newswire.ca

HOUSTON, May 6 /CNW/ -- After participating in a

conference hosted by Petroleos de Venezuela, executives in the energy industry expressed a high degree of confidence in the recovery and future growth of Venezuela's energy business. More than 400 business executives and leaders in the financial, governmental and academic sectors participated in the conference, "PDVSA, a Competitive and Sustainable Player in the International Energy Business," yesterday in Houston.

"PDVSA offered a very compelling case in three areas -- the speed with which they are reviving their operations, the opportunity for foreign investment -- clearly the country is open to investment -- and a particularly strong case for the country as a whole," said Vahan Zanoyan, president and CEO of PFC Energy, based in Washington, D.C.  "They made the point that social justice and economic development in Venezuela are not contradictory."

The conference focusing on the political, legal and financial situation of Venezuela and its oil industry was led by a high level Venezuelan delegation headed by Mr. Bernardo Alvarez, Ambassador from Venezuela to the United States; Mr. Luis Vierma, Deputy Minister of Hydrocarbons; Dr. Ali Rodriguez Araque, President of PDVSA; and Mr. Luis Marin, Director of PDVSA.

In his remarks to the group, Alvarez stressed the country's commitment to both internal and external stakeholders.  "Venezuela stands today proud of its role as a reliable supplier of energy to all nations, proud of its commitment to remain an open and market economy in which private capital can be invested with assurance, proud of its commitment to social justice, and proud of its understanding that social justice and private sector gains are compatible goals."

Dr. Rodriguez Araque, noting the country's abundant resources and newly competitive business portfolio, asserted, "Jointly with our partners, we are committed to satisfying the world's increasing demand for oil and gas."

Jim Ellington, U.S Representative from Mississippi and chairman of The Energy Council, commented that the mood of the event "exuded confidence."

"The enthusiasm came through not just for a return to normalcy in Venezuela, but for continuing improvement," Ellington added.

"The event gave those attending a good understanding of what's happening in Venezuela, and the sense that it may be the place to invest right now," said Joseph Carraro, a state senator from New Mexico.

Even those already involved in Venezuela came away with a renewed confidence.  Diana Szilard, manager of external affairs for ConocoPhillips Venezuela, Ltd., pointed out that ConocoPhillips is one of the largest current investors in the oil industry in Venezuela.  "It is very interesting and encouraging to hear about the plans and business that PDVSA has for the future," she said.  "We encourage this kind of initiative because it keeps the oil community informed."

 CONTACT:
 Karen Allen (karenAvollmerpr.com)
 Alice Brink (alicevollmerpr.com)
 713-970-2100

/Web site:  http://www.pdvsa.com.ve /

A Democracy of Convenience

Posted by click at 3:10 AM in anti-US

liberalslant.com By: Matthew Riemer - 05/06/03

The Bush administration's 2003 invasion of Iraq marks the fiftieth anniversary of U.S. interventionism in the Middle East, which began with the CIA's overthrow of Iranian Prime Minister Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953. These two events, both noteworthy in their own right, form the perfect pair of bookends for a large shelf of Washington's Middle East exploits -- from the bombing of Libya in 1986 to the first Gulf War in 1991 to involvement in Lebanon in the early '80s. 

The '53 coup is significant because it was the first successful overthrow of a foreign government by the CIA. Its success showed just how much influence Washington could have in Eurasia, especially in regions on the doorstep of the Soviet Union. In short, it was a remarkable projection of power. 

The most recent military action in the Middle East, "Operation Iraqi Freedom" as it's been dubbed by the U.S., represents a fundamental shift in how Washington chooses to achieve its policy goals -- now with increased unilateralism and nationalism. The policy of preemptive warfare has been both articulated and executed by the Bush administration in Iraq. 

One of the most interesting observations regarding these two events though reveals a strange inverse relationship they seem to have, which possibly comments on broader policy intentions. 

In both cases, the United States is carrying out "regime change." And in both cases, policy makers are concerned with how the oil industry is going to be run (nationalization/privatization). However, in the former case, the CIA removed an appointed leader and replaced him with a dictator who would then rule for 26 (1953-1979) more years. In the latter case, the opposite occurred as the U.S. removed a dictator who ruled for 26 (1976-2003) years and has replaced him with a U.S. civil administration, which will presumably attempt to foster some kind of democratic institutions. 

This illustrates that the chief U.S. interest in both cases was resource security and regional hegemony/strategic positioning and not the freeing of people from the yoke of dictatorship. In Iran, the nationalization of the Anglo-Iranian Company by the Majlis threatened British and American oil interests by shutting foreign investors out of Iran's lucrative industry, which at the time, the BBC writes, "[was] the UK's largest single investment overseas." It also further distanced the U.S. and weakened its influence in a crucial Cold War state. So in this situation, it's dictatorship over democracy. 

In 2003, the United States could no longer let Saddam Hussein -- a man who threatened U.S. interests and complicated Washington's plans just by his presence -- rule Iraq, which had become the epicenter of the world's most vital region and home to the second largest proven oil reserves. In this example, it's democracy over dictatorship. 

When "democracy" (or, at least, non-dictatorship) happens to be Washington's goal (even rhetorically), it can make for a great sell, as was surely seen over the past several weeks. On the other hand, just because "dictatorship" can't be as readily sold to the public doesn't mean interventions that empower despotic regimes are off-limits. Forays like the CIA's in Iran aren't only for days gone by. In fact, the current situation in Venezuela resembles Iran fifty years ago quite uncannily: upstart leader connected to nationalization of the oil industry from a country with regional strategic importance is overthrown by a plutocratic/military class in the interests of corporations and foreign capital. And even though President Hugo Chavez was able to return to power, the pattern of regime change aimed at governments who resist globalization and the infiltration of their countries by foreign capital continued. So, in Venezuela, like Iran, it's dictatorship over democracy. 

So democracy is only Washington's preferred political system when it happens to be one of convenience (coincides with policy). Such is the case with Iraq in 2003 because Washington's goals, to a degree, overlap with a democratic Iraq. But if Iraqi democracy produces the world's next Hugo Chavez, policy makers will very quickly have little use for such a system.

Matthew Riemer has written for years about a myriad of topics, such as: philosophy, religion, psychology, culture, and politics. He studied Russian language and culture for five years and traveled in the former Soviet Union in 1990. In addition to his work with Liberal Slant, he is also the Director of Operations at: www.YellowTimes.org as well as being in the midst of a larger autobiographical/cultural work. Matthew lives in the United States.

Find more articles by Matthew Riemer in the Liberal Slant Archives

Back to: Liberal Slant

The views expressed herein are the writers' own and do not necessarily reflect those of Liberal Slant www.liberalslant.com

2003-2002-2001-2000-1999-1998 LIBERALSLANT Web Publications. All rights reserved. liberalslant@entermail.net

Syria And The Overwhelming American Power

Posted by click at 3:05 AM Story Archive May 10, 2003 (Page 6 of 7)

daralhayat.com Marzuq Al Halabi     Al-Hayat     2003/05/06

The American threats against Syria aim, in their first phase, to put that country on the defensive, which is hardly a comfortable situation. Such situation becomes suffocating when the American administration monopolizes not only economic activities, but also the right to direct accusations and define the issues, as well as put individuals and governments on trial.

Still, I don’t think that the motives for attacking Iraq exist in the Middle East. They exist in the logic of ruling elites in America. Mainly economic and intellectual elites. They are now driven by the joy of military and political victory in Iraq and haunted by new convictions that they are capable of implementing all their schemes.

The surplus in American power is based at three levels: military, economic and political standing throughout the world. Such surplus has placed the Americans above international legitimacy and its institutions illustrated by the UN and the Security Council. Yet most analysts in the Arab world continue to base their hopes on false dreams. They still expect the Red Army to come and liberate them. Still we cannot, even in Syria, rely on a united Arab position. The notions of Arabism and Arab world have changed and we must review their premises. If we assume that we are not a “united world with an eternal message,” then we must deal with Egypt the same way we deal with any other country in the world, and we must appeal to public opinion in the UAE, for example, the way we appeal to public opinion in the U.S. Only then will we be able to achieve gains in dealing with the assault on Syria.

The theory of excess of power demands changing it into an act that is not possible its temptation. That was translated in the case of Afghanistan and later in Iraq. But there are other concealed illustrations, such as dominating Arab oil and bribing the Bulgarians or blackmailing President Hosni Mubarak. Moreover, like any other absolute theory that of excess of power tries to justify its crimes. And just like outrages were committed in the name of socialism or fascism as two absolute theories, we can witness similar outrages committed in the name of defending democracy in the wake of 9/11.

For a long period of time, combating communism was a pretext for supporting tyrannies around the world. And in the case of Iraq, the invasion that caused destruction and killing was justified as aimed at “liberating” the people of Iraq. But the drive of the American toward Iraq will not be the last push. In one way, it resembles the end of absolute capitalism just as it was the end of absolute socialism. Moreover, democracy as we knew us so far is certainly heading toward its end. The excess of American power came to declare the conclusion of democracy in the sense that it pushes the notion of national security of the state above the concept of the American state itself, as well as above other countries. The Iraqi oil and that of Venezuela are two resources that the American hegemony was unable to subdue by diplomatic means. And if the journey began with occupying Iraq, Syria is the next target of the American power surplus. But the issue is further than oil. It is one that demands obtaining the submission of the smaller powers to the bigger ones.

The war on Iraq maybe the preamble for a world war in which the small powers pay for the struggles among the larger ones. And no matter how strange it might seem, it all depends on the abilities of the Iraqis to resist the Anglo-American occupation. No one knows how the new world order is going to look like.

Mr. Al Halabi is a Palestinian academic from Al Karmal.

Total Fina 1st-Quarter Profit Rises 49% on Oil Prices (Update3)

Posted by click at 2:24 AM in Big Oil

By Jad Mouawad and Tom Cahill

Paris, May 6 (<a href=quote.bloomberg.com>Bloomberg) -- Total Fina Elf SA, Europe's third- largest oil company, said first-quarter profit jumped 49 percent after prices surged amid a war in Iraq and disruptions in supplies from Nigeria and Venezuela.

Net income rose to 2.12 billion euros ($2.4 billion), or 3.28 euros a share, from 1.43 billion euros, or 2.13 euros, last year, Chief Financial Officer Robert Castaigne said in an interview. Sales rose 19 percent to 28.3 billion euros.

Oil companies such as Royal Dutch/Shell Group and Exxon Mobil Corp. have posted record profits in the first quarter as crude oil prices climbed to a 12-year high. Prices have fallen by about a third since February, signaling earnings are poised to slide, analysts have said.

Total shares rose as much as 1.1 euros to 123.9 euros on the Paris stock market. The stock has lost 9 percent this year, compared with a 2 percent drop for the Paris benchmark CAC 40 index. Shell has lost almost 5 percent in London.

Unlike its larger rivals, Total's results were crimped by a drop in the dollar, Castaigne said. A stronger euro reduces the profit from dollar-based oil sales.

`Sensitive' to Dollar

Our company is very sensitive to the dollar,'' he said. When there is a decrease of the dollar by 10 percent, our earnings also decrease by 10 percent.''

The Paris-based company repeated a forecast that production will grow by 5 percent this year, after a 10 percent growth rate in 2002. The company holds its annual shareholders meeting today and plans to change its name to Total SA.

Oil and gas production in the first quarter rose by 5 percent, equaling 2.516 million barrels a day, the company said. Total is on track to invest 8.7 billion euros in its operations this year, it said.

Oil prices advanced over recent months on concern a war in Iraq would disrupt supplies from the Persian Gulf. That boosted profitability from pumping oil, while its refining unit benefited from declining inventories. Crude oil in New York averaged $33.75 a barrel in the first quarter, compared with $21.59 in the same period a year earlier.

Total Fina was expected to report profit of 2.06 billion euros, according to the average estimate of seven analysts surveyed by Bloomberg. Last Updated: May 6, 2003 03:20 EDT

Venezuela GDP Likely Shrank 29% in 1st Qtr: Survey (Update2)

Posted by click at 2:22 AM in ve economy

By Alex Kennedy

Caracas, May 9 (<a href=quote.bloomberg.com>Bloomberg) -- Venezuela's economy probably had its biggest contraction ever in the first quarter as an unsuccessful strike to oust President Hugo Chavez crippled oil production and consumer spending.

Gross domestic product probably shrank 29 percent in the first quarter from the same period a year ago, according the median forecast of seven economists in a Bloomberg survey. That loss almost matches oil's one-third contribution to the Venezuelan economy. The previous worst contraction was 17 percent in the fourth quarter of 2002.

``Chavez is still popular with a lot of the poor, but this economic depression is really going to test that popularity,'' said Benito Berber, an analyst with research firm IDEAglobal in New York.

The shrinking economy may accomplish what Chavez's opponents failed to get with the two-month strike: a new president. Chavez may face a binding referendum on his mandate later this year, which if he loses would lead to new elections. The strike, which cost the economy $7.4 billion, helped drive unemployment to 21 percent, and polls show about 60 percent of Venezuelans want Chavez to leave.

The economy has contracted two of the four years the former army lieutenant colonel has been in office. The central bank usually announces GDP results six to eight weeks after the end of a quarter.

The country's oil industry, whose production and revenue usually account for about 30 percent of GDP, fell 45 percent in the January-March period, according to Alejandro Grisanti, an analyst at Santander Investment in Caracas.

Oil Production

Oil production, which fell to 150,000 barrels a day in the first week of January, rose to 3 million barrels a day by the end of March, or back to pre-strike levels, according to the government. Oil output averaged 1.8 million barrels a day during the first three months of the year, down about 35 percent from the year before, the government said.

The strike and concern that a war in Iraq would cut production from that country boosted crude oil prices to $34.67 a barrel on March 12 from $23.63 on Nov. 13. Prices fell to $26.98 yesterday.

``The productive apparatus has been hit by everything that has happened recently -- the strike, the social and political conflict, the uncertainty, the lack of currency,'' said Domingo Maza, one of seven central bank directors.

Chavez restricted foreign currency trading in January to bolster international reserves depleted by falling confidence in the bolivar.

Since then the government has authorized the sale of only $105 million, compared with daily sales of about $60 million before the restrictions. The lack of dollars has stifled production in a country that imports 60 percent of consumer goods and where many companies rely on foreign parts and raw material to operate.

The government fixed the exchange rate at 1,600 bolivars a dollar in February. Companies and individuals scrambling for dollars have pushed the unofficial rate to about 2,200 bolivars.

Provisions

It's not just that we're running out of food, there are no car parts, tools, chemicals for companies, fertilizers for farmers,'' said Albis Munoz, president of Fedecamaras, the largest business association. When you attack private business, when you cut off dollars, you're cutting off the Venezuelan people.''

The government says it will import essential goods to avoid shortages.

Chavez's relations with many of the country's business people have been tense since he decreed 49 laws in October 2001 that included one allowing the government to confiscate private property.

There must be an agreement between the government and private sector over resources and the division of labor,'' Maza said. Without it, there's no possibility of overcoming the economic crisis we're in.''

Inflation quickened to 31 percent last year, a five-year high, from 12 percent in 2001.

The following chart provides a breakdown of forecasts for first quarter and 2003 GDP growth by firm:

T* Firm First Quarter 2003 IDEAglobal -19 -9.1 J.P. Morgan -24 -15 Santander Investment -35.2 -9.3 Banco Mercantil -27.1 -11.3 Deutsche Bank -38.5 -15.3 UBS Warburg -29 -15.5 BBVA -36 -12.3 Bear Sterns -15 Morgan Stanley -16.9 Veneconomy -16.8 IMF -17 Last Updated: May 9, 2003 13:47 EDT

You are not logged in