June 29, 2005

World Media Watch

by Gloria R. Lalumia

BuzzFlash Note: WMW provides BuzzFlash readers foreign views and perspectives that are not usually available from the media here in the U.S. The presentation of these articles from these international publications is not an endorsement of their viewpoints.

* * *

WORLD MEDIA WATCH FOR JUNE 29, 2005

1/Asia Times Online, Hong Kong--THE SAUDI OIL BOMBSHELL (… now, from an unexpected source, comes a devastating challenge to this powerful dogma: in a newly released book, investment banker Matthew R Simmons convincingly demonstrates that, far from being capable of increasing its output, Saudi Arabia is about to face the exhaustion of its giant fields and, in the relatively near future, will probably experience a sharp decline in output. "There is only a small probability that Saudi Arabia will ever deliver the quantities of petroleum that are assigned to it in all the major forecasts of world oil production and consumption," Simmons writes in Twilight in the Desert: The Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy. "Saudi Arabian production," he adds, italicizing his claims to drive home his point, "is at or very near its peak sustainable volume ... and it is likely to go into decline in the very foreseeable future." … The prevailing view goes like this: according to the DoE, Saudi Arabia possesses approximately one-fourth of the world's proven oil reserves, an estimated 264 billion barrels. In addition, the Saudis are believed to harbor additional, possible reserves containing another few hundred billion barrels. On this basis, the DoE asserts, "Saudi Arabia is likely to remain the world's largest oil producer for the foreseeable future." … And this is where Simmons enters the picture, with his meticulously documented book showing that Saudi producers cannot be trusted to tell the truth about future Saudi oil output. First, a few words about the author of Twilight in the Desert. Matthew ("Matt") Simmons is not a militant environmentalist or anti-oil partisan; he is chairman and chief executive officer of one of the nation's leading oil-industry investment banks, Simmons & Company International. For decades, Simmons has been pouring billions of dollars into the energy business, financing the exploration and development of new oil reservoirs. In the process, he has become a friend and associate of many of the top figures in the oil industry, including Bush and Cheney. He has also accumulated a vast storehouse of information about the world's major oilfields, the prospects for new discoveries, and the techniques for extracting and marketing petroleum. There is virtually no figure better equipped than Simmons to assess the state of the world's oil supply. And this is why his assessment of Saudi Arabia's oil production capacity is so devastating.)

2//Deutsche Welle/DW-World.de, Germany--FRANCE WINS NUCLEAR FUSION PLANT (France will host the experimental ITER nuclear fusion reactor, a multi-billion-euro project designed to emulate the sun's power, the six partners in the project agreed in Moscow on Tuesday, after Japan withdrew its bid. The construction of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) will be a little like trying to build a star on earth. The technology is daunting, but if it works, scientists say the world will benefit from a source of energy that will be cheap, clean, safe and almost infinite. For years, the six ITER partners -- the EU, the United States, Russia, Japan, South Korea and China -- had wrangled over which country would get to host the 10-billion-euro ($12 billion) project. They finally reached an agreement after Japan withdrew its bid, settling on Moscow and Beijing's preferred site, Cadarache, France. Under Tuesday's agreement, 50 percent of the cost of the project will be paid by the EU, with the rest shared out between the five other partners.)

3//The Scotsman, UK--BLAIR POISED TO SAY YES TO MORE NUCLEAR POWER (Tony Blair yesterday gave his clearest signal yet that he will authorise the controversial building of a new generation of nuclear reactors. To the dismay of environmental campaigners, the Prime Minister answered a question about new nuclear stations by casting doubt on whether wind and wave farms or solar power were viable alternatives. … The Prime Minister pointedly noted at his monthly Downing Street news conference yesterday that other countries were embracing nuclear power for their future energy needs. "If you look at how much we are going to need to boost renewable energy by over the next ten to 15 years, it's a lot," Mr Blair said of the prospect that such sources could remove the need to build new reactors. "I'm not saying we can't do it, but I am saying it's a huge investment and it's going to be very tough to do, and there are other countries that are going to make a different choice on nuclear power." That appeared to be a reference to the United States, which is moving towards much greater use of atomic energy. President George Bush has been pushing the US Congress to authorise the building of the country's first new nuclear power plants for 30 years. And a leaked draft of a G8 paper obtained by The Scotsman earlier this month showed that British negotiators were willing to allow the final Gleneagles declaration next week to include references to "Generation IV," a US energy department plan to encourage new nuclear plants worldwide.)

4//Inter Press Service News Agency, Italy--BUSH EXAGGERATES INCREASE IN U.S. AID (U.S. President George W. Bush has been significantly exaggerating the amount of money his administration has provided in aid to sub-Saharan Africa, according to a new study released here Monday. Instead of a tripling of U.S. aid to Africa between 2000 and 2005, as Bush has frequently insisted, Washington has increased aid by only 56 percent in real terms, according to the report by the Brookings Institution. The report, entitled "U.S. Foreign Assistance to Africa: Claims and Reality," is almost certain to increase pressure on Bush to announce a major new initiative to bolster development in the world's poorest continent in the run-up to the Group of Eight (G8) summit meeting in Gleneagles, Scotland, to be hosted by British Prime Minister Tony Blair Jul. 6-8. … several influential conservative black clergymen who had been wooed by the administration sent a letter to Bush calling for him to offer full support for Blair's Africa-related initiatives, including comprehensive debt relief and a doubling of official development assistance (ODA) to Africa to 50 billion dollars a year. "Some were confused by the fact that Prime Minister Tony Blair, who stood with the president on Iraq at enormous political cost to himself, did not appear to be receiving the same level of concrete support from the president when it came to Africa," Rev. Eugene Blyers, a Boston pastor who backed Bush's re-election last year, told the Los Angeles Times.)

5//The Times of India, India--‘INDIA WON’T PLAY SECOND FIDDLE TO US’ (India has rejected the idea of a unipolar world, clearly ruling out playing sub-altern to the United States if it seeks to remain dominant in the 21st century in the face of a rising Asia. The Indian stand was publicly articulated by Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee on Monday just three weeks ahead of a visit to Washington by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in what is being talked of a landmark journey, particularly after Washington said in March that its goal is to help India become a major world power in this century. … Mukherjee's address made it clear that far from kissing up to Washington ahead of the PM's visit or subscribing to those pushing for an Indo-U.S strategic alliance against China, New Delhi's foreign policy remained fiercely independent, and, as one accompanying official termed it, "very India-centric.")

* * *

1//Asia Times Online, Hong Kong Jun 29, 2005
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GF29Ak01.html

THE SAUDI OIL BOMBSHELL
By Michael T. Klare
Michael T Klare is a professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College and the author of Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Petroleum Dependency

For those oil enthusiasts who believe that petroleum will remain abundant for decades to come - among them President George W Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, and their many friends in the oil industry - any talk of an imminent "peak" in global oil production and an ensuing decline can be easily countered with a simple mantra: "Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia."

Not only will the Saudis pump extra oil now to alleviate global shortages, it is claimed, but they will keep pumping more in the years ahead to quench our insatiable thirst for energy. And when the kingdom's existing fields run dry, lo, they will begin pumping from other fields that are just waiting to be exploited. We ordinary folk need have no worries about oil scarcity, because Saudi Arabia can satisfy our current and future needs. This is, in fact, the basis for the Bush administration's contention that we can continue to increase our yearly consumption of oil, rather than conserve what's left and begin the transition to a post-petroleum economy. Hallelujah for Saudi Arabia!

But now, from an unexpected source, comes a devastating challenge to this powerful dogma: in a newly released book, investment banker Matthew R Simmons convincingly demonstrates that, far from being capable of increasing its output, Saudi Arabia is about to face the exhaustion of its giant fields and, in the relatively near future, will probably experience a sharp decline in output. "There is only a small probability that Saudi Arabia will ever deliver the quantities of petroleum that are assigned to it in all the major forecasts of world oil production and consumption," Simmons writes in Twilight in the Desert: The Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy. "Saudi Arabian production," he adds, italicizing his claims to drive home his point, "is at or very near its peak sustainable volume ... and it is likely to go into decline in the very foreseeable future."
In addition, there is little chance that Saudi Arabia will ever discover new fields that can take up the slack from those now in decline. "Saudi Arabia's exploration efforts over the last three decades were more intense than most observers have assumed," Simmons asserts. "The results of these efforts were modest at best."

If Simmons is right about Saudi Arabian oil production - and the official dogma is wrong - we can kiss the era of abundant petroleum goodbye forever. This is so for a simple reason: Saudi Arabia is the world's leading oil producer, and there is no other major supplier (or combination of suppliers) capable of making up for the loss in Saudi production if its output falters. This means that if the Saudi Arabia mantra proves deceptive, we will find ourselves in an entirely new world - the "twilight age" of petroleum, as Simmons puts it. It will not be a happy place.

Before taking up the implications of a possible decline in Saudi Arabian oil output, it is important to look more closely at the two sides in this critical debate: the official view, as propagated by the US Department of Energy (DoE), and the contrary view, as represented by Simmons' book.

The prevailing view goes like this: according to the DoE, Saudi Arabia possesses approximately one-fourth of the world's proven oil reserves, an estimated 264 billion barrels. In addition, the Saudis are believed to harbor additional, possible reserves containing another few hundred billion barrels. On this basis, the DoE asserts, "Saudi Arabia is likely to remain the world's largest oil producer for the foreseeable future."

(SNIP)

And this is where Simmons enters the picture, with his meticulously documented book showing that Saudi producers cannot be trusted to tell the truth about future Saudi oil output.

First, a few words about the author of Twilight in the Desert. Matthew ("Matt") Simmons is not a militant environmentalist or anti-oil partisan; he is chairman and chief executive officer of one of the nation's leading oil-industry investment banks, Simmons & Company International. For decades, Simmons has been pouring billions of dollars into the energy business, financing the exploration and development of new oil reservoirs. In the process, he has become a friend and associate of many of the top figures in the oil industry, including Bush and Cheney. He has also accumulated a vast storehouse of information about the world's major oilfields, the prospects for new discoveries, and the techniques for extracting and marketing petroleum. There is virtually no figure better equipped than Simmons to assess the state of the world's oil supply. And this is why his assessment of Saudi Arabia's oil production capacity is so devastating.

Essentially, Simmons' argument boils down to four major points:

-- Most of Saudi Arabia's oil output is generated by a few giant fields, of which Ghawar - the world's largest - is the most prolific.

-- These giant fields were first developed 40 to 50 years ago, and have since given up much of their easily extracted petroleum.

-- To maintain high levels of production in these fields, the Saudis have come to rely increasingly on the use of water injection and other secondary recovery methods to compensate for the drop in natural field pressure.

-- As time goes on, the ratio of water to oil in these underground fields rises to the point where further oil extraction becomes difficult, if not impossible. To top it all off, there is very little reason to assume that future Saudi exploration will result in the discovery of new fields to replace those now in decline.

Twilight in the Desert is not an easy book to read. Most of it consists of a detailed account of Saudi Arabia's vast oil infrastructure, relying on technical papers written by Saudi geologists and oil engineers on various aspects of production in particular fields. Much of this has to do with the aging of Saudi fields and the use of water injection to maintain high levels of pressure in their giant underground reservoirs.

(SNIP)

Given the high stakes involved, there is no doubt that intense efforts will be made to refute Simmons' findings. With the publication of his book, however, it will no longer be possible for oil aficionados simply to chant "Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia" and convince us that everything is all right in the oil world. Through his scrupulous research, Simmons has convincingly demonstrated that - because all is not well with Saudi Arabia's giant oilfields - the global energy situation can only go downhill from here. From now on, those who believe that oil will remain abundant indefinitely are the ones who must produce irrefutable evidence that Saudi Arabia's fields are, in fact, capable of achieving higher levels of output.

2//Deutsche Welle/DW-World.de, Germany 28.06.05 | 21:36 UTC
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,1564,1631650,00.html

FRANCE WINS NUCLEAR FUSION PLANT

France will host the experimental ITER nuclear fusion reactor, a multi-billion-euro project designed to emulate the sun's power, the six partners in the project agreed in Moscow on Tuesday, after Japan withdrew its bid.

The construction of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) will be a little like trying to build a star on earth. The technology is daunting, but if it works, scientists say the world will benefit from a source of energy that will be cheap, clean, safe and almost infinite.

For years, the six ITER partners -- the EU, the United States, Russia, Japan, South Korea and China -- had wrangled over which country would get to host the 10-billion-euro ($12 billion) project. They finally reached an agreement after Japan withdrew its bid, settling on Moscow and Beijing's preferred site, Cadarache, France.

"Today we are making history in terms of international scientific cooperation," said Janez Potocnik, the EU's science and research commissioner, at a ceremony in Moscow. "After long and difficult negotiations, the six parties... have decided that ITER should be located at the site proposed by the European Union -- Cadarache in southern France."

Under Tuesday's agreement, 50 percent of the cost of the project will be paid by the EU, with the rest shared out between the five other partners.

Japan's Science Minister Nariaki Nakyama expressed satisfaction at the outcome of negotiations.

"We managed to secure a status that amounts to being a secondary host of the project... This and other conditions should allow us to preserve our national interests completely," Nakayama said in a statement.

Recreating the power of the sun

Instead of splitting the atom -- the principle behind current nuclear plants -- ITER seeks to harness nuclear fusion: the power of the sun and the stars.

ITER was conceived at an international summit in 1985 as a test bench to see whether fusion can be taken out of the lab and help meet the world's energy needs from the middle of the 21st century.

The science behind the project presents an immense technological challenge, since fusing together atomic nuclei will require a gas field heated to 100 million degrees inside an intense magnetic field.

But the result, scientists hope, will be a plentiful energy supply that will compensate for diminishing reserves of oil, coal and natural gas. One of the hydrogen isotopes needed to fuel the process is found in water while the other can be man-made.

Environmentalists angered

Proponents of the project have said it will create hundreds of jobs in southern France and boost the region's economy. But French environmental groups slammed the project Tuesday, saying it was "dangerous," "costly," and "not a job generator."

"We are against the project because it's very dangerous and will not create jobs in the region," the head of the Mediane environmental group, Jean Marcon, said.

(MORE)

3//The Scotsman, UK Tuesday, 28th June 2005
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=710032005

BLAIR POISED TO SAY YES TO MORE NUCLEAR POWER
James Kirkup, Political Correspondent

Tony Blair yesterday gave his clearest signal yet that he will authorise the controversial building of a new generation of nuclear reactors.

To the dismay of environmental campaigners, the Prime Minister answered a question about new nuclear stations by casting doubt on whether wind and wave farms or solar power were viable alternatives.

Mr Blair also tacitly criticised the Scottish Executive's plan to block any new nuclear power station in Scotland, saying it was not "responsible" to rule out a new wave of generators come what may.

The current generation of nuclear stations is due to be wound down over the coming years.

Hunterston B, in Ayrshire, is scheduled to close in 2011; Torness, in East Lothian, is due to run until 2023.

Such closures mean Mr Blair, who has committed himself to cutting British emissions, will have to decide over the next year how to replace their energy output.

Nuclear plants generate about 23 per cent of the United Kingdom's electricity, and 40 per cent in Scotland. Renewables account for less than 3 per cent of all UK electricity, and about 11 per cent in Scotland.

The Prime Minister pointedly noted at his monthly Downing Street news conference yesterday that other countries were embracing nuclear power for their future energy needs.

"If you look at how much we are going to need to boost renewable energy by over the next ten to 15 years, it's a lot," Mr Blair said of the prospect that such sources could remove the need to build new reactors. "I'm not saying we can't do it, but I am saying it's a huge investment and it's going to be very tough to do, and there are other countries that are going to make a different choice on nuclear power."

That appeared to be a reference to the United States, which is moving towards much greater use of atomic energy.

President George Bush has been pushing the US Congress to authorise the building of the country's first new nuclear power plants for 30 years. And a leaked draft of a G8 paper obtained by The Scotsman earlier this month showed that British negotiators were willing to allow the final Gleneagles declaration next week to include references to "Generation IV", a US energy department plan to encourage new nuclear plants worldwide.

While Scotland's energy policy is reserved to Westminster, planning controls are devolved and, under pressure from the Liberal Democrats, Jack McConnell, the First Minister, has agreed the Executive will block the building of any new nuclear power stations because of concerns about the disposal of radioactive waste.

Asked about those reservations yesterday, Mr Blair insisted that he did not agree with those who wanted to rule out new atomic power stations at this stage.

"Anybody who is responsibly looking at this can't simply say, 'we are refusing ever to look at the issue of nuclear power again,'" he said.

However, he accepted that new stations could be built only if there was public acceptance and the project was affordable. Some experts have suggested that private industry would be reluctant to pay for new nuclear stations without massive government aid.

(MORE)

4//Inter Press Service News Agency, Italy Jun 27, 2005
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=29241

BUSH EXAGGERATES INCREASE IN U.S. AID
Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Jun 27 (IPS) - U.S. President George W. Bush has been significantly exaggerating the amount of money his administration has provided in aid to sub-Saharan Africa, according to a new study released here Monday.

Instead of a tripling of U.S. aid to Africa between 2000 and 2005, as Bush has frequently insisted, Washington has increased aid by only 56 percent in real terms, according to the report by the Brookings Institution.

The report, entitled "U.S. Foreign Assistance to Africa: Claims and Reality," is almost certain to increase pressure on Bush to announce a major new initiative to bolster development in the world's poorest continent in the run-up to the Group of Eight (G8) summit meeting in Gleneagles, Scotland, to be hosted by British Prime Minister Tony Blair Jul. 6-8.

The pressure on Bush to be more forthcoming toward Africa has grown steadily despite his agreement to join a debt cancellation plan with other G8 nations that should benefit about a dozen of Africa's poorest nations.

The G8 represents the world's most industrialised nations: the United States, Canada, Japan, Russia, Britain, France, Germany and Italy.

During his visit here earlier this month, Blair stressed that increased aid and other support for Africa will be among the top agenda items at Gleneagles. Along with the United Nations and the World Bank, he has called on industrialised countries to double aid to Africa over the next few years as part of a series of measures, including debt relief, to substantially reduce poverty and sustain economic growth in the region.

After Blair's visit, the leaders of several African nations who had been invited to the White House publicly criticised the administration for not disbursing aid from Bush's new Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) more quickly to needy nations.

Several days later, several influential conservative black clergymen who had been wooed by the administration sent a letter to Bush calling for him to offer full support for Blair's Africa-related initiatives, including comprehensive debt relief and a doubling of official development assistance (ODA) to Africa to 50 billion dollars a year.

"Some were confused by the fact that Prime Minister Tony Blair, who stood with the president on Iraq at enormous political cost to himself, did not appear to be receiving the same level of concrete support from the president when it came to Africa," Rev. Eugene Blyers, a Boston pastor who backed Bush's re-election last year, told the Los Angeles Times.

"It is our hope that the president will stand with the prime minister as strongly as the prime minister stood with him at the height of the controversy over the Iraq war."

Blair's call for increased aid has been well received elsewhere, leaving Bush increasingly isolated. In late May, EU leaders agreed unanimously to almost double assistance to the world's poorest countries over the next five years. One week later, Japan promised to do the same in three years' time.

In addition, key EU members, including Britain, France, Germany and Italy, have also committed to increasing their official development assistance (ODA) for poor countries to 0.7 percent of their gross domestic product (GDP) by 2015.

But Bush has been far less forthcoming, insisting that his administration has already tripled U.S. aid to Africa and that a promise to provide 0.7 percent of U.S. GDP -- nearly five times what Washington provides today -- "doesn't fit our budgetary process."

5//The Times of India, India Tuesday, June 28, 2005 10:53:06 PM
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1154854.cms

‘INDIA WON’T PLAY SECOND FIDDLE TO US’
Chidanand Rajghatta, Times News Network

WASHINGTON: India has rejected the idea of a unipolar world, clearly ruling out playing sub-altern to the United States if it seeks to remain dominant in the 21st century in the face of a rising Asia.

The Indian stand was publicly articulated by Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee on Monday just three weeks ahead of a visit to Washington by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in what is being talked of a landmark journey, particularly after Washington said in March that its goal is to help India become a major world power in this century.

"A unipolar world is clearly not a sustainable proposition in the long run. India's vision of a multipolar world is one of partnership among the nations," Mukherjee told an audience of Washington's top strategic analysts at the Carnegie Endowment.

Although at no stage has the Bush administration suggested a subservient role for India, strategic circles here have spoken of drafting India as an ally to contain the rise of China.

In a March 25 policy leap, a senior administration official who spoke of US intention of helping India become a world power had said "We understand fully the implications, including military implications, of that statement."

But in a major policy address, Mukherjee pointedly identified what he called the "geometries across continents" that New Delhi was seeking -- like the Russia-China-India consultations, the Group of Four for UNSC reform, and the India-Brazil-South Africa (IBSA) forum.

The references appeared to be aimed at showcasing India's multi-polar approach instead of trying into the coattails of the United States.

"No one country, whatever its economic, technological and military eminence, can take on the exclusive responsibility of ensuring peace and order in the whole world," Mukherjee maintained.

In Asia alone, new powers like China and Japan have emerged, the EU may have suffered a jolt bit the idea remains powerful, and Russia may be facing problems of transition but it is too important to ignore.

Mukherjee's address made it clear that far from kissing up to Washington ahead of the PM's visit or subscribing to those pushing for an Indo-U.S strategic alliance against China, New Delhi's foreign policy remained fiercely independent, and, as one accompanying official termed it, "very India-centric."

In arguing for a greater role for India as implied by US statements, Mukherjee made a strong pitch for ending restrictions on nuclear and technology cooperation, saying they limit India's ability to become a stabilizing force in Asia.