Saturday 19 February 2022

OPEC plus wants Iran to join supply deal

Reportedly, Iran has risen above Russia on the oil market radar due to reports from multiple sources that a new nuclear deal is very close to being agreed upon. There are also rumors that Russia is about to invade Ukraine, which has sent oil prices soaring earlier in the week, but tensions eased slightly by the weekend.

Iran is already gearing up for a return of its crude to international markets. The country last year announced production ramp-up plans. This week, media reported that officials from the state-owned National Iranian Oil Company had visited South Korea to discuss supply deals with local refiners.

If a deal is reached on Iran’s nuclear program, the country could add 500,000 bpd to global oil supply between April and May. According to Rystad Energy analyst Louise Dickson, Iran can ramp up production very quickly, in a matter of four to six months, and it also has substantial amounts of oil in storage to offer on international markets if sanctions are lifted

A potential agreement about the United States and Iran returning to the so-called nuclear deal looks close, according to an OPEC+ source.

“It is very likely OPEC will adjust Iran into the deal, as there is no other option,” the source told Reuters.

Over the past few days, there have been hints from diplomats that a deal on reviving the nuclear agreement is indeed close, which pushed oil prices lower.

Iran’s main negotiator, Ali Bagheri Kani, tweeted late on Wednesday. “After weeks of intensive talks, we are closer than ever to an agreement; nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, though. Our negotiating partners need to be realistic, avoid intransigence and heed lessons of past four years. Time for their serious decisions.”

In case a deal is reached, the United States has said that the window of reaching an agreement is closing fast—Iran could return some 1.3 million barrels per day (bpd) to the market within several months after the US lifts sanctions on its oil exports.

According to diplomats who spoke to Reuters, a draft of an agreement being discussed would put the main sanction-lifting stage, including oil exports, at a later stage, while releasing Western prisoners held in Iran and unfreezing Iranian funds would come first.

In the event of an agreement, OPEC+ would look to include Iran—currently exempted from all OPEC+ pact quotas—in the deal, Reuters’ source says.

Iran, for its part, will likely seek first to restore its oil production and exports, but it will also likely agree to a quota after talks with OPEC+, a source with knowledge of Iran’s thinking told Reuters.

It is looking increasingly likely that a new nuclear deal with Iran will be reached and sanctions on its oil industry will be lifted.

Iran would likely want to restore production to near pre-sanctions levels before joining any such agreement

 

Friday 18 February 2022

Biden convinced Putin ready to invade Ukraine

Prior to the attack on Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States and its allies created hype about presence of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and Iraq building weapons of mass destruction. Both the countries were attacked, but both the mantras proved merely ‘hoax call’. This time the target is Russia and the mantra is the same, “Russia is getting ready to attack Ukraine”.

President of United States, Joe Biden on Friday said he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin has made up his mind to move forward with an invasion of Ukraine.

"As of this moment I’m convinced he’s made the decision. We have reason to believe that," Biden told reporters at the White House after delivering an update on the threat of a Russian invasion.

"You are convinced President Putin is going to invade Ukraine. Is that what you just said a few moments ago?" a reporter asked moments later.

"Yes, I did," Biden said, adding that diplomacy was still on the table if Moscow chose to deescalate.

Biden and White House officials have for weeks said they did not believe Putin had made a final decision about whether to carry out an invasion into Ukraine even as Russia amassed troops and military equipment along the Ukrainian border. But Biden indicated Friday that had changed and that the US and it allies were preparing for a Russian attack in the coming days. 

"We have reason to believe the Russian forces are planning to and intend to attack Ukraine in the coming week, in the coming days. We believe that they will target Ukraine’s capital of Kyiv, a city of 2.8 million innocent people," Biden said in prepared remarks.

"We’re calling out Russia’s plans loudly and repeatedly not because we want a conflict, but because we’re doing everything in our power to remove any reason that Russia may give to justify invading Ukraine and prevent them from moving," he added.

Biden held a call earlier Friday with leaders from Europe and Canada to discuss the ongoing threat of a Russian invasion. Vice President Harris is scheduled to meet Saturday with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the Munich Security Conference in Germany.

Biden and other White House officials have said it is up to Zelensky whether he wants to leave the country amid the threat of a potential Russian attack.

Despite Russian claims in recent days that it was moving forces away from Ukraine’s border, the US and NATO said that Moscow has added troops. Russia is also engaging in military exercises in Belarus, compounding the threat.   

Biden on Friday called out Russian claims he said were being used to create a pretext for an invasion. He cited the shelling of a Ukrainian kindergarten classroom by Russian-backed separatists and "fabricated claims" of an impending Ukrainian attack on Russia. 

"All of these are consistent with the playbook the Russians have used before to set up a false justification to act against Ukraine," Biden said. "This is also in line with the pretext scenarios that the United States and our allies and partners have been warning about for weeks."

Biden reiterated that he would not send US troops into Ukraine should fighting break out, but he pledged support for the Ukrainian people.

"The entire free world is united," Biden said. "Russia has a choice between war and all the suffering it will bring, or diplomacy."

 

Thursday 17 February 2022

United States robs Afghanistan of US3.5 billion

Afghans have staged protests against a decision of the US administration to use $3.5 billion dollars of their country’s frozen assets to help settle lawsuits by the families of 9/11 victims. 

The US continues to maintain a strong economic blockade of Afghanistan and its central bank by not easing the mounting humanitarian crisis in the country. 

The protesters say the money belongs to the Afghan people stressing they are the ones who should be compensated by the US for 20 years of occupation that brought about terror, destruction, poverty, and killing of a countless number of civilians. 

Demonstrators have also gathered outside Kabul's Eid Gah mosque making similar demands of reparations from the US.

Civil society activist Abdul Rahman had this message for the US administration, “What about our Afghan people, who gave many sacrifices and thousands and thousands of losses of lives?''

Afghan activists have also pointed out that none of the hijackers that staged the 9/11 attacks were Afghan nationals and say they will never forget the destruction left behind by America. 

Aid groups have condemned the move saying the money legally belongs to the Afghan people and nobody else is entitled to it. 

Addressing a press conference in Kabul, former Afghan President Hamid Karzai slammed Biden’s decision. He called on Washington to immediately return the US$7 billion in frozen assets which he says “belong to no government, but to the people of Afghanistan”.

The Taliban’s senior spokesperson, Mohammad Naeem Wardak, wrote on social media, "The theft and seizure of money owed by the United States to the Afghan people represent the lowest level of human and moral decay of a country and a nation”. 

Pakistan’s permanent representative to the United Nations, Munir Akram, says the money was critically needed to revive the economy of the war-battered country. Akram says, “We have consistently joined the calls of the international community as well as the senior UN officials and the international humanitarian actors to unfreeze Afghanistan’s reserves”

Critics have also denounced the White House for doing so little to address underlying factors driving Afghanistan’s massive humanitarian crisis after 20 years of American occupation.

A financial advisor to the former Afghan government, Torek Farhadi, questioned the White House’s decision saying "these reserves belong to the people of Afghanistan, not the Taliban... Biden's decision is one-sided and does not match with international law”

Farhadi also says that “no other country on Earth makes such confiscation decisions about another country's reserves”. 

Policy Analyst and Afghan Researcher, Mohsin Amin, strongly denounced the move; writing on social media that "the U.S. dropped 85,000 bombs on Afghanistan. Even if one bomb killed 3 people, it's 255K. The last U.S. airstrike killed 10 (7 children), "97 percent of [Afghanistan] is starving, 3.2m children are malnourished, yet the US wants to throttle the economy and steal the hard-earned savings of Afghans”. 

The Policy Advisor to the UK Minister of Afghan Resettlement, Shabnam Nasimi, wrote on social media "as more than 23 million people are on the brink of starvation, it is unjust & immoral for @POTUS to want to use billions of Afghanistan’s frozen assets to pay 9/11 victims. The horrific 9/11 attacks had nothing to do with the people of Afghanistan, & they should not be punished”. 

Adam Weinstein, a researcher at the Quincy Institute, also added to the chorus of condemnation online saying the move will "go down in history as a travesty. Punishing an entire people for a crime they did not commit & kneecapping them into forever dependence should offend every American”. 

On Sunday, the Afghan central bank called on the U.S. administration to reverse the decision. 

In a statement, the Da Afghanistan Bank (DAB) said "blocking Foreign Exchange (FX) Reserves and allocating them to irrelevant purposes, is an injustice to the people of Afghanistan and [the DAB] will never accept if the FX reserves of Afghanistan is paid under the name of compensation or humanitarian assistance to others and [the DAB]  wants the reversal of the decision and release of all FX reserves of Afghanistan”.

"As per the law and relevant regulations, FX reserves of Afghanistan are used to implement monetary policy, facilitate international trade and stabilize financial sector”.

The statement added that “the real owners of these reserves are the people of Afghanistan. These reserves were not the property of governments, parties, and groups and have never been used as per their demand and decisions”. 

When Kabul fell to the Taliban in August 2021, Afghanistan had over $9 billion in reserves held on behalf of the country’s central bank abroad.

This included $7 billion in foreign currency reserves held in the U.S., and the rest mostly in Germany, the UAE, Switzerland, and a few other countries.

The Biden administration has decided to release $3.5 billion of Afghanistan’s money held in America towards families of victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks and it has also agreed to allocate the other $3.5 billion towards a trust fund that will be used to send humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan. 

However, a senior U.S. administration official told reporters that it will take a long time before the money is even released for humanitarian relief in Afghanistan claiming “we have to go through a judicial process here, it is going to be at least a number of months before we can move any of this money, right? So this money isn’t going to be available over the next couple of months regardless“. 

The remarks come as acute malnutrition is spiking and over 90 percent of the country is facing serious food insecurity, problems that disproportionally affect women and girls; while Afghan children are starving to death nearly every day.

Advocacy group Human Rights Watch says “even if implemented, the decision would create a problematic precedent.. directing $3.5 billion to humanitarian assistance for Afghans may sound generous, but it should be remembered that the entire $7 billion already legally belonged to the Afghan people”.

The rights group highlights that even if the U.S. gives the remaining money to “a humanitarian trust fund, current restrictions on Afghanistan’s banking sector make it virtually impossible to send or spend the money inside the country”. 

It added that more important to addressing Afghanistan’s current crisis “are ongoing efforts by the United Nations and humanitarian organizations to convince the U.S. and World Bank to ease economic restrictions to allow Afghanistan’s economy, which is near complete collapse, to stabilize. Current restrictions on Afghanistan’s banking system are driving the population toward famine” 

On multiple occasions, humanitarian organizations have warned that keeping an economic blockade on the country will only make things worse. 

Organizations and groups that are trying to offer assistance need access to banks. 

Human Rights Watch says “without them, the UN’s own humanitarian activities have become exceedingly difficult; some have had to cease operations altogether”.

Aid group Refugees International has also issued a statement saying they are concerned Biden’s administration’s decision will exacerbate the suffering of the Afghan people.

The organization said "millions are already facing a dire and life-threatening humanitarian crisis this winter. Using part of Afghanistan’s reserves to help provide badly needed relief aid and essential services will no doubt help save lives”

It added, "We are concerned that this action could further cripple the country’s financial system and thereby perpetuate the suffering of the Afghan people."

Analysts say the mounting condemnation of the US administration will add to America’s disastrous policies and mistakes Washington committed and is continuing to commit again the people of Afghanistan.

Pakistan textile exports rise to US$11 billion

According to the data released by Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, Pakistan textile exports has witnessed a record exports of US$11 billion in first seven months of the current financial year (FY22), up by 25%YoY. In PKR terms, the exports yielded Rs1.861 trillion, up 30%YoY due to 4% depreciation of the local currency.

For 7MFY22, the key export driver was increase in value-added exports where knitwear segment contributed the most as it increased by 33%YoY to US$2.9 billion, followed by Readymade garments, up 22%YoY to US$2.2 billion and Bedwear up 19%YoY to US$1.9 billion exports.

However, on MoM basis, Pakistan textile exports were down 4% to US$1.5 billion in January 2022, due to lower value-added exports segments mainly in Knitwear, down 12%MoM and Ready-made garments, down 4% MoM.

As compared to last year, Pakistan’s textile exports were up by 17%YoY in January 2022 led by significant recovery witnessed in value-added segments, largely in knitwear, up 19%YoY, Ready-made up 17%YoY and Bedwear, up 21%YoY.

The volumetric growth and improved pricing were the key drivers resulting in higher exports.   

Going forward, analysts expect textile exports to remain robust in the remaining months of FY22 fiscal and may touch US$19 billion.

Ease of lockdown in European economies is likely to drive increased orders and help overall textile exports.

The Federal Cabinet on February 15 approved the Textile and Apparel Policy 2020-25, after Ministry of Commerce (MoC) submitted the revised draft of textile policy to Economic Coordination Committee (ECC) incorporating few amendments.

The key reason behind the late approval was the dispute between MoC and Energy Ministry on the issue of Energy Tariffs, specifically RLNG and Electricity.

As to the sources, the updated draft stated that Energy Tariffs (RLNG and Electricity) will be provided to textiles and apparel industry at regionally competitive rates during the policy years. For this, tariff will be reviewed and announced in federal budget by Finance Division.

§  As per Pakistan Institute of Development Economics (PIDE), the average regional electricity tariff rate stood at 7.4 cents/kWh in Mar-21, which we believe has likely increased since than. Pakistan’s current electricity tariff is around 9 cents/Kwh. 

§  In case of RLNG, the average regional RLNG rate stood at ~US$4/MMBTU as per PIDE vs. Pakistan’s tariff rate at US$6.5/MMBTU. We believe the above stated textile policy will have a neutral impact on the sector. Given, Pakistan is already offering subsidized energy & RLNG tariffs to textile players and Pakistan being part of an IMF program, a further reduction from the current levels is highly unlikely. 

§  RLNG tariff is expected to remain intact at US$6.5/MMBTU level although regional average is comparatively low. To note, RLNG is currently being provided at US$9/MMBTU to textile sector till March-22 due to supply issues.

§  Subsidized energy rates, increasing export numbers, and currency weakness bodes well for the sector. We have an ‘Overweight’ stance on Textile Sector with Interloop Limited (ILP) and Nishat Mills Limited (NML) as our top picks.

 

 

Wednesday 16 February 2022

CNN plunging deeper into crisis

According to media reports, the crisis marring CNN deepened Tuesday with the departure of key executive Allison Gollust and a New York Times report shedding new light on internal turmoil at the network. 

Gollust served as Chief Marketing Officer of CNN. She is in a relationship with Jeff Zucker, who was ousted as the President of the network on February 02, 2022.  

Zucker’s failure to disclose the relationship was the official reason given for his departure, though there has been plenty of speculation about other factors that might have been at play. 

Gollust’s departure, like Zucker’s, looks like an involuntary resignation. In a statement, she described it as “deeply disappointing” that she “would be treated this way” as she leaves. 

Meanwhile, the New York Times story provided more detail on an allegation of sexual assault against former CNN anchor Chris Cuomo. The allegation — which Cuomo vehemently denies — dates back to his pre-CNN days at ABC News.  

But the Times report included a claim from his accuser's lawyer that Cuomo, while at CNN, may have sought to dissuade the woman from coming forward by airing a segment on the company where she worked as the "Me Too" movement gathered steam. If true, that would be a clear and grave breach of journalistic ethics. 

The new twists ensure that the saga roiling the network founded in 1980 by Ted Turner will keep on running. 

Two weeks ago, when Zucker resigned, both he and Gollust issued statements acknowledging they should have disclosed their relationship and did not. 

At that time, Gollust appeared set to stay with the network. Zucker and Gollust have worked together for decades, having first met when Zucker was the young executive producer of NBC’s “Today” and Gollust was an NBC publicist.  

The status of their relationship has been a subject of gossip in New York media circles for years. Former “Today” anchor Katie Couric described the dynamics between the two in eyebrow-arching terms in the memoir she published last fall. 

Zucker and Gollust have asserted that they were close friends and colleagues until the pandemic, when their relationship became a romantic one. Both are divorced and there is no suggestion of coercion or abuse of power. 

In a memo announcing Gollust’s departure on Tuesday, WarnerMedia CEO Jason Kilar said that an investigation “performed by a third-party law firm and led by a former federal judge” had begun last September and concluded this past weekend. 

Kilar added that the probe had “found violations of Company policies, including CNN’s News Standards and Practices, by Jeff Zucker, Allison Gollust, and Chris Cuomo.” 

But the careful phrasing says nothing about whether the job-ending violation for Gollust was her failure to disclose her relationship with Zucker. If it was, why did she seem in the clear to stay in her position just two weeks ago? If it wasn’t, what new infraction has come to light? 

Gollust, for her part, says that the claims from WarnerMedia are “an attempt to retaliate against me and change the media narrative in the wake of their disastrous handling of the last two weeks.” 

The thread that has caused the higher reaches of CNN to unravel begins with the relationship between Chris Cuomo and his elder brother, former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. 

During the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, Chris Cuomo conducted several interviews on his CNN prime-time show with the then-governor. The interviews were ethically questionable but strongly backed by Zucker.  

Familial banter between the brothers about topics including which one was favored by their mother made for compelling television even while critics voiced queasiness. 

The situation became more serious when the New York governor was accused by multiple women of inappropriate behavior. In time, it emerged that Chris Cuomo had played a role in helping his brother push back against those allegations. 

Zucker defended the CNN anchor when the first details emerged of those efforts. But the problem deepened in November 2021, when new documentation released by New York Attorney General Letitia James showed that Chris Cuomo had sought to get advance warning of damaging stories about his brother and appeared to be seeking ways to cast doubt on at least one of his accusers. 

Zucker ultimately fired Cuomo, with whom he had been personally close as well as professionally allied. 

For a start, Gollust had worked for Andrew Cuomo, albeit for a brief period almost a decade ago. Perhaps more pertinently, there are now suggestions that Zucker crossed journalistic lines in his dealings with Andrew Cuomo. 

Tuesday’s Times report noted that, after Chris Cuomo was fired, people on his team “soon began whispering to reporters that Zucker had coached Governor Cuomo on how to use his televised briefings [on the pandemic] to go after” then-President Trump. 

The Times included a denial from a Zucker spokeswoman that the ousted CNN president had ever given Andrew Cuomo “advice.” 

If that denial were to be disproved, it would cause serious outrage — and would buttress the argument of those who believe the media in general, and CNN in particular, are too cozy with Democratic politicians. 

Beyond the specifics of what exactly happened with Cuomo, Zucker and Gollust, there are bigger questions facing CNN.  Zucker is widely credited — or blamed, depending on your point of view — for driving CNN in a more opinionated direction, especially during the Trump presidency. 

To his supporters, Zucker understood that the 45th president — whose career he had previously revitalized while at NBC by making him the star of “The Apprentice” — required a paradigm shift in journalistic coverage. The network’s ratings soared as anchors, including Chris Cuomo and others, aimed daily barbs at Trump. 

To his detractors, Zucker pushed a view of politics-as-reality-show to unhealthy extremes. Zucker’s influence undercut CNN’s credibility and accelerated a general coarsening of journalistic and political culture, according to this critique. 

CNN and the rest of WarnerMedia is in the process of being spun off by its corporate owner, AT&T. Assuming that deal goes through, those properties will then merge with Discovery Inc. 

But longtime media mogul and Discovery board member John Malone caused a stir back in November last year when he told CNBC, “I would like to see CNN evolve back to the kind of journalism that it started with — and actually have journalists, which would be unique and refreshing.” 

CNN is also readying a streaming service, CNN plus, for launch. Zucker was central to that project, but he had also recruited some broadcasters who represent a break with the opinionated anti-Trump approach — notably Chris Wallace, formerly of Fox News, and Kasie Hunt, formerly of NBC News. 

With Zucker gone, and so much else in flux, any shift in the network’s tone will be closely parsed. The old maxim holds that it is never good for journalists — or media organizations — to become the news. But whether it matters to the audience is another matter. 

Other networks and big-name shows have endured scandal in recent years — and endured just fine. 

The late Roger Ailes, the driving force behind the rise of Fox News, faced multiple accusations of sexual harassment, leading to his ouster from the network in 2016. Despite this, Fox News remains the ratings leader among all cable networks. 

Matt Lauer, the longtime co-anchor of “Today,” was fired in 2017, with NBC citing a report of “inappropriate sexual behavior.” Other allegations against Lauer followed.  

Lauer has acknowledged causing other people “pain” for which he feels “sorrow and regret” but has denied ever coercing anyone into sex. There has been no long-standing damage to “Today,” which remains in a close battle with ABC’s “Good Morning America” for primacy among morning shows. 

There is no real reason to think CNN will suffer any worse fate.  That said, the network’s ratings were way off the highs of the Trump years even before the current furor kicked off. 

Multiple media reports have indicated that some of CNN’s biggest names are dismayed by Zucker’s departure. There have also been insinuations from the journalistic ranks that Zucker was really pushed out not for a terminal ethical lapse, but because of a battle for corporate power between him and Kilar. There are no signs yet of any big names actually departing the organization. But the prolonged controversy is surely bad for morale, among rank-and-file staff and on-screen stars alike. 

Iran January 2022 oil output rises 21%MoM

Iran’s crude oil production in January 2022 reached 2.503 million barrels per day (bpd), registering a 21% increase as compared to the figure for December 2021, according to OPEC’s latest monthly report. Iran had produced 2.482 million bpd of crude oil in December 2021.

The Iran’s average crude output for the fourth quarter of 2021 stood at 2.480 million bpd indicating a 40,000-bpd increase as compared to the figure for the first quarter of the year, the report indicated.

OPEC put the average Iranian crude output for 2021 at 2.405 million bpd, while the average output in 2020 was 1.988 million bpd.

These statistics show that although with the re-imposition of the US sanctions, Iran's oil production decreased; gradually the country has been able to compensate for part of the output decline.

The country’s heavy crude oil price also increased US$10.91 in January, to register a 14.6% rise as compared to the earlier month.

Iran sold its heavy crude oil at US$85.59 per barrel during the month, under review as compared to December price of US$74.68 per barrel. Based on the OPEC data, the country’s average heavy crude price was US$54.38 in 2021.

In addition to the devastating impacts of the coronavirus pandemic on the global oil industry which resulted in the drastic fall in oil production and prices, the Iranian oil industry was under pressure from the US efforts to isolate the country by re-imposing sanctions in 2021.

Iran has been ramping up its oil production over the past few months following the recovery of the global markets from the negative impacts of the coronavirus pandemic and the developments in Vienna talks.

Back in February 2021, Fitch Solutions Incorporation, a subsidiary of Fitch Ratings, which is one of the three biggest credit rating agencies of United States, saw the Islamic Republic’s crude oil exports double in 2022 compared to 2020.

“The prospects for the Iranian oil sector have brightened significantly following Joe Biden's victory in the US presidential election on November 3, 2020. President Biden has indicated that he will seek to re-enter the US into the Iranian nuclear deal, paving the way for a roll-back of secondary sanctions and recovery of around 2.0 million bpd in oil production,” the report said.

 

Tuesday 15 February 2022

Japan to supply LNG to Europe amid Ukraine crisis

US asks Japan to offer emergency assistance amid tense faceoff with Russia 

Japan will provide part of its liquefied natural gas imports to Europe from March as simmering tensions between Russia and the West over Ukraine undermine energy security in the region, said Industry Minister Koichi Hagiuda.

Hagiuda told reporters after separately meeting European Union (EU) Ambassador to Japan Patricia Flor and US Ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel that the Japanese government took account of requests from the United States and the European Union in making the decision, as well as a gas shortage in Europe.

LNG supply in Japan is currently tight, but we decided to meet the requests as long as a stable supply to Japan is ensured, said Hagiuda.

Industry Ministry officials suggested total shipment to the region in March will likely be several hundred thousand tons.

The government is asking Japanese companies involved in the LNG business for their cooperation even beyond March, Hagiuda said.

Japan, a major LNG importer, will secure enough supply for domestic needs before assisting European countries facing the threat of disruptions to their gas supply from Russia in the event of an incursion by Moscow into Ukraine, according to government sources.

With about 40% of Europe's imports of LNG coming from Russia, the United States has asked Japan to extend energy assistance to ensure stable energy supplies in the region during the winter.

The United States has warned of sanctions if Russia, which has massed troops near the Ukrainian border, invades. There is growing concern that Moscow could significantly restrict LNG exports to Europe in retaliation for Western sanctions.

To reassure allies of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the United States is sending additional troops to Europe, while Russia has accused the United States and NATO of ignoring security concerns related to Ukraine, a former Soviet republic.

At an energy council meeting in Washington earlier this week, the United States and the EU affirmed their commitment to address risks related to the bloc's energy supply.

EU Foreign Policy Chief Josep Borrell told the meeting that Russia does not hesitate to use its energy supplies to Europe as a weapon for geopolitical gain as energy prices surge worldwide.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, noting Russia's state-owned companies are holding back natural gas exports, said Washington is in discussions with governments and major producers around the world to shore up energy supply throughout Europe, including Ukraine.

US President Joe Biden also warned, after holding talks with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, that the yet-to-be-activated Nord Stream 2, a gas pipeline project connecting Germany and Russia via the Baltic Sea, will be halted if Russian troops cross into Ukraine.

Japan's LNG move forms part of such international efforts.

But in Japan, the growth in LNG demand for heating tends to outpace that of supply in the month of February, according to an energy industry official.

While Japan has a greater stockpile of LNG this winter than last, some in the energy sector believe it would be challenging to provide surplus LNG during February due to the possibility of a surge in demand.

The United States has urged Japan to consider imposing economic sanctions on Moscow if Russian troops invade Ukraine, according to diplomatic sources.