-Caveat Lector- The Caspian Connection: Pipeline Politics and the Balkan War ------------------------------------- - NATO's Eyes on the Prize - Today Kosovo, Tomorrow Azerbaijan - How a DNC Donor Changed U.S. Pipeline Policy - NATO Slips into Caspian Region - The China Connection - Europe's Goals, America's Troops from: http://38.201.154.108/articles/?a=1999/6/9/103249 The Caspian Connection: Pipeline Politics and the Balkan War ------------------------------------- Carl Limbacher and Caron Grich June 9, 1999, NewsMax.com What has America accomplished in the Balkans after 70-plus days of NATO bombardment? Cease fire negotiations sputter along on a wing and a prayer. And if they are successful, America will be rewarded with the privilege of contributing 7,000 troops to a force of 50,000 Kosovo "peacekeepers". Tour of duty: indefinite. Though Bill Clinton's Balkan adventure did much to keep the press distracted from matters like Chinese nuclear espionage and inconvenient rape charges (reporters last hit Clinton with a question about Juanita Broaddrick just five days before he ordered airstrikes on Serbia), it's debatable whether Kosovar refugees will be better off for all the effort. Slobodan Milosevic, recently dubbed an official war criminal, will retain power over Serbia. And NATO may even have to accommodate a Russian presence in Kosovo, which will only further discourage displaced ethnic Albanians from returning home. Not much of a victory. Not much, that is, until one considers another factor that may have propelled NATO into the Balkans; an incentive which has nothing to do with humanitarian relief or scandal spin. NATO's Eyes on the Prize If President Clinton were to level with the American people, he might just explain NATO's first hot war by using a variation of his old campaign theme: "It's the global economy, stupid." Because NATO's entry into the Balkans, though thus far an abject failure in terms of the mission's ostensible goals, places the West, and especially Western Europe, on the doorstep of resources so vast that the move could mean decades worth of economic well-being for member nations. Ponder this nearly two year-old observation from the New York Times, reported when a U.S. security force in the Balkans was only a twinkle in Madeleine Albright's eye: "Forget mutual funds, commodity futures and corporate mergers. Forget South African Diamonds, European currencies and Thai stocks. The most concentrated mass of untapped wealth known to exist anywhere is in the oil and gas fields beneath the Caspian (Sea) and lands around it.... The strategic implications of this bonanza hypnotize Western security planners as completely as the finances transfix oil executives." (New York Times -- September 21, 1997) Or this, from a conservative think tank the year before: "The vast expanses of the former Soviet Union harbor oil and gas riches which will be crucial to funding the global economy in the next century. The huge oil reserves, estimated at over 25 billion barrels under the Caspian Sea and in the central Asian republics of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan are similar to those in Kuwait and larger than those in Alaska's Northern Slope and the North Sea combined." (Ariel Cohen, Senior Policy Analyst, The Heritage Foundation - January 25, 1996) "Control over these energy resources and export routes out of the Eurasian hinterland is quickly becoming one of the central issues in post Cold War politics," Cohen added, without noting that Caspian oil played a major role a pre-Cold War geo-strategic conflict as well. In an attempt to gain control over access routes to the same oil reserves during World War II, the Third Reich waged the bloodiest battle ever fought, the siege at Stalingrad. More recent history shows that war for oil isn't exactly a new concept, even for America. When the U.S. went to war to chase Saddam Hussein out of Kuwaiti oil fields in 1991, then-U.S. Secretary of State James Baker was unabashed about our motives, saying that there were three reasons behind Operation Desert Storm: "Jobs, jobs and jobs." Today Kosovo, Tomorrow Azerbaijan Ever since the break-up of the old Soviet Union, the West has had its eye on the oil fields of Central Asia. And security for pipelines carrying the crude out is a priority concern that could make or break billions of dollars already invested by U.S. oil companies like Mobil, Chevron, Amoco and others. But to get Caspian oil to the trillion petro-dollar market of Western Europe, planners need alternatives to old pipeline routes that traversed Iran and Russia. That means development of the huge Eurasian reserves must focus on the corridor between those two potentially hostile regions. Almost all roads lead to Baku, Azerbaijan, the Caspian seaport believed to be sitting on trillions of dollars of untapped crude. 12 energy companies have entered into a $7.5 billion consortium, the Azerbaijani International Operating Company (AIOC). Five are U.S. based: Penzoil, Unocal, McDermott and Exxon, and Amoco, now merged with British Petroleum. In April the 515 mile Baku-Supsa pipeline opened for business and was hailed by Azerbajaini officials as a breakthrough because it avoided Russian territory, thereby adding to Azerbaijan's economic independence. But Baku-Supsa will be able to handle only 10% of the expected Caspian gusher. The AIOC is considering two other possible pipeline routes to the West: The Northern Route: From Baku northwest through the Russian Republic of Chechnya, to the Black Sea port of Novorossiysk, where tankers would transport the oil through the Bosporous and Dardenelle straights to the Agean Sea. (Some energy experts worry that transport through the unregulated Bosporus passage would represent a chokepoint for terrorists, with a cutoff of Caspian oil easily accomplished by sinking a single tanker. Alternative plans include a detour north across the Black Sea to Burgas, Bulgaria -- where the oil would be pipelined to Alexandroupolis, Greece along what has been dubbed the Trans-Balkan Pipeline.) The Mediterranean Route: From Baku west, skirting Iran through Turkey -- where Western tankers would collect the oil from Turkish port of Ceyhan. The Baku-Ceyhan pipeline is the strong favorite of U.S. energy planners. Undoubtedly, Baku-Ceyhan has its advantages. It avoids some of the risks posed by warring factions along other pipeline routes. And should, for instance, Kurdish rebels attempt to disrupt the free flow of oil, NATO member Turkey could be counted upon to resolve the situation to the West's satisfaction, especially since Turkey itself would stand to gain hundreds of millions of dollars in pipeline tolling fees alone. How a DNC Donor Changed U.S. Pipeline Policy Some suspect that the Clinton administration staunchly supports the Baku-Ceyhan route, not so much out of concern over pipeline security -- but because the Turkish route was initially favored by a major contributor to the Democratic National Committee, Lebanese oilman Roger Tamraz. As recently as May 1995, the U.S. took no official position supporting either the Black Sea, Turkish or other pipeline plans. That month, Tamraz met with NSC official Shelia Heslin but failed to sell her on his plan to pump oil from Baku to the Turkish port city of Yumurtalik. Afterwards, Heslin tried to keep Tamraz out of the White House and away from Clinton. But throughout the summer and fall of 1995, $195,000 of Tamraz's money made its way into DNC coffers. That September, the persistent oilman attended two White House coffees with Clinton on hand. Afterwards, former Clinton Chief of Staff Mack McLarty arranged for Tamraz to meet with Energy Department officials. By October, Tamraz's project had the backing of the Clinton State Department. The pressure brought to bear on Tamraz's behalf was quite impressive, considering that even with his subsequent donations, he had given a only $300,000. But for that amount, spare change really for someone in Tamraz's league, DNC chairman Don Fowler personally chatted up Ms. Heslin on Tamraz's behalf. Around the same time, even the Clinton CIA began sending Heslin favorable reports on the Lebanese oilman. But just as Tamraz seemed to be making headway, the Azerbaijani oil consortium began to move away from the Turkish route, seeing projects like Tamraz's as too costly. Falling crude prices throughout the late 90's cooled other larger oil companies on a Turkish pipeline as well. Still the Turkish route, Baku-Ceyhan in particular, continued to enjoy strong American support, despite the fact that by October 1998 the major oil companies had flat out rejected the plan. Writing for Radio Free Europe/ Radio Liberty in May, Michael Lelyveld explained it this way: "For several months, the gap between the U.S. government and the oil industry appeared to be widening.... the (Clinton) administration has refused to accept the industry's rejection and has mounted a determined diplomatic effort to keep the Baku-Ceyhan scheme alive.... The result has been increasing friction and loss of (U.S.) credibility on the pipeline issue." One possible reason the U.S. stubbornly clings to the now rejected Turkish pipeline may be Turkey's ever increasing value as a strategic ally. Before the peace agreement, there were plans for NATO planes to begin striking Serbia from Turkish bases like Bandirma and Balikesir. Turkey supplied the U.N. coalition with its northern air bases for 1991's successful Persian Gulf campaign against Iraq. Making Turkey the major Western conduit for the Caspian oil basin jackpot would help the NATO member evolve from a third world economic backwater to a major European player. And of course, a significant NATO presence in Turkey would place Euro-America's enforcers on the doorstep of the Caspian oil fields. NATO Slips into Caspian Region "The Clinton administration has also offered the promise of greater U.S. defense cooperation with Azerbaijan. For example, NATO, through its Partnership for Peace program, has established the Central Asian Peacekeeping Battalion, or CENBAT," reports Jofi Joseph in a January 1999 case study on "Pipeline Politics" for Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. "As part of one of the first joint exercises involving American soldiers and the CENBAT force, 500 members of the U.S. Army's 82nd Airborne Division parachuted into Kazakhstan (Azerbaijan's oil rich neighbor across the Caspian Sea) after a 23-hour flight from Ft. Bragg. The impressive display powerfully represented the strategic reach of the U.S.; the Kazakhstan deputy foreign minister stated, 'Five years ago, no one here could even dream of such things as American soldiers dropping out of the sky into a remote area of Kazakhstan.' " Prof. Joseph adds, "Evolving closer defense ties with Azerbaijan's neighbors sends a clear signal that the U.S. and NATO are interested in the security of the region, of which Azerbaijan is one of the most valuable pieces." Joseph isn't the only one who sees a compelling NATO interest in the Caspian region. RFE's Michael Lelyveld, says that a U.S. military presence in Azerbaijan is inevitable, especially as Western leaders continue to expand NATO's protective umbrella: "Having said yes to Eastern Europe, the U.S. and NATO may not be able to close the door on a region that is seen as a strategic prize.... Security for the planned Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline and the trans-Caspian gas line may be impossible without some U.S. role or credible support.... Because of Russia's role in the region, there may be no power other than the United States, or U.S. backed organizations, that can serve as a guarantor of peace." The China Connection Getting Caspian oil to world markets may be a boon for another big player just now emerging on the world's economic stage. Here's how the Clinton Energy Department described China's oil needs just months before the Balkan War began: "China's economic growth has made it the second largest energy-consuming nation in the world. This rapid growth has outstripped China's domestic oil production and, in 1993, China became a net oil importer. Imports currently account for 15% of total consumption, but they are projected to increase to between 40 and 50% of China's consumption by 2020." China's demand for oil could have a major impact on world markets unless new reserves are tapped. U.S. oil and gas interests are now the largest investor in China's petroleum sector. The Clinton Energy and Commerce Departments have already begun talks in Beijing about new opportunities for oil exploration and development. Interestingly enough, Roger Tamraz, the oil pipeline gadfly who pushed the Clinton administration to get behind a Caspian route through Turkey, turned his sights eastward when those plans foundered. At last report, Tamraz has the support of the China National Petroleum Company in new efforts to help Beijing tap into the Caspian oil jackpot. Europe's Goals, America's Troops In April, a new strategic concept was adopted by the NATO alliance at its 50th anniversary celebration in Washington, D.C.. The new initiative "propels the U.S. military into unlimited responsibilities for policing a new world order," according to syndicated columnist Robert Novak. One Senator told Novak that the shift in NATO policy is so dramatic that it might be necessary to submit the revisions to Congress for ratification, since the move formalizes the new U.S. role as global policeman. These new responsibilities begin in the Balkans, but where do they lead? Novak noted that British Prime Minister Tony Blair seemed extraordinarily enthusiastic about NATO's expanding role; which is a great bargain from Blair's standpoint if the current division of labor holds. The U.S. is currently shouldering about 80% of the Balkan war effort today. Blair regaled the gathering with his own theories about "a new doctrine of international community." According to Novak, "He made it clear that the West now recognizes no bar to intervention into the domestic affairs of a sovereign country." Meanwhile, Clinton sat passively as the Brit outlined their alliance's new ambitions. Perhaps the President knew the Prime Minister had said too much, inadvertently lifting the veil on the West's designs beyond Kosovo -- which may one day lead all the way to the Caspian Sea. (c)1999, NewsMax.com DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
