Prediction

FULL ARTICLE From the way the world is going, the region where a cataclysmic event may happen is in the Middle East. There are too many sides fighting for power and dominance of the region, and each is pushing the envelope further and further, currently testing the other sides’ patience and diplomatic ability.

The world today does not want to see war, necessarily. However, the veterans of World War II are dying out. They are the ones that have seen how devastating and brutal a world war can be, and how even the most civilized countries are ready to indiscriminately kill civilians and demolish whole cities in order to gain a simple ability to sell something that is located in a different land.

Commerce is the name of the game, and those that have the most resources have the best commercial ability. Commerce is power and leverage. It is control of whole economies. The United States has been very discreet about imperial aspirations. The basics of empire expansion are control of resources for a purpose of selling them. Not everyone has the power to expand in such a manner, and most take the old-school route — that is, guns blazing and bombs flying, with tanks sweeping in and destruction in the armies’ path.

The most important resource allocation in the world right now is located in the Middle East. Also, the biggest rivalries are in the Middle East. The interesting thing is that it was Europe and the United States that created the reason for there to be conflict in this area. They sparked old rivalries anew in the Middle East by creating Israel as a state. It was a gesture of good will from the Allies and the USSR. However, dislocating a large portion of people and telling them that their rivals are now the owners of the soil is bound to get one side pissed off.

And guess who that side is: the whole Arab world. Now, I am not against the State of Israel, but it is the reason for instability in the Middle East today. With European and mainly America’s backing and support, Israel was able to muster up one of the…FULL ARTICLE

Should Russia Side With Iran or the US?

FULL ARTICLE HERE Russia halts their weapons deal with Iran until they finish talks with the US President Barack Obama. This is seemingly small news. However, the results of this can lay the foundation for long term international relations between the two countries and the way both nations’ foreign policies will be formed for many years to come. The reason is that there may be two outcomes. One potential outcome is the Russia continues on trading weapons with Iran. Another outcome is that Russia stops weapons trading and joins US in persuading Iran to halt their weapons build up and potential nuclear program.

Outcome #1

The first outcome to consider is that Russia keeps on trading weapons with Iran, sending over experts and increasing cooperation between the two countries. Iran’s weapons build up and increased might will help it achieve its result of becoming the center for the Islamic world and will put it on the map as a country to be dealt with regarding any outside nation’s interests in the Middle East. This will help Iran further its interests in global affairs and will help them decrease the pressure that US and most of the West is putting on it with regard to its military and internal affairs.

For Moscow, there are benefits in this deal coming out of cooperation with Iran. Russian domestic weapons production will have huge sales contracts with Tehran and considering that Iran most likely will not buy weapons from the West Russian weapons and military production industry will hit the jackpot in the near future. They will basically supply all of Iran’s military with the equipment needed to make its military up to par with Western counterparts.

In addition, Russian gas and oil companies will be able to get huge contracts with Iranian oil and gas industries with regard to Caspian basin natural resources. Since Western companies will not be allowed to participate in the sale of contracts, Russian companies will most likely be the winners of most, if not all, contracts that Tehran may offer to build up their oil and gas industry. Considering this, United States currently sees it as in the national interest to keep Tehran out of the oil game because US and Iran bump heads very often and it will put in jeopardy the continuous flow of natural resources because US will have to use Tehran’s pipelines if it wants to diversify places from which it imports resources.

Outcome #2

The next possible outcome is that Moscow will decide to stop trading weapons with Tehran and will start siding with the US to get Iran to cease their military build up and nuclear program. Although on the surface it looks like Russia will not gain as much from this deal with US, it actually has the potential to benefit from the externality that comes of this. That externality is a large influence in Central Asian countries, former Soviet Republics, which have access to the Caspian and all of the natural resources that …CONTINUE READING

World’s Growing Interest in Africa

MORE ARTICLES HERE

Why is Africa all of a sudden coming up in the news more often? Evidence to that is the fact that news sources are coming out with more small stories about different African nations.

The caning of teachers in Tanzania, Zimbabwe’s elections, the civil war in Congo, the Ethiopian government, the potential to create an African Union and many other stories are appearing as headlines in many newspapers.

The answer is very simple – the continent with a lot of natural resources has been neglected for way over half of a century. Business opportunities are present in many parts of Africa. However, the instability of the regimes all over the continent turns potential investors away. Nations should participate actively in brining about stability in Africa for the sole reason of providing their domestic industries with business opportunities.

Most of the Middle East has been divided among corporations already. It is expensive and difficult to make a big name for a company in the Middle East unless it already has an extensive history and a world-wide recognised name. Nevertheless, this begins to create a sense of status quo in the business world because only the big players are allowed to participate in the extraction and sale of natural resources. Thus, it is time to move to new lands that have not yet been conquered by the corporate world.

Here’s a list of some African countries and their resources listed on the website of the University of Iowa:

- Congo (Former Zaire): copper, cobalt, diamonds, crude oil, coffee
- Tanzania: cotton, coffee, sisal, cashew nuts, tobacco
- Nigeria: oil, minerals, rubber, cocoa
- Kenya: tea, coffee, horticulture products, petroleum products
- Ghana: gold, diamonds, timber, aluminum
- South Africa: gold, diamonds, metals
- Ethiopia:  small reserves of gold, platinum, natural gas, hydropower

What is important to note that all of these countries, except for Congo (due to its instability), have been recently provided with financial help from the World Bank and the IMF – the two giants of global politics that have the power to decide whether certain countries sink or float. Looking at the map of the world it is easy to see the strategic location of many of these few African nations. Some provide access to ports, some provide resources, and in most cases those that provide access to ports also provide a connection to nations that are rich with resources.

Africa may become the next business ‘El Dorado’. China is already taking advantage of this ‘unconquered’ continent. By the end of 2006 direct Chinese trade with Africa has reached $US 50 billion. That’s not considering the growth in the last two years and the investments made by the IMF and the World Bank. All things considered, expect more extensive media coverage of Africa in the close future and more international interest in the continent in the years to come.

MORE ARTICLES HERE

Russia Taking Over US’ Central Asia

FULL ARTICLE HERE The political game is all about having leverage. Russia, currently, is doing all it can to gain leverage against the American presence in Central Asia. This is a vital time to do so because the new US President has not yet established himself as a hardliner and has not made any bold foreign policy moves. The Bush administration fought hard on every level to keep anyone else from meddling in Washington’s affairs in the region. The US provided a lot of support for numerous former Soviet republics in Central Asia in order to secure their political dominance in the region.

One of the most important reasons for having friendly nations in Central Asia, especially Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, was because they provided vital supply bases for US operations in Afghanistan. The majority of US personnel, ordnance, and supplies were channeled through the US Air Force base in Kyrgyzstan. Now, however, the United States has lost that base and Moscow has acted upon an opportunity to provide a counterweight to US policies abroad.

First, Kyrgyzstan stated that the US base that was virtually sold to Russia for $2 billion can be used to still transport humanitarian supplies to US forces in Afghanistan. However, it means that Washington will have to find another base to use for directing supplies to their forces fighting the Taliban. The strategic advantage of the base in Kyrgyzstan was that it was only 1,5 hours of flight time away from the US airfield in Bagram.

Second, Moscow recently offered NATO the opportunity to use their Air Force to transport supplies to US forces in Afghanistan, since they were close to Afghanistan and it would take the burden off NATO to maintain active bases in the region. For Russia this means a lesser NATO and American presence in the region. It also gives Moscow an opportunity to control the flow of supplies intended for the war in Afghanistan. This is the most important factor in the ordeal over Central Asia, having leverage against American policies abroad. If NATO agrees to use the Russian Air Force to bring …CONTINUE READING HERE

Controlling the Caspian – Russia’s New Military Alliance

FULL ARTICLE HERE The news of seven post-soviet nations creating a military rapid reaction force should come as no surprise, for it was only a matter of time before a military alliance of some former soviet republics was created. Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan are putting together a force whose central command will be in Moscow. The force will be able to dispatch a rapid reactionary force to any region in the post-soviet space.

This is actually very important because this news came out the same time that Kyrgyzstan announced that it will close a U.S. base on its territory. Most likely there was a struggle for influence between Moscow and Washington, and analysts may only guess why Kyrgyzstan chose Russia, but the fact remains that the US is not going to take this loss lightly. Trying to guess future reactions of these two powers would be a waste of time for there’s not enough information to do so. However, it is necessary to analyze why this step by these seven nations is important and what are further implications of this Rapid Reactionary Force (RRF).

Natural Resources

Every country except for Belarus is vital in its own way to protect Russia’s interest in the Caspian. Presence of Russian military bases and a joint military with these Central Asian countries gives Moscow an ability to secure their resource transit routes and the resources themselves from providing America an alternative to the Persian Gulf for oil.

It is a known fact that United States has spent a lot of time and money trying to increase their presence in the Caspian to lessen their dependence on oil coming from the Middle East. It only makes sense that Russia wants to close off this alternative for the United States. If this RRF is a successful endeavor, the United States will have to deal with another military alliance that truly does not want Washington to meddle in its affairs. The newly established RRF will also be able to react to any threat that would otherwise threaten the continuous flow of oil and gas through the pipelines and by ship to refineries in Russia and other nations of the RRF.

This military union is also a concern to Georgia and Azerbaijan as well. These two nations host foreign oil refineries and pipelines in Supsa and Baku. Especially after the recent war CONTINUE READING –>

Fighting for Resources – True Causes of Today’s Wars

FULL ARTICLE HERE

The way wars are fought has changed over time, but the reason for the wars hasn’t. It is not about religion, it is not about simply acquiring new territory. It is about acquiring resources and protecting their flow into the nation that is currently controlling those resources. Currently, not all “takeovers” have been militarily achieved.  Nations that risk too much in an open conflict will bend to the requests from more powerful nations in return for more wealth from those that are already in control. The more powerful nations or blocs are the US, China, Russia, and the EU. All the others that are on a less resource-based economic “diet” do not meddle in affairs of resource acquisition. At least not to the extent that the afore mentioned nations do.

However, armed conflicts are what this article will be about. Nations that are not developed, that are unstable, are the most probable targets for an invasion by more powerful countries in order to control the resources and vital trade routes.  Most nations that are considered as developing already “willingly” share their resources. African nations, certain Middle Eastern… FULL ARTICLE HERE

Ecuador’s First Steps Towards Economic Independence

FULL ARTICLE HERE “Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa said Friday that he will not pay interest on the nation’s foreign debt and that he was prepared to accept any consequence” –CNN. And so it begins. Latin American countries are a cornerstone of the global corporate empire’s hold on developing nations. Although these countries are not truly developing, they are called such due to large U.S. investments and a large corporate presence.

Rafael Correa stated that although around $US 7 billion has been paid towards interest on its outstanding loans, the principal sum remains the same, which is $US 4 billion. The World Bank makes huge profits off of countries like Ecuador. It is an intricate process involving many resources that make such schemes come to light. Although expensive, returns on Western efforts in persuading underdeveloped nations to accept huge loans that they cannot afford are enormous.

U.S. Involvement in Ecuador

The United States has played a huge role in Ecuador since the 1950’s. U.S. consulting companies such as Chas T. Main, Bechtel, Halliburton, and many others have convinced the Ecuadorian government to take out huge loans from the World Bank to finance big projects which were supposed to grow the nation’s economy at rates far exceeding realistic expectations. Using econometrics and other statistical analysis to forecast the growth, consultants inflated their analysis to persuade the government of the Latin American nation to go through with… FULL ARTICLE HERE

Energy Wars: Diversify or Die

FULL ARTICLE HERE on Russia Today.

It would be very naïve to think that oil producing countries would all come together during the financial crisis in order to adjust prices to suit all the parties involved. Even more naïve would be to think that Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela, Iran and other oil economies are good friends. Well, Russia, Iran, and Venezuela are definitely closer than, for example, Saudi Arabia and Russia.

Nevertheless, competition drives prices lower and also takes away market share from other competitors in a given industry. According to the New York Times, Iran and Venezuela both need US $95/barrel in order to maintain balanced budgets. Russia’s ideal oil price is US $70/barrel. Saudi Arabia needs a price of US $55/barrel in order to meet … FULL ARTICLE HERE

Elections ‘08, Economics, and Recent Events in the Caucasus

Win-Win for the GOP

United States in general had a win-win situation in Georgia. If Russia took no action, or anything short of intervening in force in South Ossetia, the republican party was going to take credit for putting Saakashvili in power, promoting democracy that was fighting to for its right to exist, and so on and so forth. In case of Georgia losing the war, Republicans still benefit, because in the 1980’s Reagan, who was a Republican, kept the Soviets at bay, called it an “Empire of Evil”, and took credit for toppling the Soviet government and defeating the Soviet Union. Isn’t that just great, seeing as how Obama threatens to shake the Republicans up and bring about a lot of changes, against which all of G.O.P. is fighting so hard? Obamacan only do one thing in this situation, and that is to side with McCain’s reaction to the war in Georgia. Republicans are scared of Obama, and they know that the American people do not really care about Georgia or the South Ossetians. So at the expense of thousands of dead, and hundreds of thousands left without homes, the G.O.P. decided to better their falling chances of winning the elections.

It is understandable why the Republican party simply “has to” win these elections. Their businesses in the Middle East and all of the time and money invested in planning an attack on oil rich Iran would be wasted, for Obama is looking to openly talk with Tehran, and actually make progress towards stabilizing the U.S. relations with unfriendly countries in the region.

Oil, Once Again

Anyone that knows anything about economics, if a war is erupted ina  region, usually prices of goods increase. The goods coming from Middle East are *drum roll* OIL. Ever since the wars in the Middle East started, price of oil has steadily increased and those that trade the commodity – all politicians invest their money – have made good buck on the situation. Even better, politicians are on the “inside”, meaning, they know preemptively, what the official Washington will do, thus knowing, not speculating, on whether prices of commodities increase or drop.

In addition, the BP oil pipeline runs around Russia, through Georgia. If the constant supply of oil through the region is threatened, prices will increase, as speculators in the market will anticipate a drop in the supply. The price of oil in the recent months has been steadily fluttering around $120-$130/barrel. If the prices has more or less been constant, then no one makes money. A decrease or increase is needed for those that have a lot invested in the commodity.

Putting the Two Together

George W. Bush and many other politicians are reaping the fruits (cash) of the recent events in in Georgia. Bush is a lame duck and now he is using all the power and information he has to make a buck. You can’t blame him, his approval ratings are down, his party has virtually turned on him, so now he is trying to get as much benefit from this as he can retire and live in peace.

The GOP, knowing that their credibility has been damaged is trying to use their Cold War reputation to keep its representation in the White House – basically have a Republican President. To do so, it only makes sense that if democracy is threatened (anywhere in the world) by an old nemesis (Russia), then it can say, “We’ve toppled their regime before, and we’ll do it again!”. Which is exactly what is happening. Republicans do not want change, which is the platform on which Obama is running. Obama is not ignorant, he knows that this war in the Caucasus is damaging his chances of winning the Presidential race. After all, McCain is considered to have military experience, although questionable, and Obama is just young, black Senator from Illinois.