US sanctions: Iran , Venezuela

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

US Removed Almost 2.7 Million Bbl/d Of Iranian Oil From Market

 

 

The United States has removed nearly 2.7 million barrels of Iranian oil from global markets daily as a result of Washington’s decision to reimpose sanctions on all purchases of Iran’s crude, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Aug. 20.

In an interview with MSNBC, Pompeo said the U.S. government was confident it could continue with its strategy.

The United States reimposed sanctions on Iran in November after pulling out of a 2015 nuclear accord between Tehran and six world powers. In May, Washington ended sanction waivers given to importers of Iranian oil, aiming to cut Tehran’s exports to zero.

Iran exported about 100,000 bbl/d of crude in July, according to an industry source who tracks such flows and data from Refinitiv Eikon. If condensate, a light oil, is included, shipments were about 120,000 bbl/d a day.

“We have managed to take almost 2.7 million barrels of crude oil off of the market, denying Iran the wealth to create their terror campaign around the world, and we have managed to keep the oil markets fully supplied,” Pompeo said.

“I am confident we can continue to do that,” he added.

OPEC, Russia and other producers have been cutting 1.2 million bbl/d since Jan. 1 to reduce global supply. OPEC in July renewed the pact until March 2020 to avoid a build-up of inventories as worldwide demand is seen weakening.

Despite OPEC’s actions along with U.S. sanctions on Iran and Venezuela, Brent crude international oil prices have been relatively weak, falling on Aug. 20 to $59 a barrel from a 2019 high of $75, pressured by concerns about slowing demand.

The exact level of Iranian exports has become harder to assess since U.S. sanctions returned in November, meaning estimates fall into a range rather than a definitive figure.

[John Foote + 1,135]

General LeMay famously was going to win the Vietnam War by bombing them back into the stone age, famously ignoring it was an agrarian society not far removed from only sticks and stones.

Iran doesn't use vast quantities to cash to buy influence and wage war. That would be the other side of the Gulf. The greater population would truly benefit from better economics, but as North Korea proves, economic isolation won't stop them, and in some strange ways, plays to them. It also strengthens Russia, China, and India's position with Iran. 

A Houthie soldier makes maybe $115 a month and has no issues fighting Saudis to a draw, despite the gross discrepancies in fire power.

The French theorized prior to WWI strategic bombing breaks the enemies will. Perhaps carpet bombing with nukes will achieve it, but short of that, it tends to harden resolve of your opponent.

This approach is unlikely to work. But perhaps it feels good to think we are winning.

I am no pacifist, a vet, love history, the Khans are some of my historical idols for how to wage and win on pure level (and even for them entirely unsustainable).

Sanctions cause suffering, but they don't break the will of countries.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,130]

11 minutes ago, John Foote said:

General LeMay famously was going to win the Vietnam War by bombing them back into the stone age, famously ignoring it was an agrarian society not far removed from only sticks and stones.

Iran doesn't use vast quantities to cash to buy influence and wage war. That would be the other side of the Gulf. The greater population would truly benefit from better economics, but as North Korea proves, economic isolation won't stop them, and in some strange ways, plays to them. It also strengthens Russia, China, and India's position with Iran. 

A Houthie soldier makes maybe $115 a month and has no issues fighting Saudis to a draw, despite the gross discrepancies in fire power.

The French theorized prior to WWI strategic bombing breaks the enemies will. Perhaps carpet bombing with nukes will achieve it, but short of that, it tends to harden resolve of your opponent.

This approach is unlikely to work. But perhaps it feels good to think we are winning.

I am no pacifist, a vet, love history, the Khans are some of my historical idols for how to wage and win on pure level (and even for them entirely unsustainable).

Sanctions cause suffering, but they don't break the will of countries.

I think the severity of the sanctions are mainly to keep the USA Shale afloat a couple of years till it can get its debt in order and partially help out Kuwait/Iraq/SA as a diplomatic gesture.  When that happens I see sanctions lifted.  Yes, technically it was for the Israel angle, but as Israel has shown, it is more than capable of taking care of itself. 

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

Half of Venezuela's Oil Rigs May Shut Down If US Waivers Lapse

 

(Bloomberg) -- A looming U.S. sanctions deadline is threatening to clobber Venezuela’s dwindling oil-rig fleet and hamper energy production in the nation with the world’s largest crude reserves.

Almost half the rigs operating in Venezuela will shut down by Oct. 25 if the Trump administration doesn’t extend a 90-day waiver from its sanctions, according to data compiled from consultancy Caracas Capital Markets. That could further cripple the OPEC member’s production because the structures are needed to drill new wells crucial for even maintaining output, which is already near the lowest level since the 1940s.

A shutdown in the rigs will also put pressure on Nicolas Maduro’s administration, which counts oil revenues as its main lifeline. The U.S. is betting on increased economic pressure to oust the regime and bring fresh elections to the crisis-torn nation, a founding member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and Latin America’s biggest crude exporter until recent years.

Venezuela had 23 oil rigs drilling in July, down from 49 just two years ago, data compiled by Baker Hughes show. Ten of those are exposed to U.S. sanctions, according to calculations by Caracas Capital Markets. The Treasury Department extended waivers in July for service providers to continue for three more months, less than the six months the companies had sought.

Most other government agencies involved in the deliberations opposed any extension, a senior administration official said last month, adding that another reprieve will be harder to come by.

“Almost half the rigs are being run by the Yanks, and if the window shuts down on this in two months, then that’s really going to hurt Venezuela unless the Russians and the Chinese come in,” said Russ Dallen, a Miami-based managing partner at Caracas Capital Markets.

Output Risk

A U.S. Treasury official said the department doesn’t generally comment on possible sanctions actions.

More than 200,000 barrels a day of output at four projects Chevron Corp. is keeping afloat could shut if the waivers aren’t renewed. That would be debilitating to Maduro because the U.S. company, as a minority partner, only gets about 40,000 barrels a day of that production.

The departure of the American oil service providers would hurt other projects in the Orinoco region, where operators need to constantly drill wells just to keep output from declining. The U.S.-based companies are also involved in state-controlled Petroleos de Venezuela SA’s joint ventures in other regions such as Lake Maracaibo.

Limiting Exposure

Halliburton Co., Schlumberger Ltd. and Weatherford International Ltd. have reduced staff and are limiting their exposure to the risk of non-payment in the country, according to people familiar with the situation. The three companies have written down a total of at least $1.4 billion since 2018 in charges related to operations in Venezuela, according to financial filings. Baker Hughes had also scaled back before additional sanctions were announced earlier this year, the people said.

Schlumberger, Baker Hughes, Weatherford, PDVSA and Venezuela’s oil ministry all declined to comment.

Halliburton has adjusted its Venezuela operations to customer activity, and continues operating all of its product service lines at its operational bases, including in the Orinoco Belt, it said in an emailed response to questions. It works directly with several of PDVSA’s joint ventures, and timely payments from customers are in accordance with U.S. regulations, it said.

Hamilton, Bermuda-based Nabors Industries Ltd. has three drilling rigs in Venezuela that can operate for a client until the sanctions expire in October, Chief Executive Officer Anthony Petrello said in a July 30 conference call, without naming the client.

The sanctions carry geopolitical risks for the U.S. If Maduro manages to hang on, American companies would lose a foothold in Venezuela, giving Russian competitors such as Rosneft Oil Co. a chance to fill the void. Chinese companies could also benefit. Even if the waivers get extended, the uncertainty hinders any long-term planning or investments in the nation by the exposed companies.

Rosneft’s press office didn’t respond to phone calls and emails seeking comment on operations in Venezuela.

 

 

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

Venezuelan oil exports fall to lowest level in 2019 as U.S. sanctions bite

 

 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/venezuelan-oil-exports-fall-lowest-154925248.html

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

U.S. blacklists 'oil for terror' ship network as it raises pressure on IRGC

 

https://news.yahoo.com/1-u-blacklists-oil-shipping-155328464.html

 

[kshithij Sharma + 78]

On 8/22/2019 at 4:27 AM, John Foote said:

General LeMay famously was going to win the Vietnam War by bombing them back into the stone age, famously ignoring it was an agrarian society not far removed from only sticks and stones.

Iran doesn't use vast quantities to cash to buy influence and wage war. That would be the other side of the Gulf. The greater population would truly benefit from better economics, but as North Korea proves, economic isolation won't stop them, and in some strange ways, plays to them. It also strengthens Russia, China, and India's position with Iran. 

A Houthie soldier makes maybe $115 a month and has no issues fighting Saudis to a draw, despite the gross discrepancies in fire power.

The French theorized prior to WWI strategic bombing breaks the enemies will. Perhaps carpet bombing with nukes will achieve it, but short of that, it tends to harden resolve of your opponent.

This approach is unlikely to work. But perhaps it feels good to think we are winning.

I am no pacifist, a vet, love history, the Khans are some of my historical idols for how to wage and win on pure level (and even for them entirely unsustainable).

Sanctions cause suffering, but they don't break the will of countries.

Sanctions don't subdue a country. It just prevents a country from taking advantage of global economy an spreading its soft power influence. In case of Iran, Iran keeps funding Iraq, Lebanon and other movements across the world. This will take a hit with sanctions. Iran will be unable to sustain funding its allies abroad with prolonged sanctions. Things like logistics, recruitment of soldiers require funds and cutting it will prevent Iran from extending its reach in areas where its own currency (which it can print) don't work.

Second, sanctions stop Iran from acquiring foreign machinery and assistance in developing strategic assets like missiles. Iran imports many critical components of it satellite launcher and missiles from abroad and many times disguise it as civilian equipment. Sanctions make such things very difficult due to 2 reasons: 1) These spy rings are very expensive and sanctions cut the funds 2) Banning of every shipment reduces the chance of strategic items being disguised as civilian items

Countries like NKorea has rational people (they don't waste time praying 5 times a day or believing in mullahs) and can develop technology like satellite launchers, missile technology and even nuclear bombs on their own despite a tiny population of 20 million and isolated from most of international resources. Unlike North Korea, Iran is filled with jihadis and don't have many people with rational mindset to think scientifically. They tend to copy or borrow technology most of the time rather than develop it on their own. So, sanctions against Iran is successful in preventing Iran from developing technology like missile, SLV, fighter jets, complex nuclear weapons (Iran may have simpler ones like Uranium or plutonium fission bombs but complex ones like miniaturised thermonuclear bombs are difficult to obtain).

Sanctions are not to break the will but to slow down Iranian strategic technology acquisition and reduce Iranian influence across the world

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

On 8/22/2019 at 6:57 AM, John Foote said:

General LeMay famously was going to win the Vietnam War by bombing them back into the stone age, famously ignoring it was an agrarian society not far removed from only sticks and stones.

Iran doesn't use vast quantities to cash to buy influence and wage war. That would be the other side of the Gulf. The greater population would truly benefit from better economics, but as North Korea proves, economic isolation won't stop them, and in some strange ways, plays to them. It also strengthens Russia, China, and India's position with Iran. 

A Houthie soldier makes maybe $115 a month and has no issues fighting Saudis to a draw, despite the gross discrepancies in fire power.

The French theorized prior to WWI strategic bombing breaks the enemies will. Perhaps carpet bombing with nukes will achieve it, but short of that, it tends to harden resolve of your opponent.

This approach is unlikely to work. But perhaps it feels good to think we are winning.

I am no pacifist, a vet, love history, the Khans are some of my historical idols for how to wage and win on pure level (and even for them entirely unsustainable).

Sanctions cause suffering, but they don't break the will of countries.

First off, General LeMay retired in 1965. He was instrumental in the US bombing campaign...IN THE SECOND WORLD WAR!!! He had no serious input for strategy in Vietnam!

Secondly, history has shown that if the US would have placed the war supporting industries in Hanoi and Haiphong harbor on the approved target lists early in the war, the outcome may have been much different. The Ho Chi Minh Trail would have shriveled and wasted away.

[John Foote + 1,135]

I met with people in the USAF during my active duty time, who briefed LeMay in 1983 at SAC headquarters. His standing with senators meant never really retired from a being involved since and was actively involved in strategy in the '80s. Today we would call him a member of the deep state. Bombing them back to the stone age was a famous thing of his. The first serious bombings of the north were on LeMay's active duty watch back in the days of Thud Ridge. He was such a SAC guy, and a true believer you could win anything with bombing and prevent wars through the threat of overwhelming response. We needed to invade and occupy the north, not bomb it. Not that that really would have worked. We created the Kilmer Rouge and destroyed a generation of Cambodia with our adventures there.

After WW1 Ho Chi Minh went to the USA asking for support. We told him to pack sand. In WW2 Ho Chi Minh was an effective alley and a serious pain in the ass to the Japanese. After the war he came to us, again we told him to pack sand and salute the French. When the French gave up, the elections determined Ho Chi Minh was the clear winner we injected ourselves in and created South Vietnam. I will give us the benefit of doubt of being sincere with the domino theory, but we were wrong and backed the wrong horse. Ho Chi Minh was very much a nationalist first, and a communist out of political connivence and necessity. That country has endured thousands of years of China and maintained independence and uniqueness. It was a killing field for the Japanese who were utterly ruthless. We never stood a chance. Communism was embraced mainly because the western bloc turned them out. Today it's got the central corrupt government malaise, but also quite the entrepreneurial spirit in the private sector. Self-determination is not a uniquely American desire.

One of my mentors in the USAF was in Vietnam in '65, and was one of the last to leave on a helicopter as the embassy fell. In 1965  Vietnamese friend offered to take him hunting and showed him were on the map. My buddy went, "Oh, but that area is controlled by the Viet Cong." The response, "No problem, we pay." We were pumping massive graft into the system. At that moment he knew we had already lost. Some how our system failed to acknowledged we were backing the far more corrupt side. LBJ, McNamara, they knew it wasn't working, but just kept doubling down. The old, when you get in a hole quit digging, they violated big time.

Ultimately the military is a primarily tool for politics. If we pick the wrong politics, we probably will lose the war even as we win the battles. We can completely destroy our opponent, but we can't win. I do believe many soldiers are the noblest people on the planet. No other profession demands so much. A religious person is going to a better place with his sacrifice. A soldier just died for us and his/her mates. But we abuse them. I still miss being a warrior even with all the funerals I attended, but that is a profession for the young, and hopefully the old know better than to use them carelessly and indiscriminately. 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Why Is France Offering $15 Billion to Appease Iran?

Despite growing evidence that Iran has been violating the 2015 nuclear deal (the JCPOA) as well as recent Iranian provocations in the Persian Gulf, including seizing ships and shooting down a U.S. drone, France is considering offering Iran a $15 billion letter of credit to salvage the nuclear deal and to convince Tehran to comply with it.
France may offer Iran this financial package despite the undeniable weakness of the JCPOA and the success of President Trump’s “Maximum Pressure” campaign which is squeezing the Iranian economy and making it harder for Tehran to fund destabilizing and belligerent activities such as its military, nuclear and missile programs, Iranian troops in Syria, and terrorist groups like Hezbollah.

So why would French President Macron want to offer such a huge payment to appease Iran despite its bad behavior? Many experts believe this is because France and other European states want to trade with Iran and are more reliant on oil imports than the United States.  ...

 

... European globalists like multinational coalitions because they promote liberal internationalist goals like the Paris Climate Accord, defeating Brexit, and trade agreements which favor Europe. But more important, such coalitions allow them to control U.S. national security policy.

This wasn’t a problem for the Obama administration which actively sought to subordinate U.S. national security to the United Nations and Europe.

It is a problem for President Trump who does not believe the United State should be ceding its sovereignty to the UN and the EU. This is why arguments made by JCPOA supporters that the United States should not withdraw from the nuclear deal because it is a multilateral agreement and that a withdrawal would offend European states had no effect on Mr. Trump.

French President Macron and other European states know that President Trump’s withdrawal from the nuclear accord has exposed not just that it is a fraud but that those who negotiated the agreement knew this all along. They knew the deal was a sell-out to Iran with weak verification that would not stop its nuclear weapons program. They also know Iran has failed to comply with the agreement from the very beginning, including by failing to provide an accurate accounting of its prior nuclear weapons-related work and refusing to allow IAEA inspections of military facilities.  ...

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

(Bloomberg) -- Exports of sanction-hit Venezuelan oil now face a new concern: a shortage of vessels willing to transport crude produced by the regime of President Nicolas Maduro.

Shipowners are avoiding transporting Venezuelan oil for fear of being sanctioned and losing insurance coverage on their vessels, according to people with knowledge of the situation. The lack of vessels may take a toll on oil exports which, according to data compiled by Bloomberg, was already at a 16-year low in August.

At least one cargo of Venezuelan oil was deferred to October as the buyer couldn’t find a vessel to load, said one of the people, who asked not to be identified because the information is confidential. Unable to find supertankers to carry its oil to Asia, the OPEC producer is resorting to smaller, costlier vessels to deliver overseas.

U.S. President Donald J. Trump signed an Aug. 5 order authorizing sanctions on anyone helping the Maduro regime amid a humanitarian crisis that has caused 4 million Venezuelans to flee the country. The Shipowners’ Club, provider of insurance to international shipping companies, advised its members to “exercise caution” if engaging with Venezuela. The group says if a member is sanctioned, its property can be blocked and the club may terminate or suspend insurance coverage.