China, India and Russia Have Bilateral Agreements with Iran to Buy Oil; U.S. 'Disgusted' by Russia, China Veto of Syria ResolutionBible prophecy describes the battle of Armageddon as a coalition of nations that will almost certainly include China and Russia and several Muslim nations of the Middle East. Every day, the evidence mounts that China will be tightly leagued with Russia and many of the Islamic nations in a powerful anti-Israel political and military alliance from which the 200-million-man army described in the book of Revelation (Rev. 9:16) will ultimately come. - The Sixth Trumpet War of Revelation 9
ABC OTUS News - The United States is "disgusted" by Russia and China's decision to veto a U.N. Security Council resolution today that called for an immediate end to the violence in Syria, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice said today.
The Security Council vote today came on one of the bloodiest days of the popular uprising in Syray, as President Bashar al Assad's security forces launched a withering artillery assault on the city of Homs that has reportedly left 200 to 400 dead.
Though they were the only negative votes in a 13 to 2 vote, Russia and China's veto power as permanent members of the Security Council killed the resolution drafted by Arab and European countries.
The vetoes came after a week of intense negotiations to gain Russian support for a resolution it had opposed from the start. The resolution supported an Arab League plan that called for an immediate end to the violence in Syria and a political solution to the crisis. Russia was opposed to the resolution because of concerns that it could leave an opening for a foreign intervention against one of its loyal client states.
The vetoes drew harsh criticism from Security Council members that supported the resolution and who had amended it several times to ease those concerns, rewording language about the transition of power and watering down the possibility of future sanctions against the Assad regime.
"The United States is disgusted that a couple of members of this Council continue to prevent us from fulfilling our sole purpose," U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice said.
"For months this Council has been held hostage by a couple of members," she said, referring to Russia and China, who she said had been "delaying and stripping bare any text to force Assad to stop his actions."
Without referring to Russia by name, she said the vetoes were "even more shameful" given that Russia has continued to sell weapons to to Syria. She called the vetoes "unforgivable" and said "any further blood that flows will be on their hands."
In brief remarks to the Council, Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said Russia actively supports an end to the violence in Syria, but that the resolution did not "accurately reflect the real state of affairs" in Syria and "sent an unbalanced signal to the parties." Churkin was speaking about armed opposition groups that have also been conducting violent attacks against the Assad regime in Syria.
He once again cited Russian concerns about "regime change" by "influential members of the international community who have been undermining the possibility of a settlement in Syria."
French Ambassador Gerard Araud said the vetoes were a "sad day for the UN Security Council … a sad day for democracy and a sad day for Syrians. … Hundreds of Syrians are dying and it is no longer possible to wait. "
Peter Wittig, the German ambassador to the United Nations criticized the vetoes particularly for having come on "one of bloodiest days of the Arab spring" and the 30th anniversary of the massacre in Hama, Syria ordered by Assad's father that resulted in 20,000 dead.
"This is the real scandal," Wittig said. "Afraid this will spur further violence and make it difficult to reach a political solution."
British Ambassador to the U.N. Mark Lyall said Russia and China should "ask themselves how many more deaths they are prepared to tolerate." He said the negotiations had "removed every possible excuse" for voting against the resolution. He also said that the United Kingdom and other countries would continue their efforts to stop the violence in Syria.
Li Baodong, China's Ambassador to the UN told Council members that China voted against the resolution because it would "further complicate the situation" in Syria.
He also said that China supported the Russian delegation's last minute calls for a delay on the vote as well as amendments proposed by Russia that were not taken up by the Council.
January 27, 2012
Iran is the fifth largest producers of oil in the world.
In what is likely a long overdue move, Iran has finally decided to give Europe a harsh lesson in game theory. Instead of letting Euro-area politicians score brownie points at its expense by threatening to halt imports and cut off the Iranian economy, the Iranian government will instead propose a bill calling for an immediate halt to oil deliveries to Europe.
The move, with most reports citing the Iranian news agency Mehr, has come about in response to the EU agreement to impose sanctions against Iran, which were announced earlier this week. And why not? After all if Europe is indeed serious, sooner or later Iran will be cut off but in the meantime experience significant policy uncertainty, which is precisely what the flipflops on the ground need. The one thing that Europe, however is forgetting, is that all that whopping 0.8 Mb/d in imports will simply find a new buyer. Quickly.
So with China, India and Russia already having bilateral agreements with Iran in place, we are confident that said buyer will have a contract signed, sealed and delivered within an hour of the proposed bill's passage.
Furthermore, as SocGen speculated, the fact that Europe will be even more bottlenecked in its crude supplies (good luck Saudi Arabia with that imaginary excess capacity), and which just may force the IEA to release some more of that strategic petroleum reserve (and thus give JPM some more free money on the replenishment arbitrage) will send Brent to $125-150 - something which Iran will be delighted by.
That is of course unless some "experts" discover that Iran may or may not have a complete arsenal of shark with fricking nuclear warheads attached to their heads (despite what Paneta has already said) which gives the US the green light for a full blown incursion, which in turn will send oil over $200, and the world economy into a global coordinated re-depression.
"If this bill is passed, the government will be forced to stop selling oil to Europe before the actual implementation of their sanctions," said Emad Hosseini, spokesman for the Iranian parliament's energy commission, reportedly said. The bill is set to become law on Sunday.
The EU sanctions allow for oil deliveries from Iran until July 1. Any pre-empting of this timescale by Tehran could prove problematic for countries like Italy, Greece and Spain, who would need to urgently find new suppliers.
China, meanwhile, a major importer of Iranian oil, has also criticized the EU sanctions. The Xinhua news agency quoted the Chinese Foreign Ministry on Thursday as saying: "To blindly pressure and impose sanctions on Iran are not constructive approaches."
Many members of the EU are now heavily dependent on Iranian oil. Some 500,000 barrels arrive in Europe every day from Iran, with southern European countries consuming most of it. Greece is the most exposed, receiving a third of all its oil imports from Iran, but Italy too depends on Iran for 13 percent of its oil needs. If this source were to dry up abruptly, the economic conditions in the two struggling countries could become even worse.
Already on Wednesday, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned of the economic consequences of the EU's planned embargo. Stopping deliveries from the world's fifth largest producer could drive up the price of oil by 20 to 30 percent.
Perhaps instead of doing its best at crippling the world energy markets, and crushing the global economy, Europe should stick to bailing itself out, and other activities in which it has extensive experience.