Cf. Michael Klare replying to a letter to the Editor, Dec. 24th issue of The Nation, rubbishes the Afghan pipeline thesis. Michael Pugliese
To: asdnet at igc.topica.com From: "Stuart Elliott" <Stuart323 at aol.com> | Block Address | Add to Address Book Subject: [ASDnet] MR's dishonest use of Unocal's Testimony Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 05:16:11 +0000 Reply-to: asdnet at igc.topica.com
The December Monthly Review is the latest to quote Unocal's Chairman
John J. Maresca's 1998 testimony supporting his company's pipeline
throug Afghanistan.
MR's editor's note the Congressional subcommittee "dealt extensively
with Central Asia oil and gas reserves and the shaping of US policy." The document is so important they tell us that they have to depart from their usual policies to print it. "We think you will understand why," they confide to their readers
What MR and others neglect to do is to let their readers know that Maresca was only one of three witnesses. The other two witneses were Robert W. Gee, Assistant Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of Energy and Professor S. Frederick Starr of Johns Hopkins University. Neither Gee nor Starr gives much support to an pipeline through
Afghanistan, they clearly prefer other options. The Unocal route is clearly something they do not view as a live option.
Congressman Doug Bereuter (chairman of the Subcommittee stated:
"Stated U.S. policy goals regarding energy resources in this region include fostering the independence of the States and their ties to the West; breaking Russia's monopoly over oil and gas transport routes;
promoting Western energy security through diversified suppliers;
encouraging the construction of east-west pipelines that do not transit Iran; and denying Iran dangerous leverage over the Central Asian
economies."
<SNIP> "On the other hand, some question the importance of the region to U.S. interests, and dispute the significance of its resources to U.S.
national security interests. Others caution that it will take a great deal of time and money to bring these resources to world markets. Still others point to civil and ethnic conflicts in Tajikistan and
Afghanistan as a reason to avoid involvement beyond a minimal diplomatic presence in the area."
Gee's testimony:
"We have given priority to supporting efforts by the regional
governments themselves and the private sector to develop and improve east-west trade linkages and infrastructure networks through Central Asia and the Caucasus. A Eurasian energy transport corridor incorporating a trans-Caspian segment with a route from Baku,
Azerbaijan, through the Caucasus and Turkey to the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan is inclusive, providing benefits to transit as well as
energy-producing countries."
<SNIP> "In general, we support those transportation solutions that are
commercially viable and address our environmental concerns and policy objectives. Based on discussions with the companies involved, a Baku-Ceyhan pipeline appears to be the most viable option. We have urged the Turks to take steps to make Baku-Ceyhan a commercially attractive
option. For our part, we are also looking at steps the United States can take to provide political risk guarantees and to foster cooperation
among the regional States on an approach that can lead to a regional
solution for the longer term."
<SNIP> [Gee doesn't mention the Afghan pipeline, Bereuter asks a question, Gee replies]
"Perhaps the Unocal witness can give you more detail. I do understand
that they do have an agreement with the government of Turkmenistan.
They have also been in discussions with the various factions within
Afghanistan through which that proposed pipeline would be routed.
The U.S. Government's position is that we support multiple
pipelines with the exception of the southern pipeline that would transit Iran. The Unocal pipeline is among those pipelines that would receive our support under that policy.
I would caution that while we do support the project, the U.S. Government has not at this point recognized any governing regime of the transit country, one of the transit countries, Afghanistan, through
which that pipeline would be routed. But we do support the project."
Starr's testimony likewise doesn't discuss an Afghan pipeline.
Presenting Maresca's testimony out of context in order to leave the impression that the military campaign against the Taliban was somehow a just a pretext for big business imperialism is a kindergarten Marxism.
URL for the entire hearing http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa48119.000/hfa48119_0.HTM
People's attention is scarce. Do not abuse it.