were more than willing to pay the huge premium for the American Silver Eagle and not the Silver Maple leaf coin was because they believed in the event the banking system was unable to function, the silver Eagle coin would be more readily accepted for bartering purposes!

And the reason investors felt the Silver Eagle would be more readily accepted was because of their United States government guarantee and worldwide recognition! Of course, after the Y2K scare passed, premiums on the coins quickly returned to normal but anyone who would have sold during this period would have done fabulously!

Could a situation like this happen again?

Yes, the economy appears to be on the mend but the risks are still out there. In the event of a widespread financial panic, would the American Silver Eagle once again be the go-to silver bullion coin? And possibly command a huge premium over other silver coins? Who knows? But, as Mark Twain once said: "The past doesn't repeat itself - it rhymes!"

Order your 2011 American Silver Eagle coins today! Just go to: ==> http://BullionBargains.us

By Christina Goldman