new.stockwatch.com 2003-03-10 12:49 ET - News Release

NEW YORK, March 10 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- BBVA Securities Inc. and BBVA Continental SAB announced today the successful placement of Corporacion Andina de Fomento's ("CAF") inaugural Condor Bond. The Condor Bond, a US$75 million Floating Rate Notes offering was increased from US$ 50 million and matures in 2006.

The Condor is the first of its kind targeting a unique Andean investor base. The Notes bear interest of Libor + 87.5 bps, payable semi-annually and are listed on both the Luxembourg and Lima Stock Exchanges. BBVA Securities acted as Bookrunner taking advantage of its local distribution capabilities in Latin America and its international markets expertise. BBVA Continental Bolsa acted as Local Placement Agent in Peru.

"We are proud of this milestone for BBVA Securities and the BBVA group. The Condor Bond has enabled us to capitalize on our local network distribution while offering a exciting investment opportunity for local investors in the Andean region," said Jaime Saenz de Tejada, Head of BBVA Wholesale Banking Americas.

The Regulation S Notes were offered under CAF's existing EMTN Program and distributed on a private placement basis among a select group of institutional investors in Peru, Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela. The Bond saw strong interest from regional investors looking to invest in high-grade dollar denominated assets, while the floating rate offered protection versus future interest rate increases.

The offering complements CAF's traditional funding sources from US, European and Japanese investors. CAF has a proven track record of successfully tapping the international capital markets. CAF is currently rated A, A2, A by Standard and Poor's, Moody's and Fitch, respectively.

BBVA aims to facilitate the breadth and diversity of investment alternatives for local investors across markets as well as to foster local opportunities for global issuers. BBVA's local presence and market knowledge makes BBVA a natural partner of choice. BBVA Securities Inc.

CONTACT: Janifer Burns, Head of Dept Capital Markets, BBVA, +1-212-728-2389

Web site: www.bbv.es

Company News On-Call: www.prnewswire.com

www.middle-east-online.com First Published 2003-03-10, Last Updated 2003-03-10 17:04:46 By Perrine Faye - LONDON

Escalating war worries drive boil prices to new two and half year high despite OPEC's efforts to calm oil market.

Oil prices nosed higher in early trading here on Monday as war worries escalated at the start of a crucial week in the Iraq crisis and efforts by OPEC energy ministers to try to calm the market fell on deaf ears.

The price of a barrel of benchmark Brent North Sea crude oil for April delivery climbed to a new two and a half year high of 34.55 dollars, before easing back to 34.15 dollars, up five cents from the previous close.

In New York, the reference light sweet crude April-dated futures contract shot up 78 cents to 37.78 dollars a barrel on Friday.

Prices resumed their upswing as the UN Security Council prepared to debate a vote on a US-British resolution giving Baghdad until March 17 to disarm or face war, as France wooed opposition among African states.

Washington warned it could launch strikes before next Monday's deadline if the United Nations rejected the resolution.

"It looks as if it could be a very strong week for crudes and the products as war fears mount," said GNI-Man Financial analyst Lawrence Eagles

"Iraq will continue to dominate market talk, especially as it would appear as if the US will have to go to war without a UN mandate," he added.

Jittery oil traders found little solace in remarks from oil ministers attending a meeting of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) in Vienna to discuss production quotas.

Venezuela and Algeria, two members of the 11-strong cartel, said they believed OPEC had enough room for manoeuvre to avoid a supply shortage in the event of war.

But UAE oil minister Obaid Al-Nasseri said it would be difficult for the oil cartel to increase production as it is already at almost full capacity, a concern shared by analysts.

Eagles said of the OPEC ministers, "Politically they are important but in practical terms few observers believe that there is any significant spare capacity outside of Saudi Arabia."

The oil minister for Iran, the second-biggest producer within OPEC, also poured cold water on any hopes among oil-importing nations that the cartel might agree to pump more oil at their formal meeting on Tuesday.

Bijan Namdar Zangeneh said it was "not at all justifiable to increase OPEC production," in remarks carried by the official Iranian IRNA news agency.

"There is no shortage of oil in the market and present prices are not at all indicative of the market situation," he said in Tehran before leaving for Vienna.

OPEC ministers are therefore expected to agree to maintain the cartel's overall output ceiling of 24.5 million barrels per day, rolling over a 6.5-percent increase introduced at the start of February to compensate for disruption to supplies from strike-hit Venezuela.

Commerzbank analyst Jon Rigby agreed that this was the most likely outcome because "there isn't a great deal of new capacity to be introduced."

"The second thing is that the market is probably reasonably well supplied at the moment, simply because we are now moving towards the second quarter when demand typically falls for seasonal reasons (spring in the northern hemisphere).

"Also, Venezuelan production is starting to increase again and OPEC had increased production to compensate for Venezuela. All those things point to the fact that an increase in OPEC quotas is unlikely," he added.

www.vheadline.com 1st Sunday in Lent 2003 sermon by The Very Reverend Roger Dawson Dean of St. Mary's Anglican Cathedral, Caracas Posted: Sunday, March 09, 2003 By: The Very Reverend Roger Dawson

Like much of the New Covenant writings in what we call the gospels, we should see today's reading as a psychological profile rather than as a physical happening in Jesus' life, though having said that, the temptations to abuse his position probably had much more effect on Jesus' life than any imaginary event conjured up by later writers.

Probably the first account of the so-called temptations is to be found in Mark's gospel and that is what we have just heard. It comes right at the beginning of the gospel that is not lumbered like the others with unnecessary speculations as to Jesus' birth origins. Mark starts at the commencement of Jesus' ministry and sets the scene for us by telling us that John the Baptist is preaching repentance in the wilderness area as a preparation for entry into a new domain of God that will happen sometime in the near future.

Mark, or whoever is the author of this gospel account, points out to us that this is God's initiative of empowering Jesus to go into what we might call the enemy-occupied territory of Israel.

The author wants us to understand that all territory ... not just Israel ... belongs to God but has been usurped by a worldly and evil power. I personally hesitate to personalize evil into the form of Satan, or Beelzebub, Belial or the Evil One as has been commonly done, because it looks as though we have two gods, one of good and one of evil and the two are in battle to see who ever is the strongest. I know that this is a common understanding by many and Jesus himself may have understood the world in those terms. However I do not subscribe to a battle in heaven, with bad angels being thrown out, and the baddies making a new home for themselves on the earth till God says enough is enough and decrees the end of time, when he will finally take over the reins and rule in truth and righteousness for the rest of eternity.

That may be the view of the author of the Book of Jubilees, and may have been great when it was written some hundred or two hundred years before the birth of Jesus, and Jesus may have known this book and believed it and indeed, have endorsed it in his message of good news  ... but two thousand years later, I want a better explanation of how evil managed to come into the world.

The bottom line is that evil is here on the earth, and people do embrace it.

Some have tried to explain what happens by looking at light ... light is energy that enables our eyes to function so that we can clearly depict objects about us. If we remove that light so that we have total darkness, or blackness, we cannot see. The dark, therefore, is an absence of light rather than a force of its own. The question we are offered is whether evil is a force of its own, or simply an absence of good, following the example of light.

We are being told that God has sent Jesus to aid us defeat the power that evil has over us, and that Jesus has himself been tested. A bit like saying a professor is coming to teach us the rudiments of mathematics, and to prove that he is qualified to teach us, he has been taught and has been tested by examination at the University of such and such, and has a doctorate from the University of this and that, and here are his certificates. By this, we have his credentials that he is competent in his subject.

Mark details the examination paper that Jesus has to undergo by telling us it is for forty days, the biblical number that denotes the period of testing preceding a salvation assault against hostile forces. We can find others, and we might like to compare the testing procedures to Noah in Genesis, Moses in Exodus or Elijah in First Kings.

Marks account is very brief. This may be because his readers already knew the story so well it would not stand up to too much repetition. Luke and Matthew, having been written later, when perhaps the story was less well known, would need some further explanation or expansion.

Alternatively the account is deliberately brief to punch the story home. The Spirit leads Jesus to the desert, and Jesus is matched with Evil in order to underscore the truth that Jesus is the representative of heaven's power that has been unleashed against a hostile world, complete with wild and destructive forces ... here represented by the wild animals.

The author is assuring us, his readers, that Jesus is the victor against the worst that all these hostile forces of evil can throw at and against him. What is more, his note-worthy victory is at least as good and great as any of the pivotal Old Covenant figures who preceded him.

Thus Jesus is enabled to proclaim, with confidence, that a new time has broken into history. The person of Jesus is gathering workers ... soldiers some like to think of us, onward Christian soldiers marching as to war ... a war against evil in which evil itself, which, although not totally routed, is at least mortally wounded by the work of Christ and his followers.

I have seen it suggested that this is like D-Day and V-Day. The invasion of evil with Christ as the chief commander was on D-Day and the final defeat will be on V-Day.

Jesus thought it would be in his lifetime, or at least in his generation, but history has shown that it is longer than this time span. Everyone says that, ultimately, we will be the winners, there will be a V-Day, a victory and this assurance is given to us in the resurrection. There has been confusion as to when this might be, but most people like to think of it as being at the point at which we die to this earth.

That is understandable but wasn't Jesus' original message.

It is always nice to know that, in the end, we will prevail, but in the meantime things may be very uncomfortable. If the Holy Spirit can take over the will of Christ so convincingly in the story of the temptations, then perhaps he can do it in our lives as well why not?

We worship the same God, and live in the same world. If it works for Christ Jesus, then it will work for us also, is how the argument goes. There are times, certainly when we feel we are in the wilderness. There are also times when others prey on our vulnerability, and our inability to retaliate with any force. There are times when circumstances press in upon us.

What this passage of Mark's gospel shows us, is that we can in fact overcome these obstacles and win through.

Jesus, in his prayer formula, asks God that we should be delivered from the Evil One and not tempted beyond what we can cope with ... and Paul, writing to the Corinthians, reckons that we shall never be taken beyond our limits.

That is what we hope for and pray for, and is a worthy theme for Lent.

biz.yahoo.com Reuters Monday March 10, 4:33 pm ET

NEW YORK (Reuters) - World oil prices dipped on Monday as the United States and Britain struggled to convince wavering nations to back a United Nations resolution that would pave the way for war on Iraq.

Prices fell despite signs that the OPEC (News - Websites)oil producer cartel, which meets on Tuesday, was backing away from plans to suspend formal limits on oil production should the United States attack Iraq.

U.S. light crude (CLc1) slipped 51 cents to $37.27 a barrel, below its recent peak of $39.99. Oil prices set a record high of $41.15 a barrel during the 1990-91 Gulf crisis.

London benchmark Brent (LCOJ3) for April fell 35 cents to $33.69 a barrel, below a session high of $34.55, its highest level since November 2000.

Oil prices are up 20 percent this year on concerns that a war in Iraq could upset oil supplies from the Middle East.

A draft U.N. resolution proposed by the United States and Britain has set a deadline of March 17 for Iraq to satisfy all Security Council resolutions that it was cooperating fully with disarmament demands, or face war.

A vote could come as soon as Tuesday. The United States and Britain stepped up efforts to win support for the declaration while veto-wielding members France, Russia and China are opposed to military action.

U.S. officials said on Monday that Iraq appears to have placed explosives at the Kirkuk oil fields in northern Iraq to destroy them if a U.S. invasion occurred. An Iraqi oil ministry official later denied the claim.

MORE SERIOUS

The prospect of disruption of Middle East oil supplies in the event of war is all the more serious in that it follows a strike that has crippled Venezuela's oil industry.

The Venezuelan stoppage and strong heating demand due to a severe northern winter have helped to reduce stocks in the United States, the world's biggest oil consumer, to the lowest levels since the Arab oil embargo of the mid-1970s.

OPEC powers Saudi Arabia and Kuwait had hoped to find backing at a Tuesday meeting of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries to set aside production quotas if war prevented Iraqi deliveries.

Fellow OPEC member Iran condemned the plan. "Iran will not back politically motivated decisions," said Iranian Oil Minister Bijan Zanganeh. OPEC should not adopt any policy that implies support for a "U.S. military assault against one of OPEC's member states," he said.

Iran and others also fear a seasonal fall in demand in the second quarter could coincide with the end of a short war and send prices spiraling lower.

Saudi Arabia -- which holds the majority of OPEC's spare capacity -- is trying to convince the United States and other importers that OPEC can compensate for war stoppages without the need for a coordinated release from emergency stockpiles in consumer countries.

U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said the United States was prepared to release crude from emergency reserves in the event of supply disruption, but a decision to release stocks would be made only in the event of a supply emergency.

Behind the scenes, Saudi Arabia has made clear that it is prepared to pump at maximum levels, with or without OPEC backing. Riyadh has lifted output sharply in recent weeks and is now pumping more than 9 million barrels daily of its 10.5 million bpd capacity.

www.oneworld.net Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Mar 9 (IPS) - Authors of a secret 1966 Pentagon study on the use of tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs) in Vietnam say their conclusions that TNWs could be ''catastrophic'' to U.S. global interests are at least as compelling today as they were almost 40 years ago.

The study by four top defence consultants within the so-called JASON group, obtained and released Sunday by the California-based Nautilus Institute, found that the ''political effects of U.S. first use of tactical nuclear weapons in Vietnam would be uniformly bad and could be catastrophic'', given the concentration of U.S. forces in Vietnam at the time and the ease with which Vietnamese guerrillas could deliver nuclear weapons obtained from the Soviet Union or China.

''The use of TNW in Southeast Asia is likely to result in greatly increased long-term risk of nuclear operations in other parts of the world,'' the scientists argued, citing possible attacks on the Panama Canal, oil pipelines and storage facilities in Venezuela and even Israel's largest city, Tel Aviv.

''The main conclusion (of the report) is that the United States offers to any likely adversary much better targets for nuclear weapons than these adversaries offer to the United States,'' said Freeman Dyson, a Princeton University professor who was one of four authors of the 1966 report, 'Tactical Nuclear Weapons in Southeast Asia'.

''This is even more true in the fight against terrorism than it was in Vietnam,'' he added in an interview with Nautilus director, Peter Hayes.

The release of the report, for which Nautilus fought a 20-year battle with Freedom of Information Act (FoIA) officials at the Pentagon and the Energy Department, comes at a critical moment in U.S. nuclear-weapons policy and the twin crises in Iraq and North Korea.

Last week, 10 Democratic senators, led by Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, complained in a letter to U.S. President George W. Bush that recent changes in his administration's nuclear policy ''threatens the very foundation'' of international arms control.

''Recent public revelations ... suggest that your administration considers nuclear weapons as a mere extension of the continuum of conventional weapons open to the United States, and that your administration may use nuclear weapons in the looming military conflict against Iraq,'' the senators said, citing a news reports that Bush has signed a classified document permitting the use of nuclear weapons in response to biological and chemical attacks by Iraq.

In addition to that contingency, the Pentagon has also been considering the use of nuclear arms to destroy targets, such as enemy leaders or stocks of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that are buried deep underground - so-called ''bunker-busters''.

And, a classified Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) signed by Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld in December added officially non-nuclear states, including Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya, and Syria, to a list of nuclear-armed countries that could be targets for U.S. nuclear weapons, a major departure from past U.S. policy.

Last month, reports were leaked to the press that Rumsfeld has scheduled a secret meeting in August to discuss the construction of a new generation of nuclear weapons, including ''mini-nukes'', ''bunker-busters'' and neutron bombs, and to end a long-standing moratorium on the testing of nuclear weapons.

These reports have spurred rising concern in the arms-control community. ''It is impossible to overstate the challenge these plans pose to the comprehensive test ban moratorium, and U.S. compliance with ... the nuclear non-proliferation treaty,'' said Greg Mello, head of the Los Alamos Study Group, a nuclear watchdog group that obtained some of the latest documents, in a recent interview.

The discussion about breaching the firewall that has existed since 1945 between nuclear and conventional weapons has also contributed to alarm among the scientists who took part in the 1966 study on TNWs.

''Since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there has grown up a taboo against the use of nuclear weapons for anything but deterrence,'' said Steven Weinberg of the University of Texas, who won the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1979 and was one of the JASON authors.

''But there have been some signs recently of a weakening of this taboo in talk of the development of low-yield weapons for attacking underground facilities, and even in suggestions of a revival of interest in nuclear-armed, anti-missile interceptors. Let's hope that this will go no further than did the idea of using nuclear weapons in the war in Southeast Asia.''

The JASON group, founded in 1959, has included many of the nation's top scientists, who serve on a rotating base. It carries out 20 to 30 annual studies, most of which are classified. Last year, Rumsfeld's Pentagon tried to end the JASON contract, which fuelled concerns about the politicisation by the Bush administration of scientific advisory panels throughout the government.

The 1966 study, when the Vietnam War was close to its height, resulted from rumours that senior military officers, including some close to the White House, were considering the use of TNWs to interdict the ''Ho Chi Minh Trail'', the network of roads and paths that permitted North Vietnam to supply Viet Cong and its own forces in South Vietnam.

Distribution of the highly classified report apparently quashed all talk about using TNW in the Indochina War. From the perspective of the U.S. military, the most chilling sections of the report laid out the vulnerability of U.S. forces to nuclear attack with portable weapons that could be carried in small boats or trucks and could even be deployed in a mortar or recoilless rifle.

The study concluded that maintaining the taboo against nuclear weapons was key in reducing the chances of their use. ''(T)he danger of nuclear guerrilla activity is likely to arise in some degree during the next 20 years,'' it warned. ''But the dangers will certainly become more acute if the U.S. leads the way by initiating tactical nuclear war in Southeast Asia.''

''It is a stark warning that using nuclear weapons against Iraq, North Korea or trans-national terrorists - or threatening to do so - makes more likely the use of the only weapons that can really threaten the United States on the battlefield with untold consequences for innocent civilians here and abroad,'' said Natuilus' Hayes. (END/2003)