<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Electronic News Posted: Friday, June 13, 2003 By: David Coleman

Forbes magazine reports from Doha in Qatar that "Venezuela blames America for backing a failed coup attempt last year, and some in the Pentagon question the US alliance with Saudi Arabia, linchpin of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) cartel."

Meanwhile OPEC has remained silent in the face of the threat to a growing number of its members, confining debate to the price of its oil ... until now.

Venezuela has put the issue of sovereignty back to the top of the agenda at a  long-term strategy meeting.  Venezuelan Energy & Mines Minister Rafael Ramirez told reporters "We need to emphasize the idea that the world has left behind the colonial era ... when one power could take by force the resources of another country ... there are several countries which could feel threatened."

The proposal is unlikely to lead to any immediate threat to world oil supplies ... but Venezuela's idea of tightening OPEC's grip over two-thirds of the world's oil reserves, and seeking to avoid military attack, has awakened interest from other members ... it's a serious concern that OPEC members with big oil reserves will become occupied by foreign powers.

While the United States is anxious to secure cheap supplies, it has increased its military and political influence in key members such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and recently Iraq.  Under the leadership of Saudi Arabia, OPEC has traded revolutionary rhetoric for talk of partnership with consuming countries in the west and some cartel participants believe its now leaning too far Washington favor with the invasion of Iraq war as just one more bad omen.

"The United States can't continue to invent wars ... we want to have a deal with the world powers ... we will supply oil and gas, but you can't invade my country ... after Iraq, who is next?"

Venezuela's route is to link security of oil supply to OPEC nations' national security ... if approved, it would be raised at the next OPEC Heads of State summit in 2005.  But a number of OPEC delegations believe that if OPEC does not rediscover its ideological roots ... born in Venezuela ... and assert national sovereignty over natural resources, OPEC could be wrecked by aggressive US foreign policies and the combined the financial clout of the world's top four oil companies.

Iran and Libya are welcoming the move ... they are already under unilateral US sanctions and have no time for Washington dictates, thumbing their nose at the Bush administration at every opportunity.  They are, though, tethered by Saudi Arabia, which resolutely cuts political arguments from OPEC discussions in an attempt to make the group a more focused market manager.

Given the current neocolonialist climate in Washington, any attempt by OPEC to fend off United States attack could possibly add fuel to USA critics who see the OPEC cartel as an instrument of economic warfare ... Venezuelan OPEC officials believe that Venezuela's experience with foreign investment in the 1990s, and Washington's "hairy hand" involvement in the April 11, 2002 coup d'etat could be cloned with OPEC affiliates as the primary target for unilateral US intervention.

Venezuela's deputy oil minister Luis Vierma offered a presentation of facts to OPEC earlier this month and said "We have already said that Venezuela's experience could be repeated in other OPEC members with very negative results, destabilizing countries."  As a result Venezuela has proposed that OPEC should reinforce its sovereign powers establishing a minimum royalty rate across the group ... a tax on gross production.  Non-OPEC producers, however, prefer to taxes profit while Venezuela has increased its royalty rate to 30%.

EL UNIVERSAL

Relationships between Venezuela and the United States “can be improved,” said on Friday Roy Chaderton, Venezuelan Foreign Affairs Minister, who also criticized U.S. President George W. Bush’s special envoy for Latin America, Otto Reich, news agency EFE reported.

“The truth is that I did not want to pay to much attention (to Reich), because that is his recurrent speech. He decided to play the bad cop in our relationships. Periodically, specially when there are good news about the relationships between both countries, he makes his remarks,” Chaderton told state television network Venezolana de Televisión.

This week, Reich stated that his government “is concerned” that President Hugo Chávez’ role model “seems to be Fidel Castro,” but Caracas had made no official statements on this matter so far.

“Our relationships with the U.S. involve a significant space for growth and improvement. We foster this space with concrete moves. Relationships are fine, but can be improved. We have very important interests in the United States of which we should take care. And I am sure that the U.S. has very important interests in Venezuela they want to preserve.”

Meanwhile, former National Assembly’s president and deputy for ruling party MVR, William Lara, said that Reich’s remarks are a trap aimed at creating a conflict between Caracas and Washington.

“It is not prudential for the government to fall in this trap; the government is being framed to generate a hostile controversy between Venezuela and the United States,” Lara said. He added that the Venezuelan political process has no similarities whatsoever with any other political process in Latin America or the world.

Chaderton also referred to the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), a U.S.-sponsored integration project, saying that the idea of keeping “a fundamentalist position” instead of “finding common elements” among the countries in this continent was “silly.”

“This idea of devastating the other party never bear good fruits, even though one achieves successful results at first. What is important is to reach agreements allowing us to grow up,” he said, implying that FTAA is only beneficial for the U.S.

<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Elecronic News Posted: Friday, June 13, 2003 By: Chris Herz

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 19:19:36 -0400 From: Chris Herz lildemocracy@earthlink.net To: Editor@VHeadline.com Subject: Iraqi Oil Sales

Dear Editor: This month, the US vice-regal authority in Iraq will begin sales in the open market of crude and refined petroleum products from their new colony.

The obvious policy will be to hold prices low, so as to be the better able to destabilize Venezuela and other OPEC countries -- ultimately to allow US interests to overthrow their governments and confiscate their oil. All the better to enable and establish the new Bush policy of global hegemony through control of oil.

At the same time, the US satrapy in Colombia is seeking to push fighting, and social instability up to and over the border into your country.

The people of Venezuela and other countries had better expect a prolonged period of assault by both economic and military means. From the perspective of Washington, where I work, it is clear enough what is happening -- no more and no less than what Messrs Wolfowitz, Cheney and Rumsfeld have always openly advocated in their voluminous writings ... see their Project for a New American Century.

My advice, and that of other honest North Americans, will be to avoid casting blame for serious economic and security problems on your own (Venezuelan) government ... but rather look to the origins of the problems, right here in the US capital.

In the last US election, 87% of the male Anglo vote, and 63% of their sisters, went to Bush ... these people know where the cheap fuel for all those sport utility vehicles is going to come from. And with a $550 billion foreign exchange deficit, they're not interested in paying a fair market price for this commodity ... nor will they tolerate paying in any currency but all the dollars they can print.

Like it or not ... Venezuela is now exposed on the front line of the struggle for American Empire.

Chris Herz lildemocracy@earthlink.net

<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Electronic News Posted: Sunday, June 08, 2003 By: Brent Bielema

Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 20:03:38 -0500 From: Brent Bielema airgun177@hotmail.com To: Editor@VHeadline.com Subject: Article about John Maisto

Dear Editor: How can Mr. Maisto say that "democracy and free market have failed" when those concepts haven't been fully implemented?

Perhaps he really meant to say that the American government-promoted mutations of those ideas have failed, because in actuality they perpetuate crony capitalism. This would be closer to the truth.

VHeadline.com Venezuela is right to champion self-determination and democracy.

Yet, be aware that democracy is no panacea for organizing a society. As in the US, when a majority of people can vote themselves benefits at the expense of the others, there is a great danger of collapse. As did ancient societies. But a system of democratic representation, within the bounds of a freedom-respecting constitution, is an ideal to follow. That is, as long as the people remain constantly vigilant of their liberties and leaders.

A free market, on the other hand, is a naturally evolving phenomenon. It is the only economic system which really delivers the goods, because it is based on man's inherent selfishness. And as with physical laws, whenever its processes are interfered with, it is bound to produce more misery. But also beware that many alleged supporters of free market policies, actually support crony capitalism.

Thanks for an interesting article and a thought-provoking publication!

Brent Bielema airgun177@hotmail.com

<a href=www.khilafah.com>khilafah.com uploaded 29 May 2003

At the insistence of the Saudis, we are in the process of ending our military presence in that country, abandoning the Prince Sultan Air Base which cost us over a billion dollars and served as our former command and control center for the Persian Gulf until we were forced to move those functions to Qatar.

The recent terrorists bombings in Riyadh, which killed 10 Americans, and the rising hostility of the civilian population towards Americans, has led to the temporary closing of all of our diplomatic outposts in that country.

The Saudi bashers in the United States and the America bashers in Saudi Arabia might be happy about all this. But the rest of us should not.

For this has given rise to a situation which is a clear and present danger to the United States, dwarfing that which, we were given to believe, was represented by Iraq prior to our overthrow of the regime of Saddam Hussein.

If the House of Saud is overthrown, chaos would result, allowing the radical fundamentalists to either gain control or, at a minimum, guarantee that anarchy would prevail. This would open the door to those who would be both willing and able to cut off the supply of crude oil from Saudi Arabia to the West. This could happen either from within or without.

It would be the ultimate act of economic self-flagellation if it comes from within, one that, however, would bring the United States to its knees like no other.

For well over a half century the United States has been fully aware of the key importance of our alliance with the rulers of Saudi Arabia. It was based on a very simple quid pro quo. We provided protection to that country's royal family in return for its guaranteeing a reliable flow of crude oil to the world market upon which we now depend for over half of our crude oil needs -- Realpolitik at its best.

Due to its huge capacity -- the ability to pump as much as 12 million barrels a day -- Saudi Arabia is the world's "swing" producer. As such, it can move the world price for this fungible commodity more or less at will, within reasonable limits. It has proven this most recently by increasing its output by amounts sufficient to prevent violent swings in the price of oil when exports from two other key OPEC producers, Iraq and Venezuela, were suddenly suspended almost simultaneously.

Given the fragile state of the world economy the issue now, however, is not just price. It is supply. Should the supply of oil from Saudi Arabia drop to zero, economic growth of the West would drop to well below zero and stay there until a "solution" is found.

There are those who think that we already have the solution, namely our control of the Iraqi oil fields. That is a total illusion. It will take years to even get Iraqi output back over 2 million barrels a day. It will take years more to bring it to a target level of 4 million barrels a day. In the meantime, Saudi oil will remain indispensable.

Then there is military intervention. Since we will be maintaining a major military presence in the Gulf, especially in neighboring Iraq, for years to come, it should be a simple matter of our moving American forces in to occupy the Eastern Provinces where the Saudi oil fields are concentrated and keep the oil flowing. This is easier said than done, however.

We could get involved in a never-ending type of asymmetric warfare in Saudi Arabia where neither Abrams tanks nor smart bombs assure victory. Equally important, however, is that even today the transport and seaport facilities key to facilitating the export of oil from Saudi Arabia are extremely vulnerable to external terrorist attack.

They will be even more vulnerable in just a few months, after the military security umbrella which the United States has maintained over Saudi Arabia has been totally removed.

Al Qaeda could plunge the world into energy chaos by blowing up a single LNG tanker in the port of Ras Tanura. Over 10 percent of the world's oil supply flows through that single seaport. Sabotage of the crude oil pipeline from the Eastern Provinces to the Red Sea, which provides the only alternate route for the export of Saudi oil, would be even easier. Then what?

All this leads me to conclude that if a geopolitical nightmare occurs in Saudi Arabia, it would represent the mother of all external shocks. Potentially, it could jolt the economies of the West more than any event since World War II.

Source:  CBS Marketwatch