Is turmoil in Persian Gulf aimed at containing Beijing’s access to energy resources of the region?

Though, I often reject conspiracy theories, but at time I also tend to pay attention to these, which provide me an opportunity to get a better perspective. One such theory demands little probe, is United States creating turmoil in Persian Gulf region to contain China’s access to energy resources of the region?

Since commencement of economic growth in 1993, China has become heavily dependent on imported oil from other countries. At present, it is the second largest energy consuming and the third largest oil importing country in the world. Despite Beijing’s efforts to ensure its energy security by diversifying its energy sources during the past years, the country is still heavily dependent on energy import from the Arabian Peninsula.

China has left its rivals far behind and became the second biggest economy of the world after the US. It seems that due Beijing is likely to leave behind the US in near future and become the world’s biggest economy. The White House has kept an eye on China’s development, its plans and initiatives and never been negligent in monitoring its ambitions and achievements.

Ever since Donald Trump, became President, conflicts between China and the sole surviving super power have widened from economic and trade to political and security conflicts. Now, the increase in Chinese power and global influence has become a major challenge for the White House. As a first step, Trump initiated trade and economic war against Beijing and in the next stage Trump wants to restrict China’s influence globally, particularly among the US allies.

To contain China, the US has resorted to many strategies and tactics such as destabilizing west borders of China with Afghanistan and Pakistan and trying to spread to central Asia aiming at thwarting Chinese ‘One road-One belt’ initiative that many experts believe will enable China to determine the word trade orders in the future.   

China imports crude oil from the following countries:

• Russia: US$37.9 billion (15.8%)
• Saudi Arabia: $29.7 billion (12.4%)
• Angola: $24.9 billion (10.4%)
• Iraq: $22.4 billion (9.4%)
• Oman: $17.3 billion (7.2%)
• Brazil: $16.2 billion (6.8%)
• Iran: $15 billion (6.3%)
• Kuwait: $11.9 billion (5%)
• Venezuela: $7 billion (2.9%)
• United States: $6.8 billion (2.8%)
• United Arab Emirates: $6.7 billion (2.8%)
• Congo: $6.4 billion (2.7%)
• Colombia: $5 billion (2.1%)
• Malaysia: $4.8 billion (2%)
• Libya: $4.7 billion (2%)

Crude oil is the driving engine of Chinese economy and any threats to energy security will inflict a heavy blow to the country’s economic growth. The statistics show that some 43% of the crude oil imported by China passes through the Persian Gulf. Another 4.6% goes from Libya and Venezuela, the US destructive polices have already created a chaotic situation in these two countries.

Many experts believe that the US withdrawal from Iran’s nuclear deal not only aims at pressurizing Iran, but also to pressurize China to compromise in the trade war that Washington has waged against it. Any conflict or tension in the Persian Gulf region means a great blow to China’s economy. Therefore, many suspicious incidents and tensions created by Washington and its proxies in Persian Gulf can be termed as the White House measures to contain China in order to guarantee the US hegemony.

With its provocative actions and sanctions, Washington not only aims to buttress its support for Israel and its Arab allies by punishing Iran, but also intends to deny Chinese access to Iranian oil.  The fear of and rivalry with China is today one of the primary drivers of American foreign policy.  Interruption of the oil flow in the Gulf is one way to directly hurt Chinese interests.  The Trump administration is, therefore, playing with fire in Iran and a potential conflagration with China.

The rising tensions between the US and Iran are mainly caused by Tehran’s policy and Washington’s intolerance. Iran's resistance to the US pressure is in fact shaping an equation in which the Islamic Republic indirectly contributes to the interests of China and even Europe. In a long-term strategic perspective, the dangers of insecurity in the Persian Gulf region, and the proximity of Europe and China to the region, heighten the need for greater coordination between Iran, China and Europe in countering the US hegemony.

There also seems a close relation between US created tensions in the Persian Gulf and containment of China, as Washington wants to exclude China from the region. Therefore, containing Iran is of crucial importance as China buys its oil. Therefore, China is likely to revisit its policy of balancing Iran and the US. Beijing may respect the latest sanctions on Iran, but resist any possibility of the US military attack on Iran. In my opinion the issue is not about Iran, but about China. I am convinced that the efforts are aimed at exploiting serendipitous opportunity.

Iran shoots down intruding US spy drone

In a statement issued early Thursday, the IRGC said the US-made Global Hawk surveillance drone was brought down by its Air Force near Kouh-e Mobarak region, after the aircraft violated Iranian airspace. The downing came after repeated violations of Iran’s airspace by US reconnaissance drones in the Persian Gulf region.

Reacting to the news, the US military claimed it did not fly over Iranian airspace on Wednesday. “No US aircraft were operating in Iranian airspace today,” said Navy Captain Bill Urban, a spokesman for the American military’s Central Command.

However, according to Associated Press an American military drone had been shot down in “international airspace” over the Strait of Hormuz by an Iranian surface-to-air missile. The drone was a US Navy MQ-4C Triton, which builds on elements of the RQ-4 Global Hawk with minor changes.

The RQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned aircraft system (UAS) can fly at high altitudes for more than 30 hours, gathering near-real-time, high-resolution imagery of large areas of land in all types of weather. The Northrop Grumman MQ-4C Triton is a maritime derivative of the RQ-4B Global Hawk and the airborne element of the US Navy’s Broad Area Maritime Surveillance Unmanned Aircraft System.

 Interestingly no MQ-4C is supposed to be in the Middle East. The deployment must have been secret. Update: This specific drone seems to have arrived in Qatar only a few days ago.

The incident is another piece of evidence that Trump's "maximum pressure" campaign against Iran now works against him.

In December last year, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta had told Fox News that the US will "absolutely" continue the drone campaign over Iran, looking for evidence of any nuclear weapons work. But the stakes are higher for such surveillance, now that Iran can apparently disrupt the work of US drones.

During an appearance with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Trump said, “Probably Iran made a mistake – I would imagine it was a general or somebody that made a mistake in shooting that drone down.”
According to officials in Jerusalem, Israel is closely monitoring the situation, although the IDF has not moved to a heightened alert status. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the issue briefly in a statement, saying, “In the last 24 hours Iran has intensified its aggression against the US and against all of us. And I repeat my call for all peace-loving countries to stand by the US in its effort to stop Iranian aggression. Israel stands by the US on this.”

Netanyahu’s comments were similar to what he said lately, following last week’s attacks on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman. He had urged all peace-seeking nations to support the US and Trump in their efforts to ensure freedom of navigation in international waterways.

US State Department announcement of ending war in Afghanistan is yet another big lie

Lately, the US Department announced, “The top US priority in South Asia is to end the war in Afghanistan through a sustainable political settlement.” It informed the Congress that any political settlement must also ensure Afghanistan’ never again serves as a haven for terrorist attacks against the United States or its interests.”

Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, a US diplomat of Afghan origin who is negotiating a political settlement with the Taliban, said that the US-backed peace plan could be “A springboard for regional connectivity, development, and economic integration.”

Earlier, the State Department and the Afghan government agreed to focus US assistance on America’s highest priority, “Furthering the peace process, ensuring Afghanistan does not serve as a terrorist safe haven, promoting Afghan self-reliance, and maintaining Afghan stability.”

I have no option but to term the statement of US Department a lie on the following grounds:

1) Afghans Taliban had neither played any role, whatsoever in 9/11, nor do they have the capacity to hit US interests or its allies. Taliban were used by the US to repel USSR attack on Afghanistan, which they did successfully.

2)  The US had announced to pull its troops from Afghanistan in 2014, which were not. It seems US is adamant at keeping its troops in Afghanistan because of ‘other reasons’. Over the years the US had failed in bringing peace and ushering development in the country, as it was never an objective.

3) One of the conspiracy theories is that the division of Taliban into good and bad is based on the support for or resistance against cultivation of poppy in Afghanistan. It seems that those resisting cultivation of poppy in Afghanistan and demanding withdrawal of US troops have been termed ‘Bad Taliban’.

4) The persistent stay of US troops in not for the development of Afghanistan but for the protection of drug trade, which allows CIA to make billions of dollars every year and use it on proxy wars in South Asia, Middle East and North Africa.

5)  After the recent hype in US-Iran confrontation, it seems more probable that US will increase its troops in Afghanistan and use them in the assault against Iran.

Therefore, all the favors the US intent to offers to Afghans are nothing but cover up, these include: 

1)       US working with the Afghan government to define the parameters of a sustainable, long-term partnership, a shift from military to civilian assistance.

2)       State Department’s 2020 budget seeking resources to help Afghanistan to maintain and expand the gains it has made over the last 18 years.

3)       Earlier, the World Bank held a donors meeting in Kabul on to arrive at and cement a peace agreement that allowed increasing economic well being and prosperity.

4)       Promoting self-reliance by developing internal resources, attracting investments, and reducing security costs.

Seven Reasons one should not trust US narrative on Gulf of Oman Incident

One should have not been surprised the way US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo blamed Iran for the damage done to two vessels in the Gulf of Oman recently, without offering any credible evidence.

Pompeo told the press in a statement, “This assessment is based on intelligence, the weapons used, the level of expertise needed to execute the operation, recent similar Iranian attacks on shipping, and the fact that no proxy group operating in the area has the resources and proficiency to act with such a high-degree of sophistication,”.

Pompeo concluded, “The US will defend its forces, interests, and stand with our partners and allies to safeguard global commerce and regional stability. And we call upon all nations threatened by Iran’s provocative acts to join us in that endeavor.” Following are the seven reasons to reject whatever Secretary has said:

1) Pompeo is a known liar, especially when it comes to Iran.

The entire world knows that Pompeo has a well-established history of circulating blatant lies about Iran. He recently told an audience at Texas A&M University that when he was leading the CIA, “We lied, we cheated and we stole. We had entire training courses.”

2) The US administration is known to use lies and false flags to start wars.

The US centralized power alliance has an extensive and well-documented history of advancing preexisting military agendas using lies, false flags and psyops to make targeted governments appear to be the aggressors. This is such a well-established pattern that “Gulf of Tonkin” briefly trended on Twitter after the Gulf of Oman incident. Any number of government agencies could have been involved from any number of the nations in this alliance, including the US, the UK, Saudi Arabia, UAE or Israel.

3) John Bolton has openly endorsed lying to advance military agendas.

The Trump administration had already begun rapidly escalating against Iran in ways that happen to align perfectly with the longtime agendas of Trump’s psychopathic Iran hawk National security adviser. At that time people were so aware of the possibility that Bolton might involve himself in staging yet another Middle Eastern war based on lies.

4) Using false flags to start a war with Iran is already an established idea in the DC swamp.

Back in 2012 at a forum for the Washington Institute of Near East Policy think tank, the group’s Director of Research Patrick Clawson openly talked about the possibility of using a false flag to provoke a war with Iran, citing the various ways the US has done exactly that with its previous wars.

5) The US State Department has already been running psyops to manipulate the public Iran narrative.

Lately, State Department officials admitted to congressional staff at a closed-door meeting that a US$1.5 million troll farm had gone “beyond the scope of its mandate” by aggressively smearing American critics of the Trump administration’s Iran policy as propagandists for the Iranian government, according to a new report from The Independent. That “mandate” had reportedly consisted of “countering propaganda from Iran,” also known as conducting anti-Iran propaganda.

6) The Gulf of Oman narrative makes no sense.

One of the ships damaged in the attacks was Japanese-owned, and the other was bound for Japan. This happened just as Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was in Tehran attempting to negotiate de-escalation between the US and Iran with Trump’s blessing, and just after Iran had released a prisoner accused of conducting espionage for the US in what many took to be a gesture of good faith.

Iran has been conducting itself with remarkable restraint in the face of relentless sanctions and provocations from the US and its allies. It wouldn’t make much sense for it to suddenly abandon that restraint with attacks on sea vessels, then rescue their crew, then deny perpetrating the attacks, during a time of diplomatic exchanges and while trying to preserve the nuclear deal with Europe. If Tehran did perpetrate the attacks in order to send a strong message to the Americans, it would have been a very mixed message sent in a very weird way with very odd timing.

7) Even if Iran did perpetrate the attack, Pompeo would still be lying.

Pompeo’s statement uses the words “unprovoked” twice and “Iran’s provocative acts” once, explicitly claiming that the US empire was just minding its own business leaving Iran alone when it was attacked out of the blue by a violent aggressor. Sometimes the things put out by the US. State Department feel like they’re conducting experiments on us, just to test the limits of our stupidity

The US has been provoking Iran with extremely aggressive and steadily tightening sanctions, which means that even if Tehran is behind the attacks, it would not be the aggressor and the attacks would most certainly not have been “unprovoked.” Economic sanctions are an act of war; if China were to do to America’s economy what America is doing to Iran’s, the US would be in a hot war with China immediately. It could technically be possible that Iran is pushing back on US aggressions and provocations, albeit in a strange and neo-conservatively convenient fashion.

Either way, we have seen no evidence supporting Pompeo’s claims, so anyone hastening to blame Iran for the Gulf of Oman incident is either a war whore or a slobbering moron, or both. Knowing what we know about the US-centralized empire and its pre-existing regime change agenda against Iran, there is no reason to believe Pompeo and many reasons not to.

Strait of Hormuz: Most important oil artery of the world

Three weeks ago I wrote an article ‘Brewing turmoil in Pakistan’s backyard’ and the concluding remarks were, “The fact remains that none of the country (United States or Iran) wants to get the blame for initiating a conflict, but it doesn’t mean that the threat of eminent war is not there. There is a fear that miscalculation or misunderstanding can trigger confrontation and an outbreak of war. As the US expands its military presence in the region, the risk of beginning an accidental war rises further.”

The apprehension came true last Thursday when two oil tankers were attacked and left adrift in the Gulf of Oman. Washington was prompt in accusing Tehran of being behind a similar incident on 12^th May when four tankers were attacked in the same area, a vital oil shipping route. Russia was quick to urge caution, saying no one should rush to conclusions about Thursday’s incident or use it to put pressure on Tehran, which has denied the US accusations. There were no immediate statements apportioning blame after Thursday’s incidents, nor any claims of responsibility.

WHERE IS STRAIT OF HORMUZ LOCATED?

The strait lies between Oman and Iran, It links the Gulf north of it with the Gulf of Oman to the south and the Arabian Sea beyond. It is 21 miles (33 km) wide at its narrowest point, with the shipping lane just two miles (three km) wide in either direction. The UAE and Saudi Arabia have sought to find other routes to bypass the Strait, including building more oil pipelines.

WHY DOES IT MATTER?

Almost a fifth of the world’s oil passes through the Strait - some 17.4 million barrels per day (bpd) versus consumption of about 100 million bpd in 2018. OPEC members Saudi Arabia, Iran, the UAE, Kuwait and Iraq export most of their crude via the Strait. Qatar, the world’s biggest liquefied natural gas (LNG) exporter, sends almost all of its LNG through the Strait.

CURRENT POLITICAL TENSION

The US has imposed sanctions on Iran aimed at halting its oil exports. Iran has threatened to disrupt oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz if the US tries to strangle its economy. The US Fifth Fleet, based in Bahrain, is tasked with protecting commercial shipping in the area.

MAJOR PAST INCIDENTS

During the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war, the two sides sought to disrupt each other’s oil exports in what was known as the Tanker War.

In July 1988, the US warship Vincennes shot down an Iranian airliner, killing all 290 aboard, in what Washington said was an accident and Tehran said was a deliberate attack.

In early 2008, the US said Iranian vessels threatened three of its Navy ships in the Strait.

In July 2010, Japanese oil tanker M Star was attacked in the Strait by a militant group called Abdullah Azzam Brigades linked to al Qaeda claiming responsibility.

In January 2012, Iran threatened to block the Strait in retaliation for US and European sanctions that targeted its oil revenue in an attempt to stop Tehran’s nuclear program.

In May 2015, Iranian ships seized a container ship in the Strait and fired shots at a Singapore-flagged tanker which it said damaged an Iranian oil platform.

In July 2018, President Hassan Rouhani hinted Iran could disrupt oil trade through the Strait in response to US calls to reduce Iran’s oil exports to zero.

In May 2019, four vessels - including two Saudi oil tankers - were attacked off the UAE coast near Fujairah, one of the world’s largest bunkering hubs, just outside the Strait of Hormuz.

Europe might give up on saving JCPOA

Iran’s former ambassador to Norway has warned that Europe might give up on saving the 2015 nuclear pact and the financial mechanism of Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges (INSTEX), which was established to do business with Iran.

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas was in Tehran for talks on ways to keep the nuclear deal, officially called the JCPOA in English or Barjam in Persian, alive. 

“It is possible that Europe would no more attach any significance to [saving] Barjam,” Mehr on Monday quoted Abdolreza Faraji-Rad as saying.

Faraji-Rad expressed doubt about the future of Iran-Europe relations, especially due to the growth of far-right groups in European countries manifested in the latest European Parliament elections.

He further said the person who will succeed European Union Foreign Policy Chief Federica Mogherini might not share her insistence on cooperating with Iran and salvaging the JCPOA.

Also the person who will succeed British Prime Minister Theresa May can be more of a hardliner compared to May, which could create a gap within Europe, Faraji-Rad remarked.

“This could mean that Europe might no longer place any importance to Barjam,” he said, underlining that such facts must be taken into careful consideration.

The JCPOA was signed between Iran and six international mediators (the United Kingdom, Germany, China, Russia, the United States, and France) in July 2015. Under the deal, Iran undertook to curb its nuclear activities in exchange for termination of the sanctions imposed previously by the United Nations Security Council, the European Union and the United States over its nuclear program.

On May 8, 2018, the United States unilaterally withdrew from the deal despite worldwide objections and followed the move with a “maximum pressure” policy against the Islamic Republic.

Likely facets of forthcoming Bangladesh Budget

Finance Minister of Bangladesh, Mustafa Kamal is scheduled to announce the budget for financial year 2019-20 in parliament on 13^th June 2019, a few days after the announcement of Pakistan's Budget for the next financial. I have just picked up news from a leading Bangladesh newspaper, which may give Pakistanis a chance to see what is being done there. 

Aiming to invigorate the promising export sector, an ailing stock market and cooling property markets, the upcoming budget is likely to announce a number of incentives to rekindle the business and investment environment, said sources involved in preparing this year’s national budget for parliamentary approval.

The incentives include enhanced subsidies, tax cuts and fiscal stimulus to take the economy to an 8.5% growth rate in financial year 2019-20.

Realtors and land developers have long been demanding a reduction of registration fees, including the Value Added Tax (VAT) and other taxes on the sale and transfer of property, like apartments or land, so as to stimulate the slowing real estate market. According to sources, the upcoming budget is likely to almost halve the current aforementioned costs.

Currently, total fees for flat registration are 14% to 16%, and 17% for land registration. The fee is imposed on the deed value of property.

A budgetary measure is also likely to be announced for the first time for the resale of existing (not new) flats.

National Board of Revenue (NBR) officials think a secondary property market boom would stimulate the economy further if registration fees for used flats were rationalized.

Presently, registration costs remain the same for both new and used flats.

The proposed budget is set to raise the tax-free income ceiling for cash dividend income from stocks to Tk50,000, up from the current ceiling of Tk25,000.

“The Finance Minister is serious about reviving the morale of stock investors in the upcoming budget. A number of budget incentives are in the offing to streamline capital markets,” said a top NBR official. “The market (capital market) will act positively after the announcement in the proposed budget,” he hoped.

Officials concerned at the finance division under the Ministry of Finance said the subsidy outlay in the budget would be around Tk45,000 crore for the next fiscal year, up from Tk38,500 crore earmarked for the current fiscal year.

The highest subsidy amount of Tk9,000 crore is likely to be allocated for the agricultural sector, with some allocation expected to be earmarked for farm mechanization.

The budget is also likely to announce a one percent export subsidy for the apparel sector, in addition to the 4% now applicable for receipts coming from non-traditional markets. The amount to be earmarked is likely to be Tk9,000 crore, which is now around Tk3,500 crore. Presently, 26 export-bound items, including apparel goods, get export subsidies of anywhere between 2% and 20%.

In the current budget, export sector subsidies amount to Tk5,000 crore. Of the total, Tk500 crore is allocated for jute and jute goods.

The power sector subsidy is likely to be earmarked at Tk10,000 crore, and the energy (including LNG) sector is likely to get Tk9,000 crore.

The proposed budget is reportedly set to announce an incentive for foreign exchange remitters, as the government is desperate for more remittances to handle the foreign exchange demand to manage rising import payments.

A subsidy of 2-3% is likely to be offered in the budget for remitters. Under the planned scheme, recipients of remittance will get 2-3% extra local currency on the remitted amount. For this purpose, an amount of Tk3,000 crore will be allocated in the budget.

Why Trump wants talks with Iran without any preconditions?

Decades ago I had heard, “Thugs have a common interest ‘make money’. They cooperate, facilitate and protect each other, though they may appear to the world, the deadliest enemies”. This was confirmed after the US President; Donald Trump announced, “We are ready to talk to Iran without any preconditions”.

I was curious about this change of heart and probed a little deeper. I instantly found a reason, “trillions of US dollars invested in financial derivatives”. The Bank for International Settlements said last year that the “notional amount outstanding for derivatives contracts” was US$542 trillion, although the gross market value was put at just US$12.7 trillion. Others suggested it was US$1.2 quadrillion or more. A person with ordinary wit may ask, what derivatives have got to do with US-Iran animosity?

The reply is simple, bulk of the derivatives are based on energy products, mainly crude oil. Therefore, it all has to do with the Strait of Hormuz. Blocking the Strait could cut off oil and gas from Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and Iran – 20% of the world’s oil. There has been some debate on whether this could occur – whether the US Fifth Fleet, which is stationed nearby, could stop Tehran doing this and if Iran, which has anti-ship missiles on its territory along the northern border of the Persian Gulf, would go that far.

According to those privy to information, a series of studies hit President Trump’s desk and caused panic in Washington. These showed that in the case of the Strait of Hormuz being shut down, whatever the reason, Iran has the power to hammer the world financial system, by causing global trade in derivatives to be blown apart. The information was duly circulated to France, Britain and Germany, the EU-3 members of the Iran nuclear deal (or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), also caused a panic.

Oil derivative specialists know well that if the flow of energy in the Gulf is blocked it could lead to the price of oil reaching US$200 a barrel, or much higher over an extended period. Crashing the derivatives market would create an unprecedented global depression. Trump’s former Goldman Sachs Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin knows it better than any other person.

And Trump himself seems to have given the game away. He’s now on the record essentially saying that Iran has no strategic value to the US. He really wants a face-saving way to get out of the problem his advisers Bolton and Pompeo got him into. Washington now needs a face-saving, Iran is not asking for meetings, but it is the sole surviving super power, United States.

They also link it to non-scheduled stop of US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in Switzerland, just because he’s a “big cheese and chocolate fan”, in his own words. Yet any well-informed also say, “He badly needed to ease the fears of the trans-Atlantic elites, apart from his behind-closed-doors meetings with the Swiss, who are representing Iran in communications with Washington. After weeks of ominous threats to Iran, the US said “no preconditions” would be set on talks with Tehran, and this was issued from Swiss soil.

Buying oil from other sources can cause a big dent to Indian economy

In India, top ministers of Narendra Modi government held talks on the issue of investment in petroleum and gas sector a month after the US waiver for India to import oil from Iran came to an end. The meeting chaired by Home Minister Amit Shah was attended by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Dharmendra Pradhan and Railways and Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal.

The meeting gained significance as US President, Trump’s administration told India, China, Turkey and a few other oil customers of Iran that no waiver on sanctions would be granted to them after 1^st May 2019, ending six months of exception to the sanctions.

The US had granted exemptions to India, China, Japan, South Korea and Turkey “to ensure a well-supplied oil market” in November last year for six months after it re-imposed sanctions on the Persian nation in view of its controversial nuclear program.

India is said to be in touch with the US to seek further extension of the waiver on oil imports from Iran, pointed out that it has been gradually reducing its energy purchases from the Islamic country.

Two weeks after the US decision came into force, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif travelled to India and met the then External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj. After her meeting with Zarif, she had said a decision on India’s oil imports will be taken after the elections keeping in mind India’s commercial considerations, energy security and economic interests.

Following the withdrawal of the US waiver, India has stopped contracting oil shipments from Iran. With 80 per cent of India’s requirements being met through imports, higher-priced oil from non-Iranian sources can make a big dent in the country’s current account deficit and foreign exchange reserves.

Oil imports from Iran in the past fiscal year ended March 2019 amounted to about US$9 billion. Official sources have said that getting oil from alternative sources would have financial implications and lead to further pressure when crude prices touch US$75-80 per barrel in the near-term, putting pressure on India’s import bill.

Iran used to offer India a longer credit period of 60 days compared to other crude suppliers, while the cargo insurance was free.

Imports from Iraq, UAE and Saudi Arabia will now be on the higher side, without some of the benefits that Iran was giving, India has been Iran’s second largest customer of oil, after China.

Chinese President says US pressure on Iran worrying

A rise in tensions in the Middle East owing to the US pressure on Iran is worrying and all parties need to exercise restraint, Chinese President Xi Jinping told Russian media ahead of a visit to the country.

Tension between Iran and the US has escalated over the past months, after the United States pulled out of a deal between Iran and global powers to curb Tehran’s nuclear program in return for lifting sanctions.

Washington re-imposed sanctions last year and tightened them sharply at the start of last month, ordering all countries to halt imports of Iranian oil. It has also hinted at military confrontation, sending extra forces to the region to counter what it describes as Iranian threats.

Chinese President told TASS news agency and Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper that because of the “extreme pressure” Washington has put on Tehran and the unilateral sanctions, tensions have continued to rise in the Middle East.

He reiterated, “The development of the situation is worrying.”

The Iran nuclear deal should be fully implemented and respected, as it is of crucial importance for peace and stability in the Middle East and non-proliferation, Xi added.

 “China and Russia’s views and positions on the Iran nuclear issue are highly aligned, and both hope that all relevant parties remain rational and exercise restraint, step up dialogue and consultations and lower the temperature on the present tense situation,” he said.

China has been angered by U.S. threats against countries and companies that violate U.S. sanctions by importing Iranian oil. China and Iran have close energy ties.

Xi did not directly address the oil sanctions issue, but appeared to allude to them by saying: “China will continue to firmly safeguard its own legitimate and lawful rights and interests”.

Iranians told not to take Trump’s bait and stay calm

A number of former Obama administration officials have quietly urged Iranian government officials to keep their heads cool in the face of the Trump administration’s maximum pressure policy against Tehran.

US officials have reached out to their contacts in the Iranian government, including Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif to tell them, “Don’t take Trump’s bait and stay calm”.

Conversations between former Obama officials and Iranian government officials have been ongoing since November 2016. But the recent round of conversations, which took place over the phone and in person over the last two months, came as lines of communication between the US and Iran, through intermediaries in Europe and elsewhere.

Tensions between Iran and the U.S. have grown in recent weeks, especially after the latter deployed an aircraft carrier strike group, B-52 bombers, and 1,500 more American troops in the region, citing unidentified Iranian “threats”. Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said, “We are aware that evident elements are trying to put America into a war with Iran for their own goals.” He said US National Security Adviser John Bolton and “other warmongers” are plotting against Iran.

“War would be a disaster for everybody in the region. We hope that wisdom will prevail in Washington, that they do not make this biggest mistake in the region ever. But we are fully prepared for that scenario,” Araqchi said.

United States to end preferential trade treatment for India on 5th June 2019

President Donald Trump announced on Friday that the United States would end its preferential trade treatment for India on 5^th June 2019. Earlier, in March this year he had announced the intention to remove India from the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) program.

Trump declared, “I have determined that India has not assured the United States that India will provide equitable and reasonable access to its markets.”

India is the biggest beneficiary of the GSP, which allows preferential duty-free imports of up to US$5.6 billion from the South Asian nation.

Indian officials have raised the prospect of higher import duties on more than 20 products of US origin, if President Trump drops India from the program.

The biggest point of satisfaction for India is that 24 members of the US Congress have sent a letter to the administration on 3^rd May 3 urging it not to terminate India’s access to the GSP.

India seeking resumption of oil import from Iran

India is planning to resume oil imports from Iran and the new government is going to hold talks with Iran in order to discuss ways of getting around US sanctions like paying in national currencies.

“The Modi government will immediately initiate talks with Iran to discuss steps that will allow it to resume oil imports,” India digital news portal ‘The Print’ has reported quoting government sources.

According to the sources, Iran’s Pasargad Bank and India’s Reserve Bank could be used to arrange the payments.

“Payments can be deposited in the Iranian bank and then Iranian authorities can decide how to utilize the money,” a senior government official who didn’t wish to be identified said.

“These talks have been held earlier too but got stalled due to elections. Talks will be revived soon and this will be one of the first focus areas of the government.” the official said.

India stopped oil imports from Iran after the six-month sanction waiver from the US ended on 2nd May 2019.

The US administration re-imposed sanctions on Iran after withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal, which was signed in 2015, along with European countries. .

The US had instructed India and other countries to cut oil imports from Iran to "zero" by 4^th November 2018 or face sanctions. However, Washington granted a six-month waiver to India and seven other countries to buy oil from Iran. The waivers expired in May this year.

India, which is the second biggest purchaser of Iranian oil after China, has since then restricted its monthly purchase to 15 million tons in a year or 300,000 barrels per day, down from 22.6 million tons or 452,000 barrels per day, bought in 2017-18 financial year.

India is world's third biggest oil consumer that meets more than 80% of its oil needs through imports.

Bolton adamant at instigating war between United States and Iran

While there is growing consensus that United States should abstain from instigating a war with Iran, warmongers like US National Security Adviser, John Bolton, spare no chance accusing Iran and creating war hype. Lately he said that naval mines “almost certainly from Iran” were used to attack oil tankers off the United Arab Emirates this month, and warned Tehran against conducting new operations.

According to a Reuters report, Bolton said the “prudent and responsible” approach taken by the United States, which has beefed up its military presence in the region, had made it clear to Iran and its proxies that such actions risked a “very strong” U.S. response.

He was speaking to reporters in Abu Dhabi ahead of emergency summits of Arab leaders in Saudi Arabia on Thursday called to discuss the implications of the tanker attacks, and drone strikes two days later, on oil pumping stations in the kingdom.

Tehran has denied involvement in either of the attacks and Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi dismissed Bolton’s latest remarks as a “ludicrous claim”.

The UAE has not yet blamed anyone for the sabotage of four vessels, including two Saudi tankers, near Fujairah emirate, a major bunkering hub just outside the Strait of Hormuz.

Riyadh has accused Tehran of ordering the drone strikes, which were claimed by the Iran-aligned Houthis who have been battling a Saudi-led coalition in Yemen in a four-year conflict seen as a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

 Bolton said without providing evidence, “There is no doubt in anybody’s mind in Washington who is responsible for this and I think it’s important that the leadership in Iran know that we know.”

He declined to comment on the specifics of the investigation into the attacks in which the United States, France, Norway and Saudi Arabia are taking part, but said those other countries and ship owners involved could do so.

Bolton said the tanker attacks were connected to the strike on oil pumping stations on the kingdom’s East-West pipeline and a rocket attack on the Green Zone in the Iraqi capital Baghdad.

He said there had been a fourth unsuccessful attack on Saudi Arabia’s Yanbu port a few days before the tanker operation but that it was unclear if it was linked to the others. Saudi officials were not immediately available to comment.

Tensions between the United States and Iran have escalated since President Donald Trump withdrew from a 2015 multinational nuclear pact with Iran and re-imposed sanctions, notably targeting Tehran’s key oil exports. Iran says it will not be cowed by what it has called psychological warfare.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani signaled on Wednesday that talks with the United States might be possible if Washington lifted sanctions and met its commitments under the nuclear deal, state television said.

Saudi Arabia and the UAE have backed sanctions against Iran, a fellow OPEC producer but a regional foe, and have lobbied Washington to contain Tehran.

Bolton said the United States was discussing next steps with Gulf allies and the goal was “to make it clear to Iran and its surrogates that these kinds of activities risk a very strong response from the Americans.”

“We are very concerned about the Quds Force and Qassem Soleimani using Shi’ite militia groups and others in Iraq as indirect ways to attack our embassy in Baghdad, consulate in Erbil, our various bases around the country,” he said.

The U.S. Combined Air Operations Center is based in Qatar and its navy Fifth Fleet in Bahrain. The U.S. air force also uses al-Dhafra airbase in Abu Dhabi.

Washington said it was sending 1,500 troops to the region after speeding up deployment of an aircraft carrier strike group and sending bombers and additional Patriot missiles.

Bolton also voiced concern about perceived threats from the overseas arm of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards.

Can Pakistan play a role in defusing Saudi-Iran conflict?

The Arab League and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) emergency summits called by Saudi Arabia are to be held on Thursday, a day before the long-scheduled OIC summit. It is not yet clear how many countries will take part in the emergency gatherings, but Qatar which has been boycotted by a Saudi-led alliance has been invited to attend the GCC meeting.

Riyadh cut diplomatic ties with Tehran in 2016 after protesters stormed Saudi diplomatic missions in Iran following its execution of a prominent Shia cleric. The OIC summit will address "current issues in the Muslim world" and "recent developments in a number of OIC member states", the official agenda states. Saudi Arabia and its allies have repeatedly accused Iran of interfering in the affairs of other countries, including Bahrain, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, by supporting and arming fighters.

Qatar has grown closer to Iran, while Kuwait has expressed concern over Iranian threats to close the Strait of Hormuz. Oman, which has good ties with both Iran and the United States, has said it and other parties "seek to calm tensions" between the two countries. Ahead of the summits, Iran's top diplomats have been touring the region, including Iraq, Kuwait, Oman and Qatar. Iran, which shares a border with Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Turkey, also has good relations with Ankara and Islamabad.

I am obliged to refer to an Editorial  published in one of Pakistan’s leading English newspaper and Dawn on 26th May 2019 that needs to be read by all Pakistanis very carefully and dispassionately. I have often asserted that Pakistan’s neighbors are turning hostile because the successive governments have been following the US foreign policy agenda, without taking into account the deprecations.

Dawn has rightly highlighted the need for serious deliberations because of the threat of a catastrophic conflict between the US and Iran looming larger over the region. It is encouraging that the incumbent government appears to be making a considerable diplomatic effort to defuse simmering tensions between the two countries.

On last Friday, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif concluded his two-day trip to Pakistan with an encouraging message from Pakistan’s civil and military leadership — that maximum restraint must be exercised in the prevailing situation as any conflict in an already volatile region could threat global peace and stability. Zarif expressed his satisfaction with Pakistan’s view that US pressure on Iran was unjustified. Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, Shah Mehmood Qureshi also emphasized the need for a resolution of the crisis through dialogue.

It is evident from Zarif’s comments as well as Prime Minister Imran Khan’s earlier visit to Tehran that the incumbent government is making an effort to avoid taking sides. It is by no means an easy situation, given Pakistan’s relationship with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), both have been generous in extending monetary support to Pakistan. The situation becomes even more difficult to handle, when there is internal and external pressure.

In 2015, parliament’s decision against sending troops to support the Saudi-led intervention in Yemen was a brave step but the current scenario could test the limits of that position. Pakistan’s relationship with Saudi Arabia runs deep. The countries also enjoy strategic and military cooperation. If the warm reception and vows of solidarity during the Saudi crown prince’s February visit are anything to go by, it will not be easy to stay neutral in the face of a request for support from Riyadh.

In this situation, the guiding principle should be to resist any external pressure in the best interest of the country as well as the region. Pakistan has successfully avoided supporting any side during Iran-Iraq war and the ongoing Yemen conflict. Therefore, Pakistan must remain steadfast in protecting its own interests, while making the best efforts to resolve the conflict between the two Muslim countries.

Islamabad should use whatever little influence it has on Iran to demonstrate that it (Iran) is not directly involved in the Yemeni conflict. Or, if the OIC countries push for a strong anti-Iran stance, Pakistan must articulate its position in a way that is not offensive, while pointing out that the ultimate beneficiary of a war would be Israel. A diplomatic approach would involve a proactive move to counsel its warring allies and make note of positive statements coming from Washington or Tehran.

With strained relationships with two of its immediate but hostile neighbors, India and Afghanistan, Pakistan cannot afford another war in the region. If US-Iran conflict breaks into war, it could put Pakistan’s security into serious jeopardy.

Sheldon Adelson: Jackpot for Israel

A bet on Donald Trump for president may have seemed risky two years ago, but for billionaire casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, the payout has been spectacular. Adelson (85-year old) and his wife Miriam gave around US$82 million to Republicans and candidate Trump in 2016, and within two years his two major asks were met: moving the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, and withdrawing of US from Iran nuclear deal.

This was accomplished in consultation with Adelson comprador John Bolton, who in December 2016 promised members of the American Friends of Beit El that Trump would not only move the embassy by declaring Jerusalem the true capital of Israel, but he would not oppose any Jewish settlement expansion in the West Bank territories. Adelson is also credited with opening the door for Bolton’s appointment to national security adviser in March

Adelson has enjoyed a direct line to Trump, speaking with him in person and on the phone at least once a month. Most recently, he was able to convince the president to cut off US aid to Palestinian refugees living in crowded, dirty, and unrelentingly hopeless refugee camps outside Israel. Around the same time, Trump withdrew US$25 million in assistance from impoverished East Jerusalem hospitals that also serve Palestinian cancer patients allowed in from the West Bank and Gaza for treatment.

Of course, Adelson’s pro Zionist agenda, which includes expanding the settlements as far as they can go most recently, is pouring his money into a huge new Israeli medical university on one of those settlements, in sync with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud party. It’s been a great year for all involved.

For the first time in recent presidential history, there is no pretense of peace with the Arabs. Trump’s endorsement of a two-state solution at the recent United Nations General Assembly in September may have appeared hopeful, but it was as lame as it was patronizing. “I like two state solutions,” Trump offered spontaneously, posing for smiling photographs with Netanyahu. “That’s what I think works best. That’s my feeling.”

For someone who supposedly has a “peace plan” but hasn’t announced it after two years in office, his “feelings” are as worthless as poker chips outside a casino. Maybe that’s why Bibi didn’t offer much of a response. After declaring he would consider Trump’s non-existent plan “with a keen and open mind,” Netanyahu reiterated that any Palestinian state endorsed by Israel will be an unarmed one, not really a state at all.

Not long after Adelson, Netanyahu also encouraged Trump to stop all funding (an estimated US$300 million allocated in 2018) from a UN agency tasked since 1950 with providing aid for Palestinian refugees, Trump abruptly closed the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) offices in Washington, the only diplomatic conduit between the US and the Palestinian National Authority. The reason given was “PLO leadership has condemned a US peace plan they have not yet seen and refused to engage with the US government with respect to peace efforts and otherwise.”

Trump’s point man for the peace plan is none other than his son-in-law Jared Kushner, whose family has generously supported the aforementioned Beit El settlement and is old friends with Netanyahu. Kushner was the primary agitator behind yanking the refugee funding, calling the aid entitlement program and withholding of it a punishment for Palestinian leaders who vilify the administration.

More cynically, reports indicate he is merely helping Israel end right of return for Palestinians and their kin displaced during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. Similarly, the embassy move was designed to take the contested issue of Jerusalem off the table. Meanwhile, Netanyahu’s government just passed a nation-state law that declares Israel a Jewish state, one that affirms Jewish settlements and the right to self-determination for Israeli Jews only, codifying, in essence, that 1.8 million Arabs living there are second-class citizens. This loads the dice before the games even begin.

Only people like Kushner and Adelson, who at a net worth of US$42.5 billion is the 16th richest man on the planet, would see withholding food, education, and healthcare as way of disappearing a problem to gain leverage in future negotiations. Only Trump would consider that the art of the deal.

Western Media is Key to Syria Deception

In the past, I have often termed western media ‘dishonest’. Today, I refer to an elaborate work of Jonathan Cook, lately published by "Information Clearing House" to substantiate my assertion. He has referred to the claim recently made by al-Qaeda-linked fighters that they were targeted with chemical weapons by the Syrian government in Idlib province – their final holdout in Syria.

It is known to all that the US and other western governments enthusiastically picked up such claims, which lack credibility.  This particular news also lacked authenticity because no evidence has yet been produced to confirm the jihadists’ claims. Syrian government is poised to defeat these al-Qaeda groups without resort to chemical weapons – and without provoking the predictable ire (yet again) of the west.

Public has all the reason to doubt the credibility of this statement at a time they have learnt that the last supposed major chemical attack – which took place in April 2018 and was, as ever, blamed by all western sources on Syria’s president, Bashar Assad – was a false-flag operation by those very al-Qaeda groups now claiming the Syrian government has attacked them once again.

Most astounding in this week’s coverage of the claims made by al-Qaeda groups is the fact that the western media continues to refuse to learn any lessons, develop any critical distance from the sources it relies on, even as those sources have repeatedly deceived it.

This was true after the failure to find WMD in Iraq, and it is now even truer after the international community’s monitoring body on chemical weapons, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), was exposed this month as deeply dishonest.

It is bad enough that warmongering governments and their expert institutions deceive and lie. But it is even worse that the corporate media is addicted to such content to promote its importance. The conviction that the western media is dishonest is getting stronger with each passing day.

US Warmongering on Iran Showing Cracks

According to reports, Exxon was forced to withdraw some 80 staff from Iraq’s oil-rich Basra over ostensible Iranian threats to US interests in the fallout from Washington’s attempt to provoke Tehran.

Now the acting US Defense Secretary is saying, vaguely, that the threat of attacks by Iran has been “put on hold” thanks to US counter measures, while Trump has wavered back and forth about his intentions, based on criticism coming from the Democratic camp.

The dishonest western media continue to say that Saudis are lobbying for a war and Yemen’s Houthis are happy to oblige, claiming to have launched an armed drone at the Najran airport in Saudi Arabia. The tinted media also say that it is not the first time Houthis have targeted this airport, which is right on the Saudi-Yemen border and is an easy target.
In the meantime, Iraqi are furious on Exxon’s evacuation of staff, calling it “unacceptable and unwarranted”. Iraqi also claim that the southern part of their country is peaceful and secure and other oil companies (Lukoil, BP, Eni) have made no similar move and also have not expressed any intent.

Reasonably, Iraq is worried about the false message being sent to the investors and the market in general.

Iraq also says that 19th May 2019 rocket attack aiming Green Zone has served to ratchet up tensions further. The attack was being headlined in the media as “near the US Embassy in Baghdad”. This headline is grabbing ploy because the attack occurred a mile away from the embassy, suggesting that the embassy was clearly not the target.

The only significance of the attack was that it was the first in the Green Zone in some 8 months, but there were no casualties, and authorities know little about the nature of the attack, other than that the rocket was fired from an open field and may have been fired from Eastern Baghdad, where there are known Iranian militias.

Overtures and Confrontations between United States and Iran

I am an ardent reader of the proceedings of ‘United States Institute of Peace’, particularly on Iran. Today, I am referring to a few snapshots of its recent release on Iran. 

I want my readers to read the briefs but also keep two points in minds: 1) since Islamic revolution in Iran, US has emerged as its worst enemy and 2) every failed attempt to ‘change the regime in Iran’ adds to US frustration and desperation.

Keeping Iran under ‘stringent economic sanctions’ has not weakened it, on the contrary, Iran has emerged the biggest resistance in the creation of ‘US hegemony in the Arabian Peninsula’.

According to United States Institute of Peace, “Half of American adults expect the US to go to war with Iran “within the next few years.”  In a survey conducted by Reuters of a representative sample of 1,007 adults were asked a series of questions from May 17-20 amid heightened tensions between Washington and Tehran. Some 53 percent of adults considered Iran a “serious” or “imminent” threat. But only 12 percent said US forces should conduct a preemptive attack on Iranian military interests.” 

Since the 1979 revolution, Washington and Tehran have gyrated between hostile actions and diplomatic overtures. Relations have never recovered from the seizure of the US Embassy and 52 diplomats. The US attempted military action to end the drama but eventually turned to diplomacy. Since then, the Islamic Republic has been linked, directly or indirectly, to the deaths of hundreds of Americans, while the US has been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Iranians. Yet both countries have also dabbled in bold outreach, with mixed results.  

Lately, Acting US Defense Secretary, Patrick Shanahan has reiterated that the US does not want to go to war with Iran. On May 21, he told reporters that recent US moves have deterred attacks on US interests in the Middle East. “Our biggest focus at this point is to prevent Iranian miscalculation,” he said.

US lawmakers have been divided over what to do next to deal with the escalating tensions between the US and Iran. The split is largely along partisan lines. Democrats voiced concern that the Trump administration was leading the US into a new Middle East war. Republicans largely denied that the administration sought war with Iran but emphasized that the US would respond forcefully if its forces in the Middle East were attacked.  

A peep into recent history indicates President Trump’s election produced dramatic change in US policy in 2017. The US withdrew from the nuclear deal with Iran and the word’s major powers in May 2018. The Trump administration has been following a “maximum pressure campaign” to press Iran to change its policies and negotiate a more comprehensive deal.

Since taking office, Trump has taken an increasingly aggressive posture toward Iran. The tone was set less than two weeks into Trump’s presidency when then-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn responded to an Iranian missile test. “The Obama Administration failed to respond adequately to Tehran’s malign actions—including weapons transfers, support for terrorism, and other violations of international norms,” he said. “As of today, we are officially putting Iran on notice.” 

The recent attacks on ships near a UAE port provided the US an opportunity to accumulate its troops, naval ships and aircrafts closer to Iran to warn of a preemptive attack. Though, both Washington and Tehran have been saying ‘we do not want a war’, it is feared that any adventurous move by any of the proxies could ignite a spark enough to break a war between two mind sets, Zionist and Islamisit.

Exempting Iranian Chabahar Port from US economic sanctions

It seems certain that the United States will not impose any sanctions on movement of Afghan transit goods through Iranian port Chabahar. This exemption will be aimed at consolidating Afghan-Indian economic relations.

The port has been constructed with the Indian assistance to boost trade between one of the largest regional economies, India, and landlocked and war ridden Afghanistan.

The exemption will be aimed at facilitating Afghanistan in reducing its dependence on Pakistan. If a contrary decision is made, it will increase the transit costs of Indian commodities and put further restrictions on Afghan merchants.

Some analysts believe reveal that imposing sanctions on Iran as the most secured and less expensive access route for Afghanistan implies imposing sanctions on Afghanistan as well.

As far as the India is concerned, the significant point is that the India’s commodities to be transit to Afghanistan are not extensive and voluminous enough to rationalize marine and road transportation expenses and to create a significant growth in India’s balance of trade.

Indian analysts are of the view that bearing in mind the trade volume of Afghanistan, Russia and Central Asian countries which altogether are more than 16 million tons and the insignificant share of Afghanistan, it could be concluded that without making possible the transportation of all India’s merchandise to above mentioned countries through Chabahar Port, the exemption of this port will not make any noticeable change in India’s trade.

Therefore, Chabahar Port’s exemption will only be a competitive advantage for India, if all Indian merchandise toward Afghanistan, Russia and Central Asian countries could be transported through Chabahar Port without any restriction in banking and insurance transactions.

The noteworthy point about Afghanistan is that the exemption of Chabahar Port will only be fruitful, if there is no restriction on entering and leaving Chabahar Port for vessels carrying Afghanistan’s merchandise; as well as commercial transactions of cargo owners, merchants and shipping lines, particularly banking transactions are done without limitation.

Pakistan grants oil exploration license to Kuwaiti firm

The Government of Pakistan (GoP) has granted the license for exploration of oil in the Makhad block to a subsidiary of Kuwait Foreign Petroleum Exploration Company.

According to the details, the GoP has executed an Exploration License (EL) as well as a Petroleum Concession Agreement (PCA) signed by Petroleum Division Secretary Mian Asad Hayauddin and Qazi Mohammad Saleem Siddiqui, Director General, Petroleum Concessions, and CEO of Kuwait Foreign Petroleum Exploration Company (KUFPEC) at a ceremony also attended by Federal Minister for Petroleum, Omar Ayub Khan.

On the occasion, the Petroleum Minister said that "the execution of PCA and EL will attract foreign investment in the petroleum sector and bridge the demand and supply gap in the energy sector."

Khan further said that the efforts will bear fruit in future years in the form of hydrocarbon reserves.

The Makhad block, is situated in Attock, Mianwali and Chakwal in Punjab as well as Kohat in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. It is said to be spread over 1,562.92 square kilometers.

Kufpec will invest at least US$9.8 million in the block. Apart from the minimum firm work commitment, the company is also obligated to spend a minimum of US$30,000 per year in Makhad block on social welfare schemes.

Israel’s role in Iran-United States conflict

The worst happening in the Arabian Peninsula is a war being waged by the Trump administration on Iran.  The financial terrorism and economic sabotage already inflicted on Iran by the US can also be termed acts of war. Truly, it does not get any more serious than this colossal foreign policy fiasco. Once again, Israel has successfully hijacked the US Military, State Department and Intelligence Community to wage an unprovoked war on a sovereign state in the Middle East. It may not be wrong to say that this war-in-the-making is the culmination of a covert plan to advance the Greater Israel project. The logic is as follows:

This is illegal, reckless and catastrophic war because such misguided warmongering is aimed at triggering the World War III. The global crime syndicate known as the International Banking Cartel, which runs the perpetual war economy across the planet, knows that the end is very near for them.  The entire Global Economic and Financial System is teetering on the precipice of a total and final collapse.  Their only way out is war, Third World War to establish a totalitarian One World Government.

Iran has become the lynchpin in this insane scheme to plunge the world community of nations into chaos.  This is precisely why President Trump was ordered by his Zionist masters to form his stone-cold war cabinet of Bolton, Pompeo, Pence, Haspel, Abrams and Shanahan.  Each chronic warmonger was hand-picked by Israel to develop and implement the war plans necessary to conquer Iran.

About eight months back MEK supporters tell them they will overthrow Iran’s regime and celebrate in Tehran with Bolton himself present. One also has to look at the rapidly evolving events in the Mideast, especially in the regions surrounding Iran. It has been quite clear ever since Trump first declared his candidacy in June of 2015 that war against Iran was the very centerpiece of his foreign policy.  Every major foreign affairs decision has been made toward that end, including the intentionally failed military coup against Venezuela.

Even Trump’s decision to continue the war in Afghanistan was made in order to maintain that strategic location which shares a long border with Iran.  The US occupation of Syria also remains firmly in place despite several promises to withdraw all troops because of the planned war with Iran; so is the large U.S. military presence in Iraq contrary to that nation’s wishes.

Now the whole world is seeing just how much premeditation and stealth have gone into this ‘American war’ against Iran fought on strictly behalf of Israel.  Zionists have been planning this armed conflict for decades, and they know it must not fail.

These warmongers know that there’s a tried and tested way to start any regional war, especially one that needs to capture the full support of the American people.  They will raise a false flag of terrorist attack on American assets somewhere in the world that is inordinately vicious and provocative.  If not that, they will secretly stage a surprise attack on the US Navy in the Mideast which will immediately be blamed on Iran.  There’s also the distinct possibility of a false attack on Saudi Arabian oil tankers.

The Israeli attack on the USS Liberty provides the best example of how Israel might be used to stage this false flag operation. Netanyahu has already proven to be an arch enemy of the United States as demonstrated by his own words and he will do whatever it takes to deceive the U.S citizenry into supporting another odious war to advance the Greater Israel project.

Can European Union resist United States pressure to join war against Iran?

With bitter memories of the catastrophic war in Iraq, European Union (EU) members seem united in opposing the United States’ effort to provoke Iran into a shooting war. However, flat refusal to Washington appears a difficult decision for the EU members. Initially, Britain expressed that there was no enhanced threat from Iran in Iraq and Syria, but expected to change its opinion under the US pressure.

While Europeans were reluctant to confront Washington directly, Britain officially agreed with the Americans and Germany and the Netherlands suspended their troop training in Iraq. Germany subsequently said it was planning to resume the training exercises.

“Every single European government believes that the increased threat we’re seeing from Iran now is a reaction to the United States leaving the Iran nuclear agreement and trying to force Iranian capitulation on other issues,” said Kori Schake, a former Pentagon official who is now deputy director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies. “They believe that the U.S. is the provocateur and they worry that the U.S. is reacting so stridently to predictable Iranian actions in order to provide a pretext for a U.S. attack on Iran,” Ms. Schake said.

“It is different from the debate preceding 2003 Iraq war, which split Europe in two,” said Tomas Valasek, the director of Carnegie Europe and a former Slovak ambassador to NATO. “This is a case of all European governments saying to Washington that this is insane, we shouldn’t be here, and it’s your fault that we’re actually talking of war.”

The Europeans are trapped between Trump and Tehran, trying to keep decent relations with Washington while committed to supporting the 2015 Iran nuclear deal that Trump mocked and then abandoned. Senior European government officials say they believe that Trump does not want a major war in the Middle East, but they also believe that Bolton does. They often cite a New York Times opinion article by Bolton in 2015, when he said “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran.”

European officials are puzzled by Trump’s insistence that he simply wants to force Iran into new negotiations. Ms. Schake has rightly raised two question: “Why, would Tehran concede or even value any deal done with the president who just abandoned a nuclear deal so painfully negotiated with the last American president? “Why would they trust us now after Trump pulled the plug on the last thing they negotiated with Washington?”

The public position of European officials has been “maximum restraint,” that is opposite to Washington’s stated policy of “maximum pressure” on Tehran, including economic sanctions designed to block its international trade, especially in oil, on which the economy depends.

Foreign ministers, including Britain’s Jeremy Hunt and Germany’s Heiko Maas — have spoken about the dangers of escalation and accidental war. “We are very worried about the risk of a conflict happening by accident with an escalation that is unintended,” said Hunt.

Maas told German legislators that putting intense pressure on Iran added to the risk of an unintended escalation. “What has happened in recent days — acts of sabotage against ships or pipelines — are indications that these dangers are concrete and real,” he said, referring to reports that four oil vessels were recently attacked.

“The Iranians may have walked into a Washington hard-liner trap,” said Jeremy Shapiro, a former senior State Department official who is now research director for the European Council on Foreign Relations. “Iran as usual is sending messages and going up the escalator ladder one-eighth of a step at a time, through proxies,” he said. “They’re following the script. Iranian and US hard-liners have a toxic interaction and feed off each other.”

In the first gulf war, in 1990-91, the United States led a broad multinational coalition; in the second, in 2003, the European “coalition of the willing” was essentially reduced to Britain and Poland. Part of Europe’s skepticism is rooted in that 2003 war, when there were charges of fake or exaggerated intelligence, which continue to haunt the reputations of then-loyal European leaders, such as former Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain and former President Aleksander Kwasniewski of Poland.

“Every European politician who supported George W. Bush was taken out and effectively executed,” Shapiro said. “Even in the UK, no way there can be a repeat of that. If the US policy is in force, there will be no European support.”

But the Trump administration — which has already strained relations with Europe badly through unilateral moves over trade, climate change and relations with Israel and Russia, let alone Iran — probably doesn’t much care what the Europeans think.

 US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo came to Brussels and spoke to European foreign ministers about Iran and American assessments of enhanced threat. For internal administration debates, European may agree to tactical support or face a bitter choice, “Either you are with us or against us.”