US buying Iranian oil suspected

There is consensus that super powers violate globally agreed policies, when their own interest is at stake. Though, one can come up with a long list of such policy violations, stories of world’s leading economies defying economic sanctions imposed on Iran have started appearing as headlines in global media.

The latest story publish in Eurasia Review has raised suspicions that even United States, the mastermind of these sanctions was involved in buying Iranian oil. The expected copybook reply could be “We placed order with an exporter and were not aware that the load was blended with oil of Iranian origin.”

Eurasia Review report says, “There is a high probability that US sanctions against Iran have been violated by its own army. Part of the $1.55 billion in fuel the US bought from Turkmenistan for the Afghan army in the last five years may have originated from Iran.”

A report by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) has also suggested that “despite actions taken by DOD to prevent the purchase of Iranian fuel with US funds, risks remain that US economic sanctions could [have been] violated” from 2007 to 2012.

The suspicion rises because most of the fuel being used in Afghanistan comes from neighboring Iran. Because of the US sanctions on Tehran restricting the trade of Iranian oil and petroleum products, the ISAF has been required to abide by the regulations and buy petrol from eight Afghan-owned companies that deliver petroleum from Turkmenistan, which borders both Iran and Afghanistan.

Turkmenistan is a major regional oil producer, which also sells petroleum products made in Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Russia and even Iran. Petrol vendors in Turkmenistan use flexible supply schemes, meaning that fuel of various origins could potentially be blended together.

In response SIGAR report, the US Embassy in Kabul stated “It is possible that if blending is taking place in Turkmenistan it could contain some Iranian fuel,” but refused to admit that fuel imported from Russia could also be blended with Iranian fuel prior to its export to Afghanistan.

It is believed that suppliers are unlikely to blend Iranian fuel, or any other product, with other sourced fuel because of the potential that blending could cause product deviation from specification standards and potentially cause a rejection of the entire shipment, said the Embassy.

A Reuter report says the US believes that the most common trick Iran uses to dodge sanctions is ship-to-ship transfers (STS), in which large tankers leaving Iran’s ports offload Iranian oil to smaller vessels. Then, the Iranian oil is blended with that of another country to disguise it. After that, new shipping documents are issued, giving the blended oil shipment a new identity.

One can still recall that when restrictions were imposed on buying oil from Iran many countries were exempted only to save their economies from sudden and grave shocks. Some of the countries are still buying oil from Iran.

In the recent past Iran was OPEC’s second largest oil producing member, exporting 2.2 million barrels oil per day. The economic sanctions have more than halved oil exports to 890,000 barrels by September 2012.

However, Iranian crude oil exports once again rose to 1.4 million barrels per day lately. Most of this oil was bought by three leading Asian economies; China, India and Japan, where demand for energy has been on the rise. The expansion of tanker fleet by Iran has also helped it to export more oil.

Iran boosts oil export despite sanctions

Economic interest remains most important for the countries around the world, irrespective of their being or not being part of any bloc or pressure group. This seems omnipresent when one looks at the developed countries buying oil from Iran, and defying economic sanctions. This leeway was initially given by the United States to a few countries but others are also joining the exempt elites.

In one of its latest reports Reuters said, “Iran's crude oil exports in December leapt to their highest level since European Union sanctions took effect last July, analysts and shipping sources said, as strong Chinese demand and tanker fleet expansion helped the OPEC member dodge sanctions.”

According to the report, oil exports from Iran rose to around 1.4 million barrels per day (bpd) during December 2012. Western sanctions had halved Iran's oil exports during 2012 from 2.2 million bpd in late 2011. But continuous robust demand from top buyer China and others such as India and Japan, as well as the purchase of new tankers, allowed Iran to boost exports late last year.

According to Reuter report Iran shipped more than 1.4 million bpd of crude oil in December and there are indications that exports would remain around the same level during January-March quarter of 2013.

This represents an increase from a low-point of less than 900,000 bpd in September and suggests monthly revenues worth approximately $4.7 billion based on December Brent prices.

One of the factors helping Iran to boost its oil export was purchase of tankers from China, which enabled it to ship more oil, even if shipping companies from other countries were not willing to carry the load.

This has taken some pressure off Iran and facilitated tanker traffic and analysts foresee further increase in oil export to China.

It is also believed that the rise in oil exports from Iran to nearly 1.4 million bpd was the result of traditional buyers finding new ways to secure insurance of oil being carried by the Iranian tankers.

Israel asked to vacate Palestinian land

According to an AFP report Israel has been asked to immediately stop all settlement activity and begin withdrawal of its settlers from the Palestinian territories on Thursday.

“Israel must … cease all settlement activities without preconditions (and) must immediately initiate a process of withdrawal of all settlers” from the occupied territories, a UN fact-finding mission concluded.

Because of the settlements, Palestinians’ human rights “are being violated consistently and on a daily basis,” the three independent experts said in a report commissioned by the UN’s Human Rights Council last March.

The three experts; Christine Chanet of France, Asma Jahangir of Pakistan and Unity Dow of Botswana will  present their findings to the 47-member state council on March 18. Israel has been asked Jewish to “ensure adequate, effective and prompt remedy to all Palestinian victims … of human rights violations that are a result of the settlements.”

The council’s decision to dispatch the fact-finding mission to determine what impact the settlements are having on the rights of Palestinians so enraged the Jewish state that it cut all ties with the 47-member state council in March 2012.

The experts published their findings just two days after Israel made its anger felt by becoming the first country to ever boycott a special council review of its rights situation.

Israel, as usual has termed this report bias saying it would only hamper peace efforts.

“The Human Rights Council has sadly distinguished itself by its systematically one-sided and biased approach towards Israel. This latest report is yet another unfortunate reminder of that,” foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said.

“Counterproductive measures, such as the report before us, will only hamper efforts to find a sustainable solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict,” Palmor said.

“The only way to resolve all pending issues between Israel and the Palestinians, including the settlements issue, is through direct negotiations without pre-conditions.”

The experts were not able to visit Israel or the Palestinian territories, after failing to secure Israeli permission, and instead met in Jordan with more than 50 people affected by the settlements or working in NGOs in a relevant field, it said.

The Jewish state is not a member of the council but like all 193 UN countries it is required to undergo Universal Periodic Reviews of its human rights situation.

Israel Attacks Syria

And finally warmonger Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tests the patience of his key rival Syria and its allies Iran and Hezbollah by attacking a caravan in Syria.

Israel is not likely to accept this, which is usual as it never admitted the 2007 air strike on a Syrian nuclear site despite US authorities confirming it.

According to a Reuters report Israeli jets bombed a convoy near Syria's border with Lebanon early on Wednesday apparently targeting weapons destined for Hezbollah. This is being termed a warning to Damascus not to arm Israel's Lebanese enemy.

Syrian state television accused Israel of bombing a military research centre, at Jamraya and even Syrian rebels disputed Israeli claim saying their forces had attacked the site. But Israel insisted on that the truck was carrying sophisticated weapons to Hezbollah.

According to Western diplomats the target was a truck loaded with weapons, heading from Syria to Lebanon and may have included anti-aircraft missiles or long-range rockets.

The overnight raid followed warnings from Israel that it was ready to act to prevent the revolt against President Bashar al-Assad leading to Syria's chemical weapons and modern rockets reaching either his Hezbollah allies or his Islamist enemies.

Syrian sources said these criminal acts would not weaken Syria's support for Palestinians and other groups engaged in resistance to Israel. Apparently the episode boils down to a warning by Israel to Syria and Hezbollah not to engage in the transfer of sensitive weapons.

Experts say Assad knows his survival depends on his military capabilities and he would not want those capabilities neutralized by Israel - so the message is this kind of transfer is simply not worth it, neither for him nor Hezbollah.

Such a strike or strikes would fit Israel's policy of preemptive covert and overt action to curb Hezbollah and does not necessarily indicate a major escalation of the war in Syria.

It is on record that Israel has recently raised its concerns about Syrian chemical weapons, but its officials say a more immediate worry is that the civil war could see weapons that are capable of denting its massive superiority in air power and tanks reaching Hezbollah; the group fought Israel in 2006 and remains a more pressing threat than its Syrian and Iranian sponsors.

Israel’s problem is even bigger because rebel groups of Syria are hostile to Jewish state because of its atrocities  An attack inside Syria could be diplomatically provocative, especially because Iran views any strike on Syria as an attack on itself.

Israeli apprehends that Syria's advanced conventional weapons, much of it Russian-built hardware has the capacity to destroy Israeli planes and tanks.

Hezbollah fighters and the Syrian army have close relations. While Damascus may have been reluctant to hand over key parts of its own arsenal to its Lebanese allies, some analysts suggest that if Syrian or Hezbollah commanders fear hardware is about to fall into rebel hands they might try to move it across the border - possibly even without formal government approval.

During the 2006 war in Lebanon, Israel's air forced faced little threat, though its navy was taken aback when a missile hit a ship. Israeli tanks suffered losses to rockets, and commanders are concerned Hezbollah may get better weaponry.

Pakistan: Armed encounters or open war

Experts have been saying for a long time that various groups getting funds and arms from outside have developed safe heavens in Balochistan and federally administered tribal area (Fata) of Pakistan.

In Balochistan they claim to be fighting for the rights of Balochs and in Fata for the imposition of Sharia. However, the sole objective of these insurgents is to create discontent by weakening Pakistan for the ultimate creation of independent Balochistan and Pushtunistan.

Experts have the consensus that since both the areas, though located at some distance, are rich in oil, gas and minerals are the focus of promoters of the new global order.

These forces are trying to get control over Pakistan’s energy reserves by fragmenting the country. In different areas miscreants wear different caps but the objective is common.

Pakistan’s security forces have repeatedly come under attack in Balochistan. This could be termed ‘challenging writ of the government’. In the latest incident dozens of armed men raided a pro-government tribal militia post, killing one man and abducting five.

The early morning raid took place in Dera Bugti district, about 400 kilometers southeast of provincial capital Quetta. There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the attack.

Armed men attacked the post and whisked away five members of the tribal force in their vehicles after forcing them to surrender. One man who resisted was shot dead by the assailants.

Local administration confirmed the raid and informed security forces had been rushed to the area and a search operation had been launched.

It is often said that Balochistan is home to a local insurgency. The insurgents demand political autonomy and a greater share of profits from the province’s oil and gas resources.

The province has become a flashpoint for sectarian violence. Lately, Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf sacked the provincial government in Balochistan after a sit in by the relatives of nearly 100 people killed in twin blasts in Quetta.

After that a serious constitutional crisis brewed in when the Speaker of the provincial assembly summoned a session. The immediate response was that the Speaker had disregarded the fact that the province was under Governor’s Rule.

Perplexed constitutional and legal experts wondered did the assembly want to play the role of a parallel government against the one headed by Governor Zulfiqar Ali Magsi?

According to another report the death toll in a gun-battle that erupted between the banned outfit Teheek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and its rival group Ansar-ul-Islam (AI) in the Khyber tribal region has crossed 60.

The gun-fight had started late on Thursday in Maidan village in Khyber’s Tirah Valley. Most of the dead were militants but some local tribesmen were also killed.

Khyber is among Pakistan’s seven semi-autonomous tribal districts near the Afghan border that has been made home by local insurgents and religious extremist organizations including the TTP. Khyber also links several agencies to each other, serving as a north-south route within Fata.

The remote Tirah valley holds strategic significance for militant groups. On one side, it shares a border with Afghanistan and on the other it leads to the plains of Bara, which connect the agency to the outskirts of Peshawar.

China defying sanctions imposed on Iran

The recently released data shows Iran’s crude oil exports to China soared to the second highest level in December 2012, despite US-led sanctions against the Islamic Republic’s energy sector.

According to Reuters report China imported nearly 593,390 barrels per day (bpd) of crude from Iran in December last year, up 3.6 per cent from the preceding year and up 39 per cent from November. For the full year 2012, the highest level of China's crude imports from Iran stood at 633,000 bpd.

Industry officials in China attributed the enhancement in Iran’s crude oil exports to improvement in shipment. The problems that used to cause delays have been overcome recently. The period of delay has become shorter and overall, less frequent.

Iran is currently China's third largest supplier of crude, providing Beijing with roughly 12 percent of its total annual oil consumption.

 At the beginning of 2012, the United States and the European Union had imposed new sanctions on Iran’s oil and financial sectors with the goal of preventing other countries from purchasing Iranian oil and conducting transactions with the Central Bank of Iran.

On October 15, 2012, the EU foreign ministers reached an agreement on another round of sanctions against Iran.

Iran terms these impositions illegal and insists that US-engineered sanctions were imposed based on the unfounded accusation that Iran is pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program.

According to another news report China will soon start importing polyethylene made in Iran, which became possible after the Islamic Republic partially lifted a ban on the export of petrochemicals late last year.

Lately, China-based market sources said that an estimated 100,000-150,000 metric tons of high density polyethylene (HDPE) and low density polyethylene (LDPE) from Iran is expected to arrive in China within a month aboard five vessels. The sources added that the Iranian tanker Touska will shortly discharge HDPE and LDPE at Shanghai port. 

On November 6, 2012, Iranian Deputy Oil Minister Abdolhossein Bayat announced that the Oil Ministry had lifted the ban on the export of seven petrochemicals; benzene, styrene monomer, caustic soda, linear alkyl benzene (LAB), melamine crystal, premature ventricular contraction (PVC), and polyethylene.

Netanyahu’s victory bad omen for global peace

Benjamin Netanyahu has once again won sufficient number of seats to qualify him to be the next Prime Minister of Israel. Netanyahu sounded warmonger when he told cheering supporters that the first challenge was and remains preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. He also expressed hoped to usher in the kind of change the Israeli people are waiting for with the broadest government possible.

However, media is describing the results as a setback for Netanyahu and his hardliner allies and say the vote could force him to consider alliances with moderate rivals who have made significant gains in the polls. According to initial reports Netanyahu’s Likud-Beitenu got 31 seats – 11 fewer than its 42 seats in the previous parliament. The centrist secular Yesh Atid won 19 seats, followed by the Labor Party with 17 seats and the far-right religious nationalist Jewish Home with 12 seats.

Israel’s elections results have apparently weakened Netanyahu and raised the prospect of a more centrist government that could ease strained relations with Washington and signal more flexibility in peace efforts with the Palestinians. Netanyahu will face a potentially difficult balancing act, trying to accommodate the rising hawkish wing of his Likud party and other rightist and religious parties that will remain influential in parliament.

Yesh Atid has emerged as a key contender in the formation of an inevitable coalition. Netanyahu would almost certainly have to join forces with Yesh Atid, now second in size. The centrist party’s demands include resuming negotiations with the Palestinians and an alliance that could result in a government less tilted to the right than Netanyahu’s outgoing administration.

It is expected that a moderate Israeli government with a large centrist component could improve Netanyahu’s tense ties with the US administration and ease Israel’s international isolation, which has been deepened by the impasse in peace talks and by Netanyahu’s recent announcements of stepped-up settlement building in the West Bank.

Netanyahu said he had begun contacts to form the broadest government possible, which would address a range of issues, including Iran’s nuclear program, peace efforts and domestic reforms demanded by Yesh Atid and other centrist parties.

Netanyahu will be more dependent on smaller coalition partners to cobble together a governing majority. Coalition talks are likely to take weeks, with hard bargaining expected before a new government can be sworn in.

The surprise result was the surge by Yesh Atid, which won 19 seats. Its leader, Yair Lapid, a former television news anchor and a political novice, based his campaign on a demand to end preferential treatment for tens of thousands of ultra-Orthodox Jews who are exempted from compulsory military service to pursue religious studies with government stipends.

Lapid’s campaign for equal service and easing the burden on a struggling middle class resonated with many secular Israelis, who pay high taxes and serve in the military. He says that the ultra-Orthodox should join the workforce and do a stint of national service, either in the military or in a civilian capacity, such as working in hospitals or helping the elderly.

Netanyahu's personal character has the potential to not only inflame the region and may also severely impact the United States. Painting his country into a corner with red lines and lobbying America politicians to do the same is both a military and economic danger to the entire world.

Israel needs a world class leader, one that can change world opinion, provide a conscience and add some moral direction. Obviously it needs something completely different than it has now. If the next government is feckless and stupid, the Israel economy and people will be sunk and the supposed peace process also doomed.

The ultimate question on the peace process is whether the slow motion Israel thievery and torture will be the same as a fast-paced thievery and torture of the Palestinian people and also the war mania to wipeout Iran. A point has been established beyond doubt that over three decades of economic sanctions has made Iranian stronger and an important regional power.