Iran Has Weapons of Mass Destruction

[Clara T]

So did Saddam. Wall $treet knows this. As does Shell/Mobil/Exxon.

The Iranian Threat: The Bomb or the Euro? 

By Dr. Elias Akleh 

In its economical war Iran is treading the same path Saddam Hussein had started when he, in 2000, converted all his reserve from the Dollar to the Euro, and demanded payments in Euro for Iraqi oil. Many economists then mocked Saddam because he had lost a lot of money in this conversion. Yet they were very surprised when he recuperated his losses within less than a year period due to the valuation of the Euro. The American administration became aware of the threat when central banks of many countries started keeping Euros along side of Dollars as their monetary reserve and as an exchange fund for oil (Russian and Chinese central banks in 2003). To avoid economical collapse the Bush administration hastened to invade and to destroy Iraq under false excuses to make it an example to any country who may contemplate dropping the Dollar, and to manipulate OPEC’s decisions by controlling the second largest oil resource. Iraqi oil sale was reverted back to the petrodollar standard. 

There is only one technical obstacle concerning the use of a euro-based oil exchange system, which is the lack of a euro-denominated oil pricing standard, or oil ‘marker’ as it is referred to in the industry. The three current oil markers are U.S. dollar denominated, which include the West Texas Intermediate crude (WTI), Norway Brent crude, and the UAE Dubai crude. Yet this did not stop Iran from requiring payments in the euro currency for its European and Asian oil exports since spring 2003. 

Iran’s determination in using the petroeuro is inviting in other countries such as Russia and Latin American countries, and even some Saudi investors especially after the Saudi/American relations have weakened lately. This determination had also invited an aggressive American political campaign using the same excuses used against Iraq: WMD in the form of nuclear bomb, support to "terrorist" Lebanese Hezbollah organization, and threat to the peace process in the Middle East. 

The question now is what would the American administration do? Would it invade Iran as it did Iraq? The American troops are knee-deep in the Iraqi swamp. The global community — except for Britain and Italy- is not offering any military relief to the US. Thus an American strike against Iran is very unlikely. Iran is not Iraq; it has a more robust military power. Iran has anti-ship missiles based in "Abu Mousa" island that controls the strait of Hermuz at the entrance of the Persian Gulf. Iran could easily close the strait thus blocking all naval traffic carrying gulf oil to the rest of the world causing a global oil crisis. The price of an oil barrel could reach up to $100. The US could not topple the regime by spreading chaos the same way it did to Mussadaq’s regime in 1953 since Iranians are aware of such a trick. Besides Iranians have a patriotic pride of what they call "their bomb". 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8354.htm


The Meridian Report
A Global Perspective on Energy

If you think the invasion of Iraq was about 9-11 and Al-Qaida then I urge you to think again. Cast aside all that the major television networks have programmed into your daily thinking, take a deep breath and slowly exhale. Now, think…real hard. Were any WMD’s (Weapons of Mass Destruction) ever found in Iraq? Has any connection between 9-11 and Saddam Hussein been solidly proven? The answer to both queries is a resounding NO. So why then would the US, the world’s largest economic entity, undertake an invasion of Iraq to capture and remove leader Saddam Hussein? The answer is all about economics. More specifically, Currency. That’s right, Currency. You see, Saddam Hussein had developed a very serious, very viable plan to sell Oil from his country in exchange for Euros. Had he succeeded in putting this plan into action, the damage to the stature of the US Dollar as the global reserve currency would have been un-fixable. Oil importing nations would have reduced their holdings of US Dollars and added Euros to their vaults. The damage to the US economy which is entirely predicated on US Dollar supremacy could have been quite serious indeed. So, in the immediate aftermath of 9-11, the US launched a major offensive under the rather attractive name Operation Iraqi Freedom to trounce any Oil for Euros plans once and for all. But CNN told you a different story. Over and over, night after night you were reminded that Saddam Hussein was a monster. He was sitting on a massive cache of destructive weapons that threatened your safety. He was intimately linked to Al Qaida and global terror. Carefully crafted stories by embedded reporters and film footage of US and British troops moving triumphantly towards Baghdad made the while thing seem larger than life.

Now, fast forward to December 2005. As I write this edition of the Meridian Report, there is a growing sense of deja-vu. This time, it is Iran that is causing problems. But, CNN will have you believe that Iran is causing nuclear problems by refusing to scale back its nuclear program. The real story is that by March 2006 Iran is threatening to have in place an entity called the Iranian Oil Bourse. Trading of Oil on this exchange will be denominated in – yes you guessed it – Euros. A well choreographed play from Saddam’s little black book of game day strategies. The Iranian Oil Bourse will go toe to toe and compete for global prominence with NYMEX in New York and the International Petroleum Exchange in London. Oil trading on these exchanges is done in US Dollar terms. That is why when we hear a quote given for Oil it is always basis the US Dollar. Oil is the lifeblood of the global economy, the US Dollar is the global reserve currency and Oil is quoted in US Dollar terms. A simple 1-2-3 argument.

But this simple 1-2-3 argument may be about to come under attack. A successful start-up of trading operations on this Bourse could lead to an erosion of the US Dollar. Hence this Bourse is a de facto weapon. A weapon so ferocious, that has the ability to undermine the entire US economy, and topple the US Dollar from its lofty perch. After all, why would Oil importing nations need to keep as many US Dollars in reserve if they can purchase Oil in Euros? The ramifications of a weakened US Dollar are serious. Global purchasers of US debt instruments may begin to shy away from a weaker currency in favor of Euro denominated debt instruments. This would place upward pressure on US interest rates and the serious imbalance of the US economy would be laid bare for all to see (as if we don’t already see it). After all, the US has no choice but to keep foreign investors interested in buying US debt. Management of the trade deficit and budget deficit depends on it. The housing market would surely collapse under the weight of higher interest rates. With mortgage rates now above 6% we are already seeing the signs of weakness of the housing market. Now imagine mortgage rates at 8% or even 9%. Given this scenario, it should come as little surprise that China recently moved all of a sudden to re-position its Renminbi currency away from the US Dollar and instead to a basket of global currencies. The Chinese are definitely not stupid. They have excellent relations with Iran and are well aware of the threat this new Bourse poses. Notice how the Chinese still have not told us the exact makeup of this basket? However, you can bet the Euro figures very prominently in the weighting of this basket.

http://www.321energy.com/editorials/meridian/meridian121005.html

[Coastie for Truth]

1. Add this to Bush's massive deficits (war and tx cuts for friends)

and this definitely pushes the interest on US debt up (i.e., pushes the dollar down - domestic inflation). This in turn drives up the dollar denominated pump price of gas (more inflation). This is where I definitely have to open up my trust copy of "International Economics: Theory and Policy" by Paul R. Krugman and Maurice Obstfeld and say "Paul, lay it on the line."

But, it is not good - and Cowboy Georgie rattling the saber will only make it worse.

[NI4NI]

2. Has Venezuela switched to Euros?

[Dangerman]

3. Is that the real reason we invaded Iraq?

:puke:

[Coastie for Truth]

4. OIL was the real reason

put whatever sub thread you want on it - OIL was the reason.

Whether it was the Euro issue or old fashioned imperialist, colonialist assertion of hegemony over oil or whatever. It was all about OIL.

[Clara T]

5. Not the only but it was the main reason-more on the bourse

The proposed Iranian oil bourse signifies that without some sort of US intervention, the euro is going to establish a firm foothold in the international oil trade. Given U.S. debt levels and the stated neoconservative project of U.S. global domination, Tehran’s objective constitutes an obvious encroachment on dollar supremacy in the crucial international oil market.

The macroeconomic implications of a successful Iranian bourse are noteworthy. Considering that in mid-2003 Iran switched its oil payments from E.U. and ACU customers to the euro, and thus it is logical to assume the proposed Iranian bourse will usher in a fourth crude oil marker – denominated in the euro currency. This event would remove the main technical obstacle for a broad-based petroeuro system for international oil trades. From a purely economic and monetary perspective, a petroeuro system is a logical development given that the European Union imports more oil from OPEC producers than does the U.S., and the E.U. accounted for 45% of exports sold to the Middle East. (Following the May 2004 enlargement, this percentage likely increased).

Despite the complete absence of coverage from the five U.S. corporate media conglomerates, these foreign news stories suggest one of the Federal Reserve’s nightmares may begin to unfold in the spring of 2006, when it appears that international buyers will have a choice of buying a barrel of oil for $60 dollars on the NYMEX and IPE - or purchase a barrel of oil for €45 - €50 euros via the Iranian Bourse. This assumes the euro maintains its current 20-25% appreciated value relative to the dollar – and assumes that some sort of US "intervention" is not launched against Iran.

The upcoming bourse will introduce petrodollar versus petroeuro currency hedging, and fundamentally new dynamics to the biggest market in the world - global oil and gas trades. In essence, the U.S. will no longer be able to effortlessly expand its debt-financing via issuance of U.S. Treasury bills, and the dollar’s international demand/liquidity value will fall.

http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/17450

[ProfessorGAC]

6. This Nonsense Again

There isn't one shred of macroeconomic data in the history of capitalism to validate the converns expressed here. There has NEVER been a case where the currency of choice for any commodity has preceeded an economic consequence. (The opposite has occurred, where a dominant economy becomes less so, so the currency of choice changes.)

For those who want to see the doom & gloom as something worthy of concern: Remember that the PNAC guys were worried about this. Since that whole crowd's economic policies have been on disaster after another, their understanding of macroeconomics wouldn't fill a thimble. If you want to share economic theories with those buffoons, you're on your own.
The Professor

[Clara T]

7. More nonsense

The Real Reasons Why Iran is the Next Target:

The Emerging Euro-denominated International Oil Marker

by William Clark

The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CLA410A.html

One of the Federal Reserve’s nightmares may begin to unfold in 2005 or 2006, when it appears international buyers will have a choice of buying a barrel of oil for $50 dollars on the NYMEX and IPE - or purchase a barrel of oil for €37 - €40 euros via the Iranian Bourse. This assumes the euro maintains its current 20-25% appreciated value relative to the dollar - and assumes that some sort of "intervention" is not undertaken against Iran. The upcoming bourse will introduce petrodollar versus petroeuro currency hedging, and fundamentally new dynamics to the biggest market in the world - global oil and gas trades

During an important speech in April 2002, Mr. Javad Yarjani, an OPEC executive, described three pivotal events that would facilitate an OPEC transition to euros. <10> He stated this would be based on (1) if and when Norway's Brent crude is re-dominated in euros, (2) if and when the U.K. adopts the euro, and (3) whether or not the euro gains parity valuation relative to the dollar, and the EU’s proposed expansion plans were successful. (Note: Both of the later two criteria have transpired: the euro’s valuation has been above the dollar since late 2002, and the euro-based E.U. enlarged in May 2004 from 12 to 22 countries). In the meantime, the United Kingdom remains uncomfortably juxtaposed between the financial interests of the U.S. banking nexus (New York/Washington) and the E.U. financial centers (Paris/Frankfurt).

The implementation of the proposed Iranian oil Bourse (exchange) in 2005/2006 – if successful in utilizing the euro as its oil transaction currency standard – essentially negates the necessity of the previous two criteria as described by Mr. Yarjani regarding the solidification of a "petroeuro" system for international oil trades. <10> It should also be noted that during 2003-2004 Russia and China have both increased their central bank holdings of the euro currency, which appears to be a coordinated move to facilitate the anticipated ascendance of the euro as a second World Reserve currency. <11> <12> In the meantime, the United Kingdom is uncomfortable juxtaposed between the financial interests of the U.S. (New York/Washington) banking nexus and that of the E.U. financial center (Paris/Frankfurt).

The immediate question for Americans? Will the neoconservatives attempt to intervene covertly and/or overtly in Iran during 2005 in an effort to prevent the formation of a euro-denominated crude oil pricing mechanism? Commentators in India are quite correct in their assessment that a U.S. intervention in Iran is likely to prove disastrous for the United States, making matters much worse regarding international terrorism, not to the mention potential effects on the U.S. economy.

[ProfessorGAC]

8. Sigh!

Like i said, if you want to throw in with the economic constructs of idiots like Perle, Kristol, and that crowd, it's OK by me. But i won't, and i know i am much more knowledgeable about macroeconomic leverage than any of those buffoons.
The Professor

[Clara T]

9. So then explain further

Seems at this point you are not providing any evidence.

As the world's economy is tied to oil and the oil is valued in the petrodollar (primarily) those who would see their vast financial stranglehold damaged by a change in the way the oil was sold would maybe be a bit upset?

But please put up info to counter what was presented. That's why were here, right?

Of course Perle, Kristol, eyt. are idiots when it comes to economics but so are the rest who traffic in neo-liberal econ theory.

Economics (ta oikonomika -- the art of household management) is the social science which treats of man's activities in providing the material means to satisfy his wants.

Economy originally meant the management and regulation of the resources of the household; that is, of the immediate family with its slaves and dependents. Political economy originally meant the management of the household of the State.

[ProfessorGAC]

10. Sorry

I'm not in a position to post any detailed economic models that cover the free world economies over the last 100 years. And, i'm not in agreement with your definition of economics. Macroeconomics is the highly interactive relationships of the aggregation of millions of micro transactions and the correlation between various inputs and outputs. I've written many papers on this, as i'm from the analytical school of economics that tends to reject conventional wisdom concepts and requires the finding of these parametric influences.

Besides, you're asking me to prove something that has never happened. Exactly how would i do that? It has never happened over the post-mercanitilist era. So, how would i prove that something hasn't happened, other than to say, look it up in the history books.

The overall influence of the dominant economy has always preceeded any change in currency of preference, and since the dollars already in circulation is counted as M1, a change in the demand for those dollars influences nothing.
The Professor

[Clara T]

11. Well then

to interject your disagreement on any particular position and then essentially say you will not explain why you disagree doesn't lend credence to your statements. Quite the contrary. Suggesting that one is knowledgeable in any area without putting forth that knowledge for skeptics to see and discuss is dubious at best.

Too bad as I too reject the body of study which is called "conventional economics".

However the shift to the bourse is rather important in our current very uneconomical global system of finance.

[ProfessorGAC]

12. Actually I Did Explain It

You are just rejecting the explanation. And, that's ok.
The Professor

[No Exit]

16. Why do you repeatedly write "preceeded"?

I'm not an expert on economics, but I do know that the word is "preceded".

[ProfessorGAC]

17. Brain Cramp

Mea Culpa. Spelling police, or what?
The Professor

[No Exit]

19. Must be painful.

Sorry. I even wince when my current favorite blog repeatedly writes "precident" instead of "precedent".

[TahitiNut]

26. Whether or not the motives/fears of PNACers is well-grounded ...

... doesn't weigh against those motives/fears being a driving factor in Middle East hegemonstic moves, does it? So, even if such a threatened move by Iraq/Saddam or Iran doesn't pose the threat to the dollar described, that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't what precipitated a reactive assault - or won't be. No? (Perplexed.)

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. Mr. Clark doesn't quite know what the euro currency is, it seems

which makes his expertise slightly less, I think.

"(2) if and when the U.K. adopts the euro ... the euro-based E.U. enlarged in May 2004 from 12 to 22 countries"

The UK has not adopted the euro, so condition number 2 has not been met. None of the 10 new EU countries have adopted the euro; they have (unpopular) plans to do so in the next 5 years, though the unpopularity might mean delays. But since those 10 countries combined GDP is less that 60% of the UK, and none produce significant amounts of oil (nor do they have an international petroleum exchange), their adoption of the euro means little for international oil trading. The adoption by the UK might mean something - but that has become far less likely since 2002. No-one with a chance of forming a government in the UK in the next 10 years is remotely interested in the euro any more; as an example, the pressure group "Britain in Europe", founded to push for British membership of the euro, has been disbanded, because it wasn't getting anywhere.

[Clara T]

22. Recommended reading

Petrodollar Warfare
Oil, Iraq and the Future of the Dollar
William R. Clark

The invasion of Iraq may well be remembered as the first oil currency war. Far from being a response to 9-11 terrorism or Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, Petrodollar Warfare argues that the invasion was precipitated by two converging phenomena: the imminent peak in global oil production, and the ascendance of the euro currency.

Energy analysts agree that world oil supplies are about to peak, after which there will be a steady decline in supplies of oil. Iraq, possessing the world's second largest oil reserves, was therefore already a target of U.S. geostrategic interests. Together with the fact that Iraq had switched its oil export currency to euros -- rather than U.S. dollars -- the Bush administration's unreported aim was to prevent further OPEC momentum in favor of the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency standard.

Meticulously researched, Petrodollar Warfare examines U.S. dollar hegemony and the unsustainable macroeconomics of 'petrodollar recycling,' pointing out that the issues underlying the Iraq war also apply to geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and other countries including the European Union (E.U.), Iran, Venezuela, and Russia. The author warns that without changing course, the American Experiment will end the way all empires end with military over-extension and subsequent economic decline. He recommends the multilateral pursuit of both energy and monetary reforms within a United Nations framework to create a more balanced global energy and monetary system thereby reducing the possibility of future oil-depletion and oil currency-related warfare.

http://www.petrodollarwarfare.com/

[No Exit]

18. I think I see a way to reconcile your viewpoint and that of "Professor"

This alleged professor is saying, if I read his posts (in which he insists on explaining himself only partly, at best) correctly, that the bourse could not ruin us. IOW, he is saying that the articles which say it could ruin us are wrong.

That may or may not be.

But I do believe that the neocons and other members of Bush's rich cabal thought they could lose a great deal of money when Saddam put into practice his plan of trading oil in euros instead of dollars, and I believe that they think they can lose a great deal of money if Iran does the same thing.

Hence, I do believe that the real reason for our invasion of Iraq was what your sources say it was: fear that the dollar would not be the sole oil-trading currency. And the reason for the upcoming attack on Iran is the same.

Certainly the Iraq invasion was NOT about "weapons of mass destruction" or "links to Al Quaeda", nor will the Iran invasion be about those or similar red herrings.

In early 2003, I wondered why we were really invading. Though I have no inside knowledge of our foreign affairs, I just instinctively knew that the real story was not what they were telling us.

My hope is that if anyone does lose big money when the Iranian bourse takes effect, it will be those same rich people who are currently abusing our government and our country. It stands to reason that those who have the most stand to lose the most. And in that case, the majority of us (not being gazillionaires) don't have nearly as much to worry about from Iran--which means that the majority of us should NOT sign up to help with any invasion of Iran.

Since Reagan, I've heard over and over that our little assets and well-being were inextricably tied to those of our gazillionaires. Well, I refuse to believe that any more. There is some connection, but I do not think it is absolute.

[Clara T]

13. Oil Hitting the Fan: Iran's Coming Petroeuro Oil Bourse

Oil Hitting the Fan: Iran's Coming Petroeuro Oil Bourse

What is an oil bourse? It's like a stock exchange for oil. There's two major ones in the world already: London's International Petroleum Exchange (IPE) and the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX).

Along with Iranian plans to start a third oil bourse in early 2006, what may be most disturbing to the petrodollar establishment is the likely intention of Iran to also, according to William Clark, "usher in a fourth crude oil marker - denominated in the euro currency. From a purely economic and monetary perspective, a petroeuro system is a logical development given that the European Union imports more oil from OPEC producers than does the U.S."

Does that mean Iran will be made an example, too? Is war with Iran inevitable, notwithstanding the euros recent weakness? Seymour Hersh and Scott Ritter, at least, believe it's right around the corner. Both the veteran investigative journalist (in the January 24th New Yorker) and the former weapons inspector (in a February 18th talk) maintain that the decision has already been made and the planning already begun.

http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_05/demeritt060605.html

[Stockholm]

15. Thank you for posting the material but I´ll stick with oil and

"he tried to kill my daddy".

[No Exit]

20. Those are probably part of it.

And this bit about the bourse is intimately connected to the oil industry, with which Bush/Cheney is... intimately connected!

As for me, I find it too much of a coincidence that Saddam was doing this euro bit, and got attacked, and now Iran is doing this euro bit, and whaddya know, now we've got to attack THEM, etc.

[Clara T]

21. Oil transactions

and the currency that rules them, the petrodollar, are connected to virtually all aspects of the geopolitical economy. One cannot understand US history and foreign policy without an understanding of OIL. The import of this cannot be overstated. If Iran would rescind there agreements to begin the petro trade in the Iranian bourse you would see the war drums disappear in a haze of supposed diplomatic agreements. At the same time there are other reasons here.

Wall $treet knows this and the Pentagon knows this.

[No Exit]

23. I agree with you

[Clara T]

24. The approaching war with Iran

The approaching war with Iran

January 4, 2006 – On November 10th 2005, the Muckraker Report published an article that described one of the unspoken reasons why the United States had to invade Iraq; to liberate the U.S. dollar in Iraq so that Iraqi oil could once again be purchased with the petrodollar.  See The liberation of the U.S. Dollar in Iraq
 
In November 2000, Iraq stopped accepting U.S. dollars for their oil.  Counted as a purely political move, Saddam Hussein switched the currency required to purchase Iraqi oil to the euro.  Selling oil through the U.N. Oil for Food Program, Iraq converted all of its U.S. dollars in its U.N. account to the euro.  Shortly thereafter, Iraq converted $10 billion in their U.N. reserve fund to the euro.  By the end of 2000, Iraq had abandoned the U.S. dollar completely. 
 
Two months after the United States invaded Iraq, the Oil for Food Program was ended, the country’s accounts were switch back to dollars, and oil began to be sold once again for U.S. dollars.  No longer could the world buy oil from Iraq with the euro.  Universal global dollar supremacy was restored.  It is interesting to note that the latest recession that the United States endured began and ended within the same timeframe as when Iraq was trading oil for euros.  Whether this is a coincidence or related, the American people may never know. 
 
In March 2006, Iran will take Iraq’s switch to the petroeuro to new heights by launching a third oil exchange.  The Iranians have developed a petroeuro system for oil trade, which when enacted, will once again threaten U.S. dollar supremacy far greater than Iraq’s euro conversion.  Called the Iran Oil Bourse, an exchange that only accepts the euro for oil sales would mean that the entire world could begin purchasing oil from any oil-producing nation with euros instead of dollars.  The Iranian plan isn’t limited to purchasing one oil-producing country’s oil with euros.  Their plan will create a global alternative to the U.S. dollar.  Come March 2006, the Iran Oil Bourse will further the momentum of OPEC to create an alternate currency for oil purchases worldwide.  China, Russia, and the European Union are evaluating the Iranian plan to exchange oil for euros, and giving the plan serious consideration. 
 
If you are skeptical regarding the meaning of oil being purchased with euros versus dollars, and the devastating impact it will have on the economy of the United States, consider the historic move by the Federal Reserve to begin hiding information pertaining to the U.S. dollar money supply, starting in March 2006.  Since 1913, the year the abomination known as the Federal Reserve came to power, the supply of U.S. dollars was measured and publicly revealed through an index referred to as M-3.  M-3 has been the main stable of money supply measurement and transparent disclosure since the Fed was founded back in 1913.  According to Robert McHugh, in his report (What’s the Fed up to with the money supply?), McHugh writes, “On November 10, 2005, shortly after appointing Bernanke to replace Greenbackspan, the Fed mysteriously announced with little comment and no palatable justification that they will hide M-3 effective March 2006.” 
 
http://www.teamliberty.net/id209.html

[TahitiNut]

25. I try to fit the Russia/Ukraine/Europe oil/gas supply issue into this.

It makes me wonder whether the oil/gas people in Russia are siding with the dollar and are showing they're willing to destabilize the euro as a threat. The timing and impact are just too convenient on the dollar side to ignore.