Is OPEC ready to face tough time?

OPEC and its allies may celebrate their success in buoying world oil markets, but the coalition will soon be faced with some tough choices. Russia has already expressed fears that high prices will facilitate US shale comeback and Iran could revive exports, if it succeeds in improving relations with the United States.

Oil prices extended gains on Thursday after the OPEC alliance decided to stick to a reduced output policy. There was another blessing as crude stockpiles in the United States fell to their lowest levels, since March last year. Brent were traded at US$58.97/barrel, by 0741 GMT and West Texas Intermediate (WTI) futures were traded at US$56.22, after reaching its highest settlement level in a year on Wednesday.

Last month’s pledge by Saudi Arabian Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman to slash production by a further one million barrels a day has supported global markets against the latest onslaught from the pandemic.

While that relieves OPEC+ of any need to adjust its policy, it’ll need to start considering how long to restrain output -- a calculation clouded by the potential return of supply from Iran.

At the heart of the dilemma is a fundamental tension between the Saudis and their most critical partner in the alliance, Russia. While Riyadh has sought higher prices to cover government spending, Moscow will certainly try to maintain its market share.

“Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman’s doctrine that you err on the side of caution has been vindicated,” said Helima Croft, chief commodities strategist at RBC Capital Markets LLC. “We might get the contours of the arguments that will be made next month.”

OPEC and its partners have resolved this year to restore some of the 7.2 million barrels of daily output, roughly 7% of global supplies, they continue to idle after making vast production cuts when the pandemic erupted last spring.

The restrictions have proved effective, turning around an oil market that in April 2020 briefly saw prices plunge below zero in New York, and throwing a financial lifeline to producers around the world, from tiny African states to corporate giants.

Restoring the halted production, however, is turning out to be a delicate process.

OPEC+ is scheduled to revive a total of 2 million barrels a day this year; it agreed a two-month pause after the first 500,000 barrel installment in January as new virus infections menaced fuel demand. Riyadh doubled down on the curbs by announcing an extra one million-barrel cutback of its own.

The panel that oversees the alliance’s strategy, the Joint Ministerial Monitoring Committee, will convene online to assess the outlook. The JMMC is unlikely to recommend new policies, which will instead be tackled at the next full OPEC+ meeting in early March, according to delegates who asked not to be identified.

“The Saudi cut has bought OPEC+ some time,” said Bill Farren-Price, a director at research firm Enverus and veteran observer of the cartel. The question of what to do next will loom over their discussions on Wednesday.

Russia on the other hand fears that supporting prices too long will backfire, provoking investment in US shale oil and a flood of new supply that will negate OPEC+’s hard work. At last month’s meeting, Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak proposed a production increase, and tried to dissuade the Saudi Prince from his unilateral cut.

 “It is going to be a hell of fight at the OPEC+ March meeting,” said Helge Andre Martinsen, senior oil market analyst at DNB Bank ASA. “Russia will consider it a massive failure if OPEC+ cuts starts to stimulate growth in US shale again, while at the same time they’re sitting on plenty of spare capacity.”

Russia isn’t the only member that might push for relaxing the curbs. Iraq is in the grip of an economic crisis and desperately needs the revenues that would come from higher oil sales. The United Arab Emirates is seeking to promote a benchmark oil contract that depends on plentiful output, and last year briefly broke ranks with Riyadh to open the taps.

Then there’s the complication of Iran. President Joe Biden is seeking to reactivate a nuclear agreement that would lift US sanctions on the Islamic Republic, allowing the return of almost 2 million barrels of daily output. With the end of the “maximum pressure” campaign waged by former President Donald Trump, Iranian exports have already crept higher.

Still, Secretary of State Antony Blinken says an agreement remains a “long way” off. As the two sides jockey for leverage -- and Tehran presses on with uranium enrichment -- they could be headed for a new rupture rather than reconciliation, according to RBC’s Croft. Instead of extra barrels, markets may need to brace for “a geopolitical tremor,” she cautions.

But if a deal is struck, OPEC+ will need to choose between cutting output further, or seeing their efforts to drain surplus oil stockpiles founder. It is unclear how readily Saudi Arabia would make way for the comeback of its political nemesis.

Yang Jiechi warns United States to stop meddling in Chinese internal affairs

Yang Jiechi, Director, Central Foreign Affairs Commission of the Chinese Communist Party has called Beijing and Washington to put relations back on a predictable and constructive path, saying the United States should stop meddling in China's internal affairs, Hong Kong and Tibet.

Yang Jiechi is the highest ranking Chinese leader to speak on Sino-US relations since President Joe Biden took office.

Under the Trump administration, the US relations with China plunged to their lowest point since the establishment of diplomatic ties in 1979, as both sides clashed over issues ranging from trade and technology to Hong Kong, Taiwan and Xinjiang, and the South China Sea.

While reassuring the United States that China has no intention to challenge or replace the US position in the world, Yang stressed that no force can hold back China's development.

"The United States should stop interfering in Hong Kong, Tibet, Xinjiang and other issues regarding China's territorial integrity and sovereignty," Yang said, defining these as issues concerning China's core interests and national dignity.

Speaking at an online forum organized by the National Committee on US-China Relations in Beijing, Yang said China never meddles with US internal affairs, including its elections.

Yang, whose position in the ruling Communist Party gives him more influence than even the Foreign Minister, also urged the Biden administration not to abuse the concept of national security in trade.

"We in China hope that the United States will rise above the outdated mentality of zero-sum, major-power rivalry and work with China to keep the relationship on the right track," he said.

Yang reasserted that China is prepared to work with the United States to move the relationship forward along a track of "no conflict, no confrontation, mutual respect and win-win cooperation."

The word "cooperation" appeared 24 times in his speech. He suggested that US firms could gain from an estimated US$22 trillion worth of exports to China in the coming decade.

Bangladesh rejects Al Jazeera report

Reportedly, Bangladesh has dismissed Al Jazeera news channel’s Monday’s report titled “All the Prime Minister’s Men” calling it as “false and defamatory” and a desperate “smear campaign” instigated by extremists and their allies, working in London and elsewhere.

“The report is nothing more than a misleading series of innuendos and insinuations in what is apparently a politically motivated “smear campaign” by notorious individuals associated with the Jamaat-e-Islami extremist group,” a foreign ministry statement said here today.

The Jamaat-i-Islami extremist group has been opposing the progressive and secular principles of Bangladesh since its very birth as an independent nation in 1971, it added.

The foreign ministry said Dhaka regrets that Al Jazeera had allowed itself to become an instrument for their malicious political designs aimed at destabilizing the secular democratic government of Bangladesh with a proven track record of extraordinary socio-economic development and progress.

The statement noted that the main “source” of Al Jazeera’s allegations is an alleged international criminal claimed to be a “psychopath” by Al-Jazeera itself.

“There is not a shred of evidence linking the prime minister and other state institutions of Bangladesh to this particular individual, and it is highly irresponsible for an international news channel to draw conclusions on the basis of the words of a mentally unstable person,” said the statement.

Pointing that the report’s historical account failed to even mention the horrific genocide in 1971, in which Jamaat perpetrators killed millions of Bengali civilians and raped more than two hundred thousand Bengali women, the statement said, this is the reflection of the political bias in Al Jazeera’s coverage.

It also noticed that the principal commentator of the report David Bergman was convicted by International Crimes Tribunal Bangladesh for challenging the official death toll of 1971 Liberation War.

“It is also not surprising that the report aligns with the string of anti-Bangladesh propaganda habitually orchestrated by a few convicted absconding criminals and discredited individuals patronized by Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, which on certain occasions have conspired with international extremist groups and news media specially the Al Jazeera,” said the statement.

 

 

Nuclear weapons are in contradiction to our ideological views, says Zarif

If Iran wanted a nuclear weapon it would have built one already, Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said in an interview with CNN published on Tuesday. 

"If we wanted to build a nuclear weapon we could have done it some time ago," Zarif told Christiane Amanpour. "But we decided that nuclear weapons are not, would not augment our security and are in contradiction to our, eh, ideological views. And that is why we never pursued nuclear weapons."

On Monday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken told NBC that if Iran violated additional restrictions included in the 2015 nuclear deal it could obtain enough fissionable material for a bomb within "a matter of weeks". 

Zarif said that the uranium enriched by the Islamic Republic could immediately be scaled back to comply with the nuclear deal if the US lifts sanctions. "Eight thousand pounds of enriched uranium can go back to the previous amount in less than a day,” he claimed. 

The Biden administration, the Iranian foreign minister said, had a "limited window of opportunity" to re-enter the 2015 nuclear agreement.

"The time for the United States to come back to the nuclear agreement is not unlimited," he said. "The United States has a limited window of opportunity, because President Biden does not want to portray himself as trying to take advantage of the failed policies of the former Trump administration."

Zarif sketched out the path to overcome the impasse saying the EU foreign policy chief could "choreograph" the moves.

"There can be a mechanism to basically either synchronize it or coordinate what can be done," Zarif told CNN when asked in an interview how to bridge the gap between Washington and Tehran. Each government wants the other to resume compliance first.

Zarif noted the agreement created a Joint Commission coordinated by the European Union foreign policy chief, now Josep Borrell. Borrell "can ... sort of choreograph the actions that are needed to be taken by the United States and the actions that are needed to be taken by Iran," Zarif told CNN.

The Commission includes Iran and the six other parties to the deal that were Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States.

 

Robert Malley appointment as Iran envoy attracts mixed response

Joe Biden has named Robert Malley as special envoy for Iran. He was a key member of former President Barack Obama's team that negotiated the nuclear accord with Iran and world powers, an agreement that Donald Trump abandoned in 2018, despite strong opposition from Washington's European allies.

Malley’s appointment puts him at the forefront of Biden's efforts to find a way to deal with Iran after years of worsening relations under former President Donald Trump, who not only pulled out of a 2015 international nuclear deal with Tehran, but also re-imposed crippling economic sanctions.

When Malley's name first surfaced in news reports as a leading candidate for the post, he drew criticism from some Republican lawmakers and pro-Israel groups who expressed concern that he would be soft on Iran and tough on Israel, but a number of foreign policy veterans rushed to his defense.

It's a positive sign from Biden that he's really willing to revitalize American diplomacy. For too long, US foreign policy has been militarily very muscular, but diplomatically very weak," Sina Toossi, a senior research analyst at the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) told Middle East Eye.

Toossi said the humiliations that Iran had faced in recent years - including the US departure from the JCPOA, the killing of top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani and the assassination of nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh - make it difficult for the Iranian government to take the first step towards reviving the JCPOA.

Matt Duss, a foreign-policy adviser to Senator Bernie Sanders, lauded Biden for refusing to back down in the face of attacks against Malley's candidacy.

"Great news, there's no one better than Rob to make this policy succeed, which is why the hardliners didn't like the pick," Duss wrote on Twitter. "Also very good that Biden stood strong with this choice and disregarded their smear campaign. It won't be their last."

Khaled Elgindy, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, also praised the announcement, calling the nomination "great news". "Malley is a highly skilled and thoughtful negotiator with extensive knowledge and an empathic disposition - literally the polar opposite of every member of the previous administration’s Middle East team of clowns," Elgindy said in a Twitter post.

Senator Tom Cotton, a staunch conservative, had led criticism against Malley, accusing him of being sympathetic to the Iranian government and having "animus towards Israel".

Malley is an American lawyer, political scientist and specialist in conflict resolution, who was the lead negotiator on the 2015 Iran nuclear deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). He being once again tasked to bring the United States and Iran into compliance with the Iran deal abandoned by President Trump.

Previously, Malley was President and CEO of the International Crisis Group, a Washington, DC, committed to preventing wars. Prior to holding that title, he served at the National Security Council under Barack Obama from February 2014 until January 2017.

In 2015, the Obama administration appointed Rob Malley as its "point man" on the Middle East, leading the Middle East desk of the National Security Council. In November 2015, Malley was named as President Obama's new special ISIS advisor.

Malley is considered, by some, to be an expert on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and has written extensively on this subject advocating rapprochement with Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood. As Special Assistant to President Clinton, he was a member of the US peace team and helped organize the 2000 Camp David Summit.

Malley was criticized by supporters of Israel after co-authoring an article in the July 8, 2001 edition of The New York Review of Books arguing that the blame for the failure of the 2000 Camp David Summit should be divided among all three leaders who were present at the summit, Arafat, Barak, and Bill Clinton, not just Arafat, as was suggested by some mainstream policy analysts. Later, other scholars and former officials voiced views similar to those of Malley.

Malley and his views have come under attack from other critics, such as Martin Peretz of the magazine The New Republic, who has opined that Malley is "anti-Israel", a "rabid hater of Israel. No question about it” and that several of his articles in the New York Review of Books were "deceitful."

On the conservative webzine The American Thinker, Ed Lasky asserted that Malley "represents the next generation of anti-Israel activism."

 

 

 

 

  

Are Israel-US relations turning bitter after Joe Biden becomes President?

Reportedly, Joe Biden, President of United States has not called Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel as of Sunday; 11 days into his presidency.  Biden has called the leaders of Canada, Mexico, the UK, France, Germany, NATO, Russia and Japan, in that order, but not Netanyahu.

This not only surprises the analysts, but must be bothering Netanyahu, who had enjoyed exceptionally cordial as well as personal relationships with outgoing President, Donald Trump. 

Some quarters attribute the lack of a call between Biden and Netanyahu to Joe Biden’s priorities, which are mostly domestic in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as an America that has increasingly disentangled itself from the Middle East in recent years.

However, it also comes at a time when Israeli officials feel a sense of urgency to communicate with Biden on his stated plan to rejoin the 2015 Iran nuclear deal.

Netanyahu, IDF Chief of Staff and others have said returning to the plan, with its sunset clauses would eventually allow Iran to attain nuclear weapons that would endanger Israel.

Blinken and others in the Biden administration have said they would speak with US allies in the region, including Israel, before Iran, but it was still too early for negotiations.

The history haunt Israelis because former US President, Barack Obama called Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas before calling the then Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert on his first day in office, indicating his emphasis on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Netanyahu was the third leader former president Donald Trump called, which reflected their close relationship.

“Biden is screening Netanyahu’s calls... Netanyahu is now reaping the rotten fruit of the rift he created with the Democrats,” Meretz leader MK Nitzan Horowitz wrote on Facebook.

“Israel must rehabilitate its relationship with the Democrats and the new administration and return to values of democracy, equality and peace,” he said, adding that Meretz was the only party that speaks the Democrats’ language.

According to former Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren, “They’ll speak eventually, and [Netanyahu] will eventually go to Washington.” But regarding Biden’s phone calls, he said: “There’s a message in that order.”

Netanyahu congratulated Biden for winning the presidency about 12 hours after most of the other leaders with whom the president spoke. He also did not actually say in his message that Biden was president-elect and he followed it with praise for Trump, Oren said. “There’s a price to pay for that,” he said.

Oren was ambassador to the US (2009-13) during the Obama administration, when Biden was Vice President. Netanyahu and Biden are unlikely to have the mutual personal acrimony that poisoned the relationship with Obama, he said.

“They may not be as chummy as they used to be... but it won’t be like [Netanyahu] and Obama: That was very bad blood,” Oren said.

Biden administration sees Quad as fundamental foundation to build US policy on Indo-Pacific

The new Biden administration sees the Quad grouping comprising of the United States, India, Japan and Australia as a fundamental foundation upon which to build a substantial American policy in the strategically-vital Indo-Pacific region. National security advisor Jake Sullivan said at an event organized by the US Institute of Peace, a Congress-funded think-tank that the US will build on and carry forward the four-nation Quad grouping.

Quad and the Indo-Pacific policy of the Trump administration are one of the few policies that the Biden administration has said it will continue to build on, besides the Abraham Accords, Sullivan said.

“Those are in two different theaters in the world and two initiatives that you will see continuity and an effort to reinforce and carry forward steps that have been taken by the previous administration,” he said.

"When the first Accords with the UAE, Bahrain were announced, it was in the heat of a political campaign, a presidential campaign, and then candidate Biden made no bones about coming out saying: ‘I think this is a good thing. I think this is a positive thing',” he said.

Biden said consistently over the course of the last several months that he would like to carry forward this initiative, deepen the cooperation between the countries that have signed the accords, make real normalization that has taken root and add more countries, he said.

“He (Biden) sees that as being positive for security in the region, positive for economic development, in the region, and positive for America's national interest for many of the reasons that Robert laid out,” Sullivan said.

“So, one of the things that we will be doing in the coming weeks and months is thinking about how we make sure that the seeds that have now been planted actually grow into the full kind of cooperation across multiple dimensions and these relationships can move forward and how that can really help the United States advance our interests,” he said.

In November 2017, India, Japan, the United States and Australia gave shape to the long-pending proposal of setting up the "Quad" to develop a new strategy to counter China's aggressive behaviour in the strategically-vital Indo-Pacific region.

The evolving situation in the Indo-Pacific region in the wake of China's increasing military muscle flexing has become a major talking point among leading global powers. The US has been favouring making Quad a security architecture to check China's growing assertiveness.

China is engaged in hotly contested territorial disputes in the South and East China Seas. Beijing has also made substantial progress in militarizing its man-made islands in the past few years.

Beijing claims sovereignty over all of the South China Sea. But Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, Brunei and Taiwan have counterclaims. In the East China Sea, China has territorial disputes with Japan.

The South China Sea and the East China Sea are stated to be rich in minerals, oil and other natural resources. These are also vital to global trade. Although, the US lays no claims to the disputed waters, it has challenged China's growing territorial claims in the South China Sea by deploying warships and fighter jets to assert freedom of navigation and over flight patrols in the strategically-vital region.