is saudi arab a good place to live for a orthodoctor & is 10000saudi ryal +free accommodation good salary?
i am an orthopedic surgeon with 18 years of experince in india-have been offered a job in saudi arabia for 10000rsaudiriya/mth eq to approxx 1lac/mth + free accommodation- do you think its easy to live in a islamic country like saudia- & is the package enough to make some money too-how is the social life? malls/internet/shopping/clubs etc
Saudi Arabia - 9 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
SR10 000 isnt much really. Free accomodation is standard practice. edit: to share with you my experience of visiting a hospital in jeddah when i was having JUST a fever. I spent SR1500 just for a visit. So i am sure the hospital would be able to pay you much higher salary with your qualification. edit: shopping is good, plenty of malls and imported items are really cheap. club? are u serious? no public clubs, however if u mingle with other expats, u will know who is conducting private parties which u could attend (if u were invited of course). Some expats produce their own house wines which you could get your hands on for a mere SR30 a bottle. Pretty nice too. Some expats managed to get a bottle of pure whiskey Black Labels or Jack Daniels through friends which could cost around USD250 a bottle. drat!! I lived in Jeddah for a while a few years ago and i enjoyed living in a gated community with other expats. I only hate it when i have to go out shopping, being a woman, men sometimes tries to grope me so i hate it. Damn arseholes.. if u move there, dont be like them.
2 :
Salaries vary according to your education,experience and nationality. 10,000 Riyal seems reasonable to me if you are working in the private sector. Governmet salaries are generally higher and can reach 30,000+. Life in KSA is generally quiet and smooth. Some cities are more open than others. For expats, I believe Jeddah is a good place , so is Dammam and Dhahran. Riyadh, the capitol, is more conservative and the Mutawwas( religous police) are everywhere. But don't get intimidated, if you are a decent guy and respect the local customs regardless of how weird they seem to you, then you have nothing to worry about my friend. Malls: are great and everywhere. Internet: modem, DSL, or satellite. Shopping: you can find almost anything you need. Clubs: Book clubs, hourse back riding, art and talents, as for other activities>>how I wish !!
3 :
SAR10,000.- is equivalent to USD2,666.66. It's is a good deal and free accomodation is really on labor code here in Saudi. Grab the opportunity if you see that this is better than what you are earning now. there are only malls and internetshop here in Saudi. Some internet site are banned especially those contain x-rated pics and movie clips. There is no club here, not even a movie house. in short social life is dead!!! however, you can also enjoy going to the beaches, malling and going out with friends.
4 :
Its OK, try to come and purchase your own car and get connivance allowance that will be 10% of basic plus fuel allowance. That will return your car price within few years. don't forget to bring your driving licence with you it will help you to get Saudi licence here. Which nationality you are depends to choose the location. there are different locations for different nationalities but also mixed as well. try to take your housing allowance and take your own house on rent, instead of free residence from company, in this way you can save some money, as 25% of basic is the housing allowance. every thing is very interesting and comfortable. be ready for hot and dry weather.
5 :
are u american
6 :
The salary is not that much for the qualification that you have,,,, But if I wer you I would ask for the work coditions, and what type of accommodation they are offering you is it an upmarket unit or is it a room in a shared complex and most important thing is how many hours do you have to work a week???
7 :
I think 10000 SR is low for u as a doctor if u r not working in private hospital , Saudi teachers takes more !! about living I think u will enjoy it ,, I agree with mahawi about social life ,,
8 :
it is very low income compare to your qualification. Your employer well make fortune out of you. But if you really need the Job then go for it. I know very stupid Indian working in financial sector in Saudi and they make some thing like SR 40,000 / month. European or American with same qualification well make at least SR 70,000/ month, Saudi Arabia is really prejudice country with regards to nationality.
9 :
10,000= approximately $2,666 US dollars a month. And free accomodations is great! No rent, no utilities! We are living in Khamis Mushayt. There are shopping malls, internet and such here. We live on a compound so there are some clubs but I'm not sure about in the actual kingdom since no alcoholic drinking allowed. I don't know how much you get paid in India if it is less than what Saudi is offering, I would take the deal. But if more, stay where you are!!
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Should USA stop buying Saudi oil?
Should USA stop buying Saudi oil?
Saudi Arabia rakes in billions of petro-dollars. The money they make by selling oil they use to finance the very dangerous Wahhabi sect of Islam around the world. Saudi Arabia pays for the construction of mosques in countries like USA, Spain, Italy, Germany, France, England, etc. They then pay for Wahhabi Imams to preach hatred and religious bigotry at those mosques. 1. What if USA stopped paying for Saudi oil? What would be the pros and cons? Could America withstand the higher prices as a result? 2. What if USA stopped buying Iranian oil at the same time? Please answer both questions and draw out the logical and possible consequences.
Government - 10 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
WHERE WOULD WE GET OIL THEN...?
2 :
no, we should keep sending money to the country who's people took down NYTC's ....... US gov cares little about its people, .........its all about business
3 :
We DON'T buy Iranian oil. As for Saudi oil, well, we could eliminate all Middle East oil from our consumption by allowing our refineries to process heavy oil and importing it from other wonderful places like Russia and Venezuela, and accepting higher levels of air pollution. S.A. kind of has us over a barrel, not on price but for supply, at least in the short run.
4 :
Then all they would have is Canadian Oil
5 :
The answer is to end our dependency on oil altogether. It sounds idealistic but there's no reason why we can't make it happen. If we invented rockets that can go to the Moon, we should be able to develop alternative energy sources. If the government weren't in the pockets of the energy companies, we'd have a lot more freedom to do this.
6 :
Yes, I think America could live without oil from Middle East countries. But, I think there are a few main reasons we continue to buy oil from countries like Saudi Arabia. The first is simply we need cheap oil. America is slow to produce alternate fuel vehicles and such. This makes us very ouil dependent. Secondly, we want to keep on good terms with the Saudis. They may do things we do not like, but overall they remain one of our only Arab allies in the middle east. Refusing to buy their oil would end that relationship in a hurry. Third, fossil fuels such as oil will not always be available. Sooner or later, the wells in these oil rich countries will stop producing. When this happens, America will still have Alaska to explore and will still have some of the richest oil fields in the world. We buy from others so we can horde our own. These are just a couple reasons. I am sure there are more though.
7 :
Yeah, run all those V12s on carrot juice.
8 :
The Us citisens wouldn't stand for the higher cost of fuel if we stopped buying Saudi oil. Look how we start whining & pi--ing when gas(petrol) hits $3 a gal. Saudi, Iran who the hell cares, they are all the same.
9 :
US JUST CANT't DO THAT.
10 :
sure if you want pay $12 dollars for gallon or more..
Saudi Arabia rakes in billions of petro-dollars. The money they make by selling oil they use to finance the very dangerous Wahhabi sect of Islam around the world. Saudi Arabia pays for the construction of mosques in countries like USA, Spain, Italy, Germany, France, England, etc. They then pay for Wahhabi Imams to preach hatred and religious bigotry at those mosques. 1. What if USA stopped paying for Saudi oil? What would be the pros and cons? Could America withstand the higher prices as a result? 2. What if USA stopped buying Iranian oil at the same time? Please answer both questions and draw out the logical and possible consequences.
Government - 10 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
WHERE WOULD WE GET OIL THEN...?
2 :
no, we should keep sending money to the country who's people took down NYTC's ....... US gov cares little about its people, .........its all about business
3 :
We DON'T buy Iranian oil. As for Saudi oil, well, we could eliminate all Middle East oil from our consumption by allowing our refineries to process heavy oil and importing it from other wonderful places like Russia and Venezuela, and accepting higher levels of air pollution. S.A. kind of has us over a barrel, not on price but for supply, at least in the short run.
4 :
Then all they would have is Canadian Oil
5 :
The answer is to end our dependency on oil altogether. It sounds idealistic but there's no reason why we can't make it happen. If we invented rockets that can go to the Moon, we should be able to develop alternative energy sources. If the government weren't in the pockets of the energy companies, we'd have a lot more freedom to do this.
6 :
Yes, I think America could live without oil from Middle East countries. But, I think there are a few main reasons we continue to buy oil from countries like Saudi Arabia. The first is simply we need cheap oil. America is slow to produce alternate fuel vehicles and such. This makes us very ouil dependent. Secondly, we want to keep on good terms with the Saudis. They may do things we do not like, but overall they remain one of our only Arab allies in the middle east. Refusing to buy their oil would end that relationship in a hurry. Third, fossil fuels such as oil will not always be available. Sooner or later, the wells in these oil rich countries will stop producing. When this happens, America will still have Alaska to explore and will still have some of the richest oil fields in the world. We buy from others so we can horde our own. These are just a couple reasons. I am sure there are more though.
7 :
Yeah, run all those V12s on carrot juice.
8 :
The Us citisens wouldn't stand for the higher cost of fuel if we stopped buying Saudi oil. Look how we start whining & pi--ing when gas(petrol) hits $3 a gal. Saudi, Iran who the hell cares, they are all the same.
9 :
US JUST CANT't DO THAT.
10 :
sure if you want pay $12 dollars for gallon or more..
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Why dont saudis get what expats get? and your opinon on expats who badmouth saudi?
Why dont saudis get what expats get? and your opinon on expats who badmouth saudi?
Hello. I am hoping not to be misunderstood by this, or to offend anyone. But I just dont think this is fair! How come when the expats come here they get to live in luxury? They live for free in the BEST most lavish compounds, free cars, free phones, free gas, free private schooling, free travel tickets, free medical at the best hospitals, all they basically pay for is clothes and food? But why dont they do this for the saudis? I have my kids in a preschool in a compound and I have started wondering this. It's not fair! Or at least give the saudis the same level of education these expats have so that they can have these jobs too! Why does the average saudi today have to struggle to pay rent? put his kids in school? pay utilities? pay hospitals? if you want a free hospital you have to go to one that is going to make you wait 6 months for an appointment! I just think its sad that the average saudi like my husband and my friends shusbands are finding it almost impossible to buy a house when the expats come and live for free, then take all the money and send it to their countries. I'm not talking bad of expats, most my friends are expats. I just think it's unfair saudis dont get that. My husband works for the govt and risks his life for the country every morning he goes to work. But what I really hate are the expats who are ungrateful. Who break the rules, complain about saudi, make fun of the saudis, mutawas, and culture. Dont bite the hand that feeds you. An expat in aramco was complaining about the noise the RSAF makes every day. I understand complaining, but she was going too far. Calling them stupid, rude, saying she was going to "complain". I said my GOD...you are very ungrateful. Those pilots are risking their lives daily practising to save YOUR ASS if their is ever an attack. You should be happy to hear them. Ive also heard women making fun of mutawas and even islam. To all the expats who hate saudi so much, and hate saudi people, Please remember that you would be jobless and broke and maybe homeless if it wasnt for saudi arabia. thank you everyone for your responses. well to me when a company pays for everything for you, I consider it free. And I do know of many expats who do get free cars, phones, gas, etc. All I am saying is that I wish the saudis would be offered at least some of the same, or at least offered the education in decent schools for free. And I dont mean scholarships I mean from KG and up. Yes there are free saudi schools, but have you ever been in one!?!!?!? You would be SHOCKED and most of them should be condemned. And I would like to add I am in no way complaining about my husbands work, I am in fact extremely proud of him, however I do think he should be given more credit by the government for all he does like other countries do with their air force. We do have free hospitals but again, have you BEEN in one? Thank you very much for your much appriciated answer. I know that yes, expats work very hard. But so do the saudis and I just wish they could also have some of these privelages. thank you h. No sadly it is not the same here. and I did not know that about expats, thank you for telling me. Please do not misunderstand me people, I love expats and am one in a way, (other than the ones who say mean things about the country and its locals). I am not saying I wish expats didnt get these things, I am saying I wish it was mandatory for the companies to provide these things for saudis they hire too. elephant shoes, have you compared your salary at aramco to that of a saudi's? Even if he does get extra months in pay it still isnt the same as an american/brit's. Im not referring to the saudis who have been there YEARS and are about to retire.. and thank you elephant shoes for the appriciation! his job terrifies me personally but the uniform is definately a perk. Again people....NOT getting my QUESTION....!!!! My question WAS I dont think it is fair that the saudi's do not have the perks that the expats DO have. Even a saudi must move from one area to another and miss his family. Even Saudi kids have to relocate. Even a saudi who is QUALIFIED ENOUGH for a job should be offered all those things too. And if the money that put food on my kids table was coming from another country, even Isreal, I would be appriciative. I know not all expats make bad comments. But you would not believe the comments I HAVE heard and my negative feelings are towards THEM. AGAIN- TO CLARIFY- I'm not saying NO to expats. I'm saying give the QUALIFIED saudi's the same!
Saudi Arabia - 12 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Hi. First of all no expat is getting any thing free here. Every expat works really hard to earn. THey had worked hard to get the right education and left their home lands to work and survive. Dont forget that they are away from their families and all that , so expats are the one who are suffering. There are many expats like me who working so hard to earn little. We all risk lives for some body, every morning i get to work after passing huge traffic which is also risk because anything can happen. You should be proud of your husband that he is serving his country and you shouldnt be complaining. The people who are making fun of others shouldnt be doing this, but it has nothing to do with whether they are expats or whatever. Anybody can make fun of anybody which is wrong. Please remember that million of Saudis have businesses because of expats in this country. Unfortunately Saudis dont realize that expats are part of success and developement of this country. I have been to UK and british friends told me that they are very thank full for expats especially Indians and Pakistanis who work hard and running their hospitals, schools and other businesses. Please consider our efforts in this country. Well if you are talking about western expats then may be your are right that its unfair.
2 :
We don't live in luxury and I hardly think the compounds are lavish. We don't get free cars, phones, gas and we do actually pay rent. The Saudis I know get free education, as well, all the way through University. Once a year we get money to travel home. I think it might have something to do with residency laws, but I'm not sure. The Saudis I know also get free medical care and that includes extended family members. For every 12 months of pay an expat gets, the Saudis get 14-16 months (at Aramco) they also receive a housing allowance to help pay for the purchase of their homes. So really it goes both ways. We all get perks. As far as people complaining,well it's part of human nature. Anyone living in culture that is unfamiliar to them is going to complain about how things are different from what they are used to. As far as the noise from the planes, if I don't hear them flying I think something is wrong! I am glad they are doing their jobs and I appreciate and thank them for it!
3 :
ONCE, I was in a festival called "Almohamadiyyah 1st Arabian Horse festival" there were many western expats .. when the owners names have been called - those expats were makin' jokes about the names- One of them said "abdulaziz steals everything" they thought we don't understand But that word made me sad very much . that word made me think too much about our "respect" to them
4 :
Salams sis, I wanted to email you but that is not possible. I understand how you feel, I too felt the same way before. When I was in Singapore, I see all the expats living the high life and getting paid so much. While we Singaporeans had to slog and work for longer hours and make much lesser than them. Now that my husband got a job in Dubai, we somehow received the same 'package' as any other expats. I think its to compensate us, for leaving the comforts of our own homes/ country and work in a foreign land. Alhamdulillah, we are thankful that we are here in Dubai and so much of our daily expenses are taken care by the company. Although, I must add, wherever you may be, you have to respect the people, culture n religion of others. May Allah bless your family, sister.
5 :
Very interesting and new to me. I always thought that KSA has the same structure regarding the foreign workforce than the UAE (or almost). Some UAE citizen, especially Govt. employers, employees in higher positions and family with more than 3 kids will mostly receive a free villa. I know that both countries provide free education (for citizen) and free health care. As a plus, citizen will be send aboard if proper medical care can not be provided and the Govt. will pay all expenses for the patient and his/her company. Also students aboard will be provided with a scholarship. Mostly expats will receive a "salary package" incl. rent, furnishing allowance and transportation. Please be aware, that most expats leave their home and sometimes family members behind. Do you think a professional with a good job at home will pay rent twice? Buy furnisher twice (and this mostly just for a couple years)? A Westerner mostly will go home for major surgery. Do you know what this costs? An expat is not covered financially when loosing his/her job and has to leave the country. An expat will not receive any retirement money or pension in Saudi. An expat is not covered falling ill and not be able to work any more. An expat is not able to receive any social benefits. Please take into consideration, that for all the mentioned cases an expat who thinks in the long run needs to save money to be covered for the unexpected and the end of service. An other aspect is that you have to convince experts to go to a foreign country for work, especially if an expat is not coming from a country like India, Pakistan, Asia etc, where people are desperate for jobs. To complain lays in the human nature. What do you think how often I hear that Arabs wear dresses and are gay when greeting each other. How often is the Abaya called a tent and the men "towle heads". Just ignore it. edit@N M: I found an article you may find interesting: http://www.arabianbusiness.com/515749-expats-to-blame-for-saudi-unemployment?ln=en Also read the comments:))
6 :
Think about it: Is it really all expats that get all this? I dont think so...It is a minority in certain professions and with very good work experience that get these payments. The reason they give them all this money is as an initiative for them to move over here. Why would a whole family of say a pilot trainer agree to move to KSA,without a good financial initiative? You think it is easy for children to relocate? For the wife to leave behind all her family and move here raising children alone? If such people were not needed, they would not be hired. The amount of high salaries-since the 80's has fallen a lot and the amount of expats in general is reduced ( I mean the really high paid ones). In addition, how many of these expats really enjoy living in the compounds? What is so special about them? The villas are average sized - typical european and US sizes-and there is a common pool. They live isolated from the rest of the community, like in a cage with high walls,,,,not to be seen! What a nice feeling....Do you think that this is ideal? I do not believe that these high salaries should be mandatory for anyone! These are temporary salaries covering some needs.
7 :
Most expats in Saudi Arabia are from the Philippines, Egypt, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Shri Lanka. And they get paid far less than the Saudis get paid. A relatively small number of westerners from Europe and other countries get free housing and other benefits that might be better than most Saudis have. Because that's what it takes to attract workers from these countries. And for one reason or another these workers cannot be easily replaced with Saudi workers. Many Saudi women for example cannot work night shifts or be on call for emergencies. And that makes many foreign female workers in Saudi hospitals irreplaceable with Saudi workers. And due to family responsibilities, Saudi workers in other types of employment quite often don't work as much as the foreign workers work, even when their work responsibilities are exactly the same. They either come late for work, or they leave early, or they take a lot more sick leave than the foreign workers take. Which often leads to resentment among foreign workers who have to pick up the slack and work twice as hard, when the Saudi workers are absent from their work. And of course, many westerners resent the Mutawas who try to impose Saudi culture and values on them. Because such imposition is seen among westerners as a violation of human rights. Most western countries have rules and laws that at least on paper guarantee a lot more religious and cultural freedom than what is allowed in Saudi Arabia. And for many westerners, coming to Saudi Arabia is a big cultural shock. Because they are not used to such lack of freedom and so many restrictions on their culture and religion.
8 :
i would be happy if i weak up one day and find Saudi Arabia is expats-free.
9 :
I understand you Sister, But I am also an Expat and living in KSA, I am at managerial position and we also have many Saudi's working in my company. The difference between expat and the Saudi's are; I have to work long hours after duty time. (without overtime) I have to take responsibility of every thing in the company. I don't get any reward if I do something beneficial to the company. I have to pay the damages if a Saudi's make mistake under my supervision. Saudi's come late and leave early. Its impossible to run normal daily tasks of company if given to Saudi's. They don't take or feel any responsibility to work. They waste company resources and believe its meant for them. I have to keep a standby expat beside every Saudi to function normally. Well there are many more things, but I will like to say only one thing. If Saudi's were capable to do things themselves, Expats won't be needed. I am sorry sister if you feel any offense, but this is my experience.
10 :
I hear you punjabi! My husband was moved to KSA to take over a major project for his company and when we were moving everyone told us how family friendly KSA was. Guess what? ever since we have come here we hardly get to see him bcos he has to cover up for his Saudi colleagues... in his company saudization is not complete and hence things according to him are not as bad as they could have been! I know several other men on our compound who complain how difficult it is to get Saudis to work and frankly listening to them it seems to me astonishing that they have jobs at all! However Saudization has been shoved down every manager's throat and there is no choice. I am sorry to say this but if Saudis were so capable to take care of their own country you wouldnt need expats. You guys have much to learn from the smarter and worldy wise Emiratis, who have been so successful in their emiratization drive simply bcos their people are ready to work and have realised to live in this world they need to get real. In the west the KSA is known as a hardship posting and myhusband for exampe would never have come here, exciting project or not, if we hadnt gotten a good accomodation in a good compound and schooling and medical insurance as perks. Please know that back in the Uk both of these things are free for us anyway. Compare this to the fact that everyone is dying to go to the UAE and so hence the days of big salary packages for westeners is very much past there!
11 :
I can see all sides of the argument. My husband is Saudi, and I'm American, and I'm sure if I were to get a job I would make more money than him. we have similar degrees, so it wouldn't be about education, it would be about nationality. I do wish we can have some of the perks that the expats get in his company. But at the same time, I feel grateful that he has such a good job. It's a stable job. It's secure. They very rarely fire anyone. We have free healthcare. My husband will get retirement from the company, and of course he contributes to GOSI. But, the expats who are permanent employees also get retirement from the company or at least a very large end of service benefit. I honestly think we're better off with his 'Saudi' salary than we would be if we were living in the US, still on one income. He doesn't pay any taxes here, and he always gets raises and extra pay sometimes and he can get some overtime. I think there are some expats who are ungrateful for what they have and are not here for a cultural experience. But, for the most part, I've found the expats to be friendly. @ h - Saudis are eligible to apply for an interest free home loan from the government, but they won't get the money for at least like 20 years from when they apply because too many people want the loan and not everyone pays it back.
12 :
i'm an expat & ya i agree with yur point. i believe that alwayz experience, talent , qualifiction & hardwork should b counted .but we generally c taht the priority is given to which country the employee belongs to. NOT ALL EXPATS R GETTING FAIR MONEY DEAR. we asians neverthless of our talent,dedication & hardwork get very very very less pay when compare to employees frm other countries. u all know which countries i'm talking 'bout. i'm not complaining. just keeping my point that all expats r not treated the same.this country has given me a lot & i luv this country & dont wanna leave it.nomatter what.
Hello. I am hoping not to be misunderstood by this, or to offend anyone. But I just dont think this is fair! How come when the expats come here they get to live in luxury? They live for free in the BEST most lavish compounds, free cars, free phones, free gas, free private schooling, free travel tickets, free medical at the best hospitals, all they basically pay for is clothes and food? But why dont they do this for the saudis? I have my kids in a preschool in a compound and I have started wondering this. It's not fair! Or at least give the saudis the same level of education these expats have so that they can have these jobs too! Why does the average saudi today have to struggle to pay rent? put his kids in school? pay utilities? pay hospitals? if you want a free hospital you have to go to one that is going to make you wait 6 months for an appointment! I just think its sad that the average saudi like my husband and my friends shusbands are finding it almost impossible to buy a house when the expats come and live for free, then take all the money and send it to their countries. I'm not talking bad of expats, most my friends are expats. I just think it's unfair saudis dont get that. My husband works for the govt and risks his life for the country every morning he goes to work. But what I really hate are the expats who are ungrateful. Who break the rules, complain about saudi, make fun of the saudis, mutawas, and culture. Dont bite the hand that feeds you. An expat in aramco was complaining about the noise the RSAF makes every day. I understand complaining, but she was going too far. Calling them stupid, rude, saying she was going to "complain". I said my GOD...you are very ungrateful. Those pilots are risking their lives daily practising to save YOUR ASS if their is ever an attack. You should be happy to hear them. Ive also heard women making fun of mutawas and even islam. To all the expats who hate saudi so much, and hate saudi people, Please remember that you would be jobless and broke and maybe homeless if it wasnt for saudi arabia. thank you everyone for your responses. well to me when a company pays for everything for you, I consider it free. And I do know of many expats who do get free cars, phones, gas, etc. All I am saying is that I wish the saudis would be offered at least some of the same, or at least offered the education in decent schools for free. And I dont mean scholarships I mean from KG and up. Yes there are free saudi schools, but have you ever been in one!?!!?!? You would be SHOCKED and most of them should be condemned. And I would like to add I am in no way complaining about my husbands work, I am in fact extremely proud of him, however I do think he should be given more credit by the government for all he does like other countries do with their air force. We do have free hospitals but again, have you BEEN in one? Thank you very much for your much appriciated answer. I know that yes, expats work very hard. But so do the saudis and I just wish they could also have some of these privelages. thank you h. No sadly it is not the same here. and I did not know that about expats, thank you for telling me. Please do not misunderstand me people, I love expats and am one in a way, (other than the ones who say mean things about the country and its locals). I am not saying I wish expats didnt get these things, I am saying I wish it was mandatory for the companies to provide these things for saudis they hire too. elephant shoes, have you compared your salary at aramco to that of a saudi's? Even if he does get extra months in pay it still isnt the same as an american/brit's. Im not referring to the saudis who have been there YEARS and are about to retire.. and thank you elephant shoes for the appriciation! his job terrifies me personally but the uniform is definately a perk. Again people....NOT getting my QUESTION....!!!! My question WAS I dont think it is fair that the saudi's do not have the perks that the expats DO have. Even a saudi must move from one area to another and miss his family. Even Saudi kids have to relocate. Even a saudi who is QUALIFIED ENOUGH for a job should be offered all those things too. And if the money that put food on my kids table was coming from another country, even Isreal, I would be appriciative. I know not all expats make bad comments. But you would not believe the comments I HAVE heard and my negative feelings are towards THEM. AGAIN- TO CLARIFY- I'm not saying NO to expats. I'm saying give the QUALIFIED saudi's the same!
Saudi Arabia - 12 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Hi. First of all no expat is getting any thing free here. Every expat works really hard to earn. THey had worked hard to get the right education and left their home lands to work and survive. Dont forget that they are away from their families and all that , so expats are the one who are suffering. There are many expats like me who working so hard to earn little. We all risk lives for some body, every morning i get to work after passing huge traffic which is also risk because anything can happen. You should be proud of your husband that he is serving his country and you shouldnt be complaining. The people who are making fun of others shouldnt be doing this, but it has nothing to do with whether they are expats or whatever. Anybody can make fun of anybody which is wrong. Please remember that million of Saudis have businesses because of expats in this country. Unfortunately Saudis dont realize that expats are part of success and developement of this country. I have been to UK and british friends told me that they are very thank full for expats especially Indians and Pakistanis who work hard and running their hospitals, schools and other businesses. Please consider our efforts in this country. Well if you are talking about western expats then may be your are right that its unfair.
2 :
We don't live in luxury and I hardly think the compounds are lavish. We don't get free cars, phones, gas and we do actually pay rent. The Saudis I know get free education, as well, all the way through University. Once a year we get money to travel home. I think it might have something to do with residency laws, but I'm not sure. The Saudis I know also get free medical care and that includes extended family members. For every 12 months of pay an expat gets, the Saudis get 14-16 months (at Aramco) they also receive a housing allowance to help pay for the purchase of their homes. So really it goes both ways. We all get perks. As far as people complaining,well it's part of human nature. Anyone living in culture that is unfamiliar to them is going to complain about how things are different from what they are used to. As far as the noise from the planes, if I don't hear them flying I think something is wrong! I am glad they are doing their jobs and I appreciate and thank them for it!
3 :
ONCE, I was in a festival called "Almohamadiyyah 1st Arabian Horse festival" there were many western expats .. when the owners names have been called - those expats were makin' jokes about the names- One of them said "abdulaziz steals everything" they thought we don't understand But that word made me sad very much . that word made me think too much about our "respect" to them
4 :
Salams sis, I wanted to email you but that is not possible. I understand how you feel, I too felt the same way before. When I was in Singapore, I see all the expats living the high life and getting paid so much. While we Singaporeans had to slog and work for longer hours and make much lesser than them. Now that my husband got a job in Dubai, we somehow received the same 'package' as any other expats. I think its to compensate us, for leaving the comforts of our own homes/ country and work in a foreign land. Alhamdulillah, we are thankful that we are here in Dubai and so much of our daily expenses are taken care by the company. Although, I must add, wherever you may be, you have to respect the people, culture n religion of others. May Allah bless your family, sister.
5 :
Very interesting and new to me. I always thought that KSA has the same structure regarding the foreign workforce than the UAE (or almost). Some UAE citizen, especially Govt. employers, employees in higher positions and family with more than 3 kids will mostly receive a free villa. I know that both countries provide free education (for citizen) and free health care. As a plus, citizen will be send aboard if proper medical care can not be provided and the Govt. will pay all expenses for the patient and his/her company. Also students aboard will be provided with a scholarship. Mostly expats will receive a "salary package" incl. rent, furnishing allowance and transportation. Please be aware, that most expats leave their home and sometimes family members behind. Do you think a professional with a good job at home will pay rent twice? Buy furnisher twice (and this mostly just for a couple years)? A Westerner mostly will go home for major surgery. Do you know what this costs? An expat is not covered financially when loosing his/her job and has to leave the country. An expat will not receive any retirement money or pension in Saudi. An expat is not covered falling ill and not be able to work any more. An expat is not able to receive any social benefits. Please take into consideration, that for all the mentioned cases an expat who thinks in the long run needs to save money to be covered for the unexpected and the end of service. An other aspect is that you have to convince experts to go to a foreign country for work, especially if an expat is not coming from a country like India, Pakistan, Asia etc, where people are desperate for jobs. To complain lays in the human nature. What do you think how often I hear that Arabs wear dresses and are gay when greeting each other. How often is the Abaya called a tent and the men "towle heads". Just ignore it. edit@N M: I found an article you may find interesting: http://www.arabianbusiness.com/515749-expats-to-blame-for-saudi-unemployment?ln=en Also read the comments:))
6 :
Think about it: Is it really all expats that get all this? I dont think so...It is a minority in certain professions and with very good work experience that get these payments. The reason they give them all this money is as an initiative for them to move over here. Why would a whole family of say a pilot trainer agree to move to KSA,without a good financial initiative? You think it is easy for children to relocate? For the wife to leave behind all her family and move here raising children alone? If such people were not needed, they would not be hired. The amount of high salaries-since the 80's has fallen a lot and the amount of expats in general is reduced ( I mean the really high paid ones). In addition, how many of these expats really enjoy living in the compounds? What is so special about them? The villas are average sized - typical european and US sizes-and there is a common pool. They live isolated from the rest of the community, like in a cage with high walls,,,,not to be seen! What a nice feeling....Do you think that this is ideal? I do not believe that these high salaries should be mandatory for anyone! These are temporary salaries covering some needs.
7 :
Most expats in Saudi Arabia are from the Philippines, Egypt, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Shri Lanka. And they get paid far less than the Saudis get paid. A relatively small number of westerners from Europe and other countries get free housing and other benefits that might be better than most Saudis have. Because that's what it takes to attract workers from these countries. And for one reason or another these workers cannot be easily replaced with Saudi workers. Many Saudi women for example cannot work night shifts or be on call for emergencies. And that makes many foreign female workers in Saudi hospitals irreplaceable with Saudi workers. And due to family responsibilities, Saudi workers in other types of employment quite often don't work as much as the foreign workers work, even when their work responsibilities are exactly the same. They either come late for work, or they leave early, or they take a lot more sick leave than the foreign workers take. Which often leads to resentment among foreign workers who have to pick up the slack and work twice as hard, when the Saudi workers are absent from their work. And of course, many westerners resent the Mutawas who try to impose Saudi culture and values on them. Because such imposition is seen among westerners as a violation of human rights. Most western countries have rules and laws that at least on paper guarantee a lot more religious and cultural freedom than what is allowed in Saudi Arabia. And for many westerners, coming to Saudi Arabia is a big cultural shock. Because they are not used to such lack of freedom and so many restrictions on their culture and religion.
8 :
i would be happy if i weak up one day and find Saudi Arabia is expats-free.
9 :
I understand you Sister, But I am also an Expat and living in KSA, I am at managerial position and we also have many Saudi's working in my company. The difference between expat and the Saudi's are; I have to work long hours after duty time. (without overtime) I have to take responsibility of every thing in the company. I don't get any reward if I do something beneficial to the company. I have to pay the damages if a Saudi's make mistake under my supervision. Saudi's come late and leave early. Its impossible to run normal daily tasks of company if given to Saudi's. They don't take or feel any responsibility to work. They waste company resources and believe its meant for them. I have to keep a standby expat beside every Saudi to function normally. Well there are many more things, but I will like to say only one thing. If Saudi's were capable to do things themselves, Expats won't be needed. I am sorry sister if you feel any offense, but this is my experience.
10 :
I hear you punjabi! My husband was moved to KSA to take over a major project for his company and when we were moving everyone told us how family friendly KSA was. Guess what? ever since we have come here we hardly get to see him bcos he has to cover up for his Saudi colleagues... in his company saudization is not complete and hence things according to him are not as bad as they could have been! I know several other men on our compound who complain how difficult it is to get Saudis to work and frankly listening to them it seems to me astonishing that they have jobs at all! However Saudization has been shoved down every manager's throat and there is no choice. I am sorry to say this but if Saudis were so capable to take care of their own country you wouldnt need expats. You guys have much to learn from the smarter and worldy wise Emiratis, who have been so successful in their emiratization drive simply bcos their people are ready to work and have realised to live in this world they need to get real. In the west the KSA is known as a hardship posting and myhusband for exampe would never have come here, exciting project or not, if we hadnt gotten a good accomodation in a good compound and schooling and medical insurance as perks. Please know that back in the Uk both of these things are free for us anyway. Compare this to the fact that everyone is dying to go to the UAE and so hence the days of big salary packages for westeners is very much past there!
11 :
I can see all sides of the argument. My husband is Saudi, and I'm American, and I'm sure if I were to get a job I would make more money than him. we have similar degrees, so it wouldn't be about education, it would be about nationality. I do wish we can have some of the perks that the expats get in his company. But at the same time, I feel grateful that he has such a good job. It's a stable job. It's secure. They very rarely fire anyone. We have free healthcare. My husband will get retirement from the company, and of course he contributes to GOSI. But, the expats who are permanent employees also get retirement from the company or at least a very large end of service benefit. I honestly think we're better off with his 'Saudi' salary than we would be if we were living in the US, still on one income. He doesn't pay any taxes here, and he always gets raises and extra pay sometimes and he can get some overtime. I think there are some expats who are ungrateful for what they have and are not here for a cultural experience. But, for the most part, I've found the expats to be friendly. @ h - Saudis are eligible to apply for an interest free home loan from the government, but they won't get the money for at least like 20 years from when they apply because too many people want the loan and not everyone pays it back.
12 :
i'm an expat & ya i agree with yur point. i believe that alwayz experience, talent , qualifiction & hardwork should b counted .but we generally c taht the priority is given to which country the employee belongs to. NOT ALL EXPATS R GETTING FAIR MONEY DEAR. we asians neverthless of our talent,dedication & hardwork get very very very less pay when compare to employees frm other countries. u all know which countries i'm talking 'bout. i'm not complaining. just keeping my point that all expats r not treated the same.this country has given me a lot & i luv this country & dont wanna leave it.nomatter what.
Wednesday, August 1, 2012
Should we just make a law that says no religious buildings be built by foreign money?
Should we just make a law that says no religious buildings be built by foreign money?
We don't allow foreign contributions to political parties, why can Saudi Arabia and Iran with Qatar funnel their money to force their religion on us? If the muslims living here can build the mosques on their own, by all means it would be a bit different. But we have seen evidence otherwise. I don't see them comming up with 100 million dollars to build a supermosque in a part of Manhattan where there are very few muslims..if you have ever been to New York that part of Manhattan is the Financial District and most of the muslims live in Brooklyn. The constitution doesn't protect foreign interests in the US, dimwits
Politics - 13 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Have you ever heard of the Constitution or do you just like shitting all over it?
2 :
Maybe, but that might inhibit all religions....wait, yes. Definitely yes.
3 :
There are 100 mosques already in NYC and no Muslim lives in 1/2 mile of the super mosque.
4 :
Because this would be making a law about religion. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" It isn't that hard to read. Think of it as 100 million off the trade deficit.
5 :
I don't think any foreign money should be used to aquire U.S. territory.
6 :
How about we just establish a Republican Tribunal that everyone must apply to before they do anything, to get permission first.
7 :
I'll go with that if we also no longer allow foreign money to invest in U.S. corporations.
8 :
Better stop building Catholic churches then. A good bit of that money comes from the Vatican. Fish in a barrel folks. Fish in a barrel.
9 :
Ouch. I've seen really dumb posts before, but this might be tops. Please read what you wrote, and contrast it with our Constitution. Lemme know how it goes.
10 :
I agree with you Joe, if the Muslim living in this Country and are in America legally. power to them. I wonder if the Mormons can build a Temple in Saudi Arabia? Hey! good luck and God bless you
11 :
How do you constitute that when the Federal Reserve bank does not even belong to the United States of America??? Did you know, you being the Sheriff you ought to have known that and made some arrests. Proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2fjxaRLpQo&feature=related
12 :
You're very amusing. I can't tell if you're serious or being sarcastic. Can you explain to me how building a mosque or any other house of worship is "forcing a religion on you"? Are you so weak-minded and weak-willed that the very sight of a house of worship compels you to practice that religion against your will? When a Temple is erected, is Judaism forced into your brain? And, uh, by the way, the "mosque" is being built 2 1/2 blocks away from ground zero which serves as the cut-off for the financial district- therefore, it is NOT in the financial district but 2 1/2 blocks east. In this area is a high concentration of Middle Eastern shops and restaurants. Not to mention, the center is open to people of any faith (it has basketball courts and workout facilities among many other things), and happened to be a cheap buy in NYC, which is tough to find these days. But above all, our Constitution and New York State laws support this construction- if you want to wipe your a$$ with the Constitution, go to Saudi Arabia and do it, will ya? Edit: Uh, the owners of that building are American citizens, DIMWIT, regardless of how they are funded. An American citizen remodeling a building that he/she owns is not a "foreign interest" as much as you would like it to be.
13 :
You state " We don't allow foreign contributions to political parties" Have you heard about- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. I think we know who the dimwit is.
We don't allow foreign contributions to political parties, why can Saudi Arabia and Iran with Qatar funnel their money to force their religion on us? If the muslims living here can build the mosques on their own, by all means it would be a bit different. But we have seen evidence otherwise. I don't see them comming up with 100 million dollars to build a supermosque in a part of Manhattan where there are very few muslims..if you have ever been to New York that part of Manhattan is the Financial District and most of the muslims live in Brooklyn. The constitution doesn't protect foreign interests in the US, dimwits
Politics - 13 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Have you ever heard of the Constitution or do you just like shitting all over it?
2 :
Maybe, but that might inhibit all religions....wait, yes. Definitely yes.
3 :
There are 100 mosques already in NYC and no Muslim lives in 1/2 mile of the super mosque.
4 :
Because this would be making a law about religion. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" It isn't that hard to read. Think of it as 100 million off the trade deficit.
5 :
I don't think any foreign money should be used to aquire U.S. territory.
6 :
How about we just establish a Republican Tribunal that everyone must apply to before they do anything, to get permission first.
7 :
I'll go with that if we also no longer allow foreign money to invest in U.S. corporations.
8 :
Better stop building Catholic churches then. A good bit of that money comes from the Vatican. Fish in a barrel folks. Fish in a barrel.
9 :
Ouch. I've seen really dumb posts before, but this might be tops. Please read what you wrote, and contrast it with our Constitution. Lemme know how it goes.
10 :
I agree with you Joe, if the Muslim living in this Country and are in America legally. power to them. I wonder if the Mormons can build a Temple in Saudi Arabia? Hey! good luck and God bless you
11 :
How do you constitute that when the Federal Reserve bank does not even belong to the United States of America??? Did you know, you being the Sheriff you ought to have known that and made some arrests. Proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2fjxaRLpQo&feature=related
12 :
You're very amusing. I can't tell if you're serious or being sarcastic. Can you explain to me how building a mosque or any other house of worship is "forcing a religion on you"? Are you so weak-minded and weak-willed that the very sight of a house of worship compels you to practice that religion against your will? When a Temple is erected, is Judaism forced into your brain? And, uh, by the way, the "mosque" is being built 2 1/2 blocks away from ground zero which serves as the cut-off for the financial district- therefore, it is NOT in the financial district but 2 1/2 blocks east. In this area is a high concentration of Middle Eastern shops and restaurants. Not to mention, the center is open to people of any faith (it has basketball courts and workout facilities among many other things), and happened to be a cheap buy in NYC, which is tough to find these days. But above all, our Constitution and New York State laws support this construction- if you want to wipe your a$$ with the Constitution, go to Saudi Arabia and do it, will ya? Edit: Uh, the owners of that building are American citizens, DIMWIT, regardless of how they are funded. An American citizen remodeling a building that he/she owns is not a "foreign interest" as much as you would like it to be.
13 :
You state " We don't allow foreign contributions to political parties" Have you heard about- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. I think we know who the dimwit is.
Saturday, July 28, 2012
Do you think people who drive V8 engines or bigger are supporting terrorism?
Do you think people who drive V8 engines or bigger are supporting terrorism?
Being that Iran, Iraq, Saudi arabia, and others are making all their money off of us and our huge oil consumption. Do you think those people with the huge trucks and SUV's and the american flags all over their vehicles got it all wrong. Your Thoughts! I can totally understand if you need the truck for work but other than that it seems unnecessary & funds terrorists pockets. by the way svs22422 i am not a liberal. I just think the only reason those countries even have money is from countries who buy a bunch of oil from them. America buy's the most oil. I guess some of yall just don't see it, Owell OK Karl, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia don't have terrorists. pfffft who is Osama Bin Laden where was he from??????? Yeah of course everyone uses oil but do we need to use as much as we do? Also my computer is not using oil it is electricity, yes does APS or SRP use oil yes but also a lot of other technology not just oil. Does a 20 year old single woman need to drive a huge truck?? I don't think so. And the ones who disagree with me probably complain about gas prices when its 4 bucks a gallon LOL.
Other - Politics & Government - 8 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
No, neither are drug users. Only those who send them donations and support them openly are supporting terrorism. A lot of our oil is bought from Russia and Canada as well as the middle east.
2 :
No ! But do you think that your new failing leader can negotiate with terrorist ?
3 :
Since most of everything we use is imported or made domestically and requires use of oil to manufacture, even you and I who walk to work are supporting terrorism if what you say about the indirect support has any merit.
4 :
I suppose that, in your opinion, Congress had nothing to do with our oil import bill? And that despite that various [mostly Democratic] administrations and Congress refuse to permit significant oil drilling in America. *** Did you know that America is the only industrialized nation that does not permit oil exploration in significant chunks of its offshore waters? *** Thanks to those Washington boneheads, America's energy policy is to import it -- and has been since about 1979. Of course, importing energy has the effect of exporting jobs. You might want to look at the pay rates of jobs in the oil patch, in gas drilling, in coal mining, in railroads, and in nuclear power. Dad gum if they aren't HIGHER than America's national average. The policy has been to export high paying jobs to foreign nations so that we can all work in lower paying jobs and be poorer. How's that for "stupid is as stupid does"??
5 :
Nope People who Drive H1,2, and3 Hummers do.
6 :
liberals like you will never understand FACTS AND LOGIC!!!
7 :
Yes I think they are. Only people who drive 4 cylinder cars are in the Coalition of the Willing. Good Christian folk.
8 :
Are you insane?? first of all do you actually think that everyone in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia are terrorist? if so then Bush and Cheneys scare tactics have work way too well on you my friend. second your comparison is just way off base for instance did you know it takes fuel to generate the electrical power your using to power your computer to write this message? how dare you support terrorism like that!!! Do you watch television? how dare you!! you say you have a total electric house?!? you should be waterboarded by dick cheney for that! you like to watch late night tv?! gitmo is surely in your future.
Being that Iran, Iraq, Saudi arabia, and others are making all their money off of us and our huge oil consumption. Do you think those people with the huge trucks and SUV's and the american flags all over their vehicles got it all wrong. Your Thoughts! I can totally understand if you need the truck for work but other than that it seems unnecessary & funds terrorists pockets. by the way svs22422 i am not a liberal. I just think the only reason those countries even have money is from countries who buy a bunch of oil from them. America buy's the most oil. I guess some of yall just don't see it, Owell OK Karl, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia don't have terrorists. pfffft who is Osama Bin Laden where was he from??????? Yeah of course everyone uses oil but do we need to use as much as we do? Also my computer is not using oil it is electricity, yes does APS or SRP use oil yes but also a lot of other technology not just oil. Does a 20 year old single woman need to drive a huge truck?? I don't think so. And the ones who disagree with me probably complain about gas prices when its 4 bucks a gallon LOL.
Other - Politics & Government - 8 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
No, neither are drug users. Only those who send them donations and support them openly are supporting terrorism. A lot of our oil is bought from Russia and Canada as well as the middle east.
2 :
No ! But do you think that your new failing leader can negotiate with terrorist ?
3 :
Since most of everything we use is imported or made domestically and requires use of oil to manufacture, even you and I who walk to work are supporting terrorism if what you say about the indirect support has any merit.
4 :
I suppose that, in your opinion, Congress had nothing to do with our oil import bill? And that despite that various [mostly Democratic] administrations and Congress refuse to permit significant oil drilling in America. *** Did you know that America is the only industrialized nation that does not permit oil exploration in significant chunks of its offshore waters? *** Thanks to those Washington boneheads, America's energy policy is to import it -- and has been since about 1979. Of course, importing energy has the effect of exporting jobs. You might want to look at the pay rates of jobs in the oil patch, in gas drilling, in coal mining, in railroads, and in nuclear power. Dad gum if they aren't HIGHER than America's national average. The policy has been to export high paying jobs to foreign nations so that we can all work in lower paying jobs and be poorer. How's that for "stupid is as stupid does"??
5 :
Nope People who Drive H1,2, and3 Hummers do.
6 :
liberals like you will never understand FACTS AND LOGIC!!!
7 :
Yes I think they are. Only people who drive 4 cylinder cars are in the Coalition of the Willing. Good Christian folk.
8 :
Are you insane?? first of all do you actually think that everyone in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia are terrorist? if so then Bush and Cheneys scare tactics have work way too well on you my friend. second your comparison is just way off base for instance did you know it takes fuel to generate the electrical power your using to power your computer to write this message? how dare you support terrorism like that!!! Do you watch television? how dare you!! you say you have a total electric house?!? you should be waterboarded by dick cheney for that! you like to watch late night tv?! gitmo is surely in your future.
Saturday, July 14, 2012
is there any american company recruiter who needs a telecom engineer to work in Middle East/cina?
is there any american company recruiter who needs a telecom engineer to work in Middle East/cina?
I am a telecom engineer, I'd love to work in saudi arabia, emirates, china, japan and so on because I want to make money. I have experience.
Corporations - 1 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
you are really, really looking in the wrong place!!! You're saying that you are experienced, use your own contacts, network!! Try to contact HR agencies, head hunters specialized for regions or profession. Speaking of China, I can guarantee you won't find job searching on internet fast or ever!! And I expect you don't speak Mandarin at all. Anyway good luck tho.
I am a telecom engineer, I'd love to work in saudi arabia, emirates, china, japan and so on because I want to make money. I have experience.
Corporations - 1 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
you are really, really looking in the wrong place!!! You're saying that you are experienced, use your own contacts, network!! Try to contact HR agencies, head hunters specialized for regions or profession. Speaking of China, I can guarantee you won't find job searching on internet fast or ever!! And I expect you don't speak Mandarin at all. Anyway good luck tho.
Saturday, July 7, 2012
How can the US/UK Justify their Relationship with Saudi Arabia?
How can the US/UK Justify their Relationship with Saudi Arabia?
Ostensibly, the purpose of the Iraq invasion was to bring freedom and democracy to an oppressed people living under a regime of fear (if you believe the Bush people). I think there was something in there about ending terrorism too. So how can we condone warm relations with an "ally" country that allows this to happen to a rape victim? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7106234.stm Is that promoting freedom and human rights? Some cite our supposed alliance with the Saudis against terrorism. But Saudi Arabia is the spiritual center of Wahabism. And where is the AQ in Afghanistan getting its money? I doubt the local goat farmers are passing the hat around. Why not just admit it's all realpolitik, and our governments will do whatever's expedient to make sure we can get our oil? Especially after Gordon Brown's cozy meeting with the Saudi king last week. For the record, I am not anti-Islam, anti-American, or anti-anything but sickening hypocrisy.
Politics - 9 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Saudi Arabia, a dictatorship, has OIL. That's your justification.
2 :
They can't, of course. Nor can the relationship with Pakistan be justified, or a whole number of questionable regimes from around the world. But the public hears what the powers that be want them to hear. Aside from a small minority of people who have taken it upon themselves to seek information about the way the world truly works, the rest are subjected to the mass media machine that bombards them with propaganda on a daily basis. Thus is America's worldview distorted. If the public were truly informed, I don't think they would stand for what either of the main political machine stands for. I remain optimistic in that I believe that deep down, the mass of the population is still fundamentally moral and that they would object to profiteering.
3 :
Do you like to drive your vehicle? Heat your home? Live in a consumer society and buy things? Of course the Saudi dont promote human rights but they have oil.....welcome to the real world. In WW2 the US/UK allied with the Soviet Union to defeat Germany. By then Stalin had killed as many people as Hitler's Germany (starvation in the 1930s) Cassacks, Polish officers and yet they were on "our side"..
4 :
They really can`t........ but for oil they`re prepared to do anything.
5 :
oil
6 :
Oil, the international lubricant.
7 :
I agree, and I applaud you for not believing everything youre told. In fact, Saudi Arabia is not the only ally that has civil rights violations. Turkey oppresses the Kurds as Iraq did. We just dont hear about it on the news. Youre right, its all about (bad) diplomacy. Its about securing our national interests under the auspises of maintaning order. Those who actually research the issue find that it the governments justification doesnt hold up to scrutiny. How did we get to Iraq from the twin towers anyway? There was NO connection. None of the hijacksers were from Iraq... They were from Saudi Arabia - a place that uses stoning and has absurd laws reguarding women. The atrocities in this article are not unusual for this country. Theres a long, documented history of twisted laws and even more twisted punishments in Saudi Arabia. No wonder why the middle east thinks were hippocrites. If we want to prove how much better we are, we need to stand up against our governments bad decisions. We have a constitutional RIGHT to make our government uphold OUR values. Not the values of warped foreign monarchs, corrupt CEOs, or religious fanatics (sorry, I just had to include everyone. No disrespect to reasonable religious adherents).
8 :
Saudi Arabia not only has oil ,but along with China they are lending money to Bush daily . Our National debt is raised by $1.48 billion dollars a day for over the last 15 months now.
9 :
Anybody who has read William Engdahl’s excellent book ‘A Century of War – Anglo-American oil politics and the New World Order’ (reviewed here), will not be surprised to learn that the convoluted machinations of those who rule empires, whether past or present, are intrinsic to the workings of the ruling class. History reveals that a mere handful relatively speaking of individuals are able to determine the fate of millions through the economic and political power they wield. The role of the political class that represents the interests of the owners of economic power is to maintain the rule of the owners of capital by making damn sure that opposition is neutralised and/or made to look ridiculous or ultimately ‘removed’. Hence the ‘loony left’, ‘fellow travellers’, ‘dinosaurs’ et al are but a few of the pejoratives the corporate/state-run media use to marginalise the views of those who oppose such power. But in times of crisis and failing propaganda and persuasion, more extreme measures need to be taken and such people and movements need to be re-labelled as ‘extremists’ or a ‘danger to the state’. Laws are passed making such opposition illegal, such as those now being enacted, even thinking ‘seditious’ thoughts become the subject of the state’s wrath. A quick scan of the media reveals the tactics used; President Chavez is described as a ‘leftist with authoritarian ambitions’, Castro as a ‘Marxist dictator’, and anybody who opposes the rule of capital is invariably labelled as an ‘opponent of the free market’ or ‘anti-privatisation’; a ‘demagogue’ and so on and so forth. Attempts are made to link ‘leftists’ to ‘extremists’ and even to ‘terrorists’. Such terms, in use for so long, trigger conditioned reflexes in the reader, the associations are buried deep in the public’s mind as ‘received opinion’; all thinking ceases; we metaphorically salivate when we hear or read the terms and dismiss such people and ideas as beyond the pale or even dangerous to our health. Critics of those of us who analyse the workings of our rulers are quick to dismiss us as ‘conspiracists’, nutty people who apparently have nothing else to do with our time but weave complex plots, spun out of what are, at least according to the pundits, accidents of time and place, mere serendipity. This is of course a tactic to relegate our opinions to ‘Area 51’, and obviously there are those who do spin complex webs, making connections where none exist. But connections do exist between events, else there would be no cause and effect, no one with interests and objectives they’d rather not reveal to the world for what they are, vested interests and real criminal conspiracies. That it’s governments or business doing the conspiring doesn’t make them any the less conspiracies, indeed it makes them all the more dangerous because of the immense power they wield. Without connections the world would be one of chaos and happenstance, a world where as Margaret Thatcher said, “there is no such thing as societyâ€, an obviously loony idea but one that has a subversive appeal, as it implies that circumstances are ultimately beyond our control hence why bother as there is nothing we can do about it. The implication is that we are at the mercy of ‘natural’ forces, hence capitalism for example, is a ‘force of nature’. The intended result of course is that we adopt a position of fatalism, very convenient for our rulers, they can get on with the business of ruling undisturbed by ‘winters of discontent’. The problem of course is that any investigation of events does reveal vested interests, possessing economic and political power is not an accident and rarely is its possession the result of good intentions or a social conscience. As Engdahl’s book reveals, the past 100 years and more have been shaped by a small group of individuals who possess vast wealth intimately connected to an equally small group of people who possess enormous political power. The centres of their economic power are predictably energy, banking, weapons and communications and maintaining control of such enormous power inevitably connects directly into the comparable key areas of government; trade, investment, ‘defence’ and foreign policy. Those who sit on the boards of big corporations are also found in key government positions and they regularly make the trip back and forth between the two in a revolving door relationship. The examples are numerous, the most obvious being for example in the UK, the relationship between the Blair government and British Petroleum or in the US, between the Bush regime and Halliburton and the big oil companies. Is identifying such connections an invention, a conspiracy or a reflection of the common interests of those who hold economic power and the political class that seeks to maintain an environment that preserves that power? Most importantly, to what lengths will they go in order to maintain their power? Considering what’s at stake it is no surprise that there is virtually nothing they won’t do in order to maintain the status quo including murdering their own citizens, attacking sovereign states, concocting ‘threats’ and fabricating entire ‘histories’ to justify their piratical ways. The apologists for such activities would have us believe that such actions belong to the past, the past being conveniently, well before the current crop of rulers inherited power. St. Paul, on the road to Damascus is said to have gone through a major conversion, he proverbially ‘saw the light’ and in all likelihood there are many of us who experienced a comparable flash of illumination when the forces of Darkness invaded Iraq and came to rational and well-founded conclusions about the relationship between war and economics – the two go hand-in-hand, to pretend otherwise is either sheer ignorance or deliberate deception. The mainstream media was (and still is) all to quick to condemn all those who cried ‘it’s all about oil’ as ‘conspiracists’ and in their haste to condemn us they revealed much about their own ideological leanings, leanings that would have us believe that the invaders were actually operating out of concern for the Iraqi people. Indeed, the mainstream media was awash with apologists for the invaders. Most are now noticeable by their absence given the results of the invasion and occupation. Most noticeable is the absence of any alternative explanation for the invasion except the laughable “failure of intelligenceâ€, which only a cretin would actually believe. By 2010 we will need on the order of an additional fifty million barrels a day. So where is the oil going to come from? .… While many regions of the world offer great oil opportunities, the Middle East with two thirds of the world’s oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies – Dick Cheney in 1999, then CEO of oil services company Halliburton So, is it all about oil? For over 100 years oil has been lifeblood of capitalism, two world wars have been waged over possession of it, but not merely its possession but because without it, the larger economic objectives of capitalism would be unrealisable, hence to say it’s all about oil is only part of the answer. Oil fuels the armies, powers the factories and control of its production and distribution enables the West to exert control over the natural resources needed to make the entire shambolic enterprise lurch from crisis to crisis and of course, make profits for the shareholders. It is, when all’s said and done, astounding simple, one might say juvenile were it all not so murderous of millions. British officials believed that the area [the Middle East] was a “vital prize for any power interested in world or domination[2], while their US counterparts saw the oil resources of Saudi Arabia as a “stupendous source of strategic power and one of the greatest material prizes in world historyâ€. A report, ‘Crude Designs – The rip-off of Iraq’s oil wealth’, available here, is a comprehensive analysis of the centrality of oil to the invasion of Iraq and for anyone who is really interested in the real motivations behind the invasion and occupation, it is required reading. I’ll do my best to produce an overview of its findings as understanding what is really going on is central to countering all the nonsense surrounding the policies and actions of our governments and those who would condemn us as ‘conspiracists’ or defend the motivations of our rulers as ‘humanitarian’. Much has been made in the corporate/state-run media of Blair being some kind of ‘restraining influence’ on Bush and the ‘neo-cons’ but as the report makes abundantly clear, US-UK foreign and energy and military policies are ‘joined at the hip’ and have been so for the past century and in spite of the rivalries. As Jack Straw made clear in January 2003, “…one of the Foreign Office’s seven priorities was “to bolster the security of British and global energy supplies.†The geography of such a strategy had been spelled out in the 1998 Strategic Defence Review White Paper: Outside Europe our interests are most likely to be affected by events in the Gulf and Mediterranean. Instability in these areas also carries wider risks. We have particularly important national interests and close friendships in the Gulf. Oil supplies from the Gulf are crucial to the world economy.†And lest anyone think that the UK government’s relationship with the major oil companies is not central, a later paper states that a key objective is to “improve investment regimes and energy sector management in these regions [the Middle East, parts of Africa and the former Soviet Union], focusing on key links in the supply chain to the UK [emph. in the original]†And, as the report demonstrates the US-UK relationship is no ‘one-night- stand’, but an on-going relationship a century-old. Moreover the label ‘neo-con’ is a total misnomer, for whilst it may well be true that Bush is some kind of weird Christian fundamentalist and his close associates are heavily involved with Israel’s imperialist strategy, it is a big mistake to confuse the ideology of Bush or that of Israel with the fundamental strategic/economic interests of the US (and UK). This is made abundantly clear by the ‘parting of the ways’ of the ‘traditionalists’ within the US ruling elite currently taking place as the Middle East strategy of the Bush regime goes pear-shaped, revealing the fact that as long as objectives can be realised, Bush’s ‘peculiar’ ideas are neither here nor there in the larger scheme of things. Importantly, the policies of America and Britain are coordinated. The US-UK Energy Dialogue – a bilateral initiative established during the April 2002 meeting of Prime Minister Blair and President Bush in Crawford, Texas,[3] and designed to “enhance coordination and cooperation on energy issues†– demonstrates the close convergence of Anglo-American views and interests on Middle Eastern oil. The relationship between economics and politics is revealed by the following quote taken from the Executive Summary The development model being promoted in Iraq, and supported by key figures in the [Iraqi] Oil Ministry, is based on contracts known as production sharing agreements (PSAs), which have existed in the oil industry since the late 1960s. Oil experts agree that their purpose is largely political; technically they keep legal ownership in state hands, while practically delivering oil companies the same results as the concession agreements they replaced.[1] The report describes the background as well as the context leading up to the invasion and occupation; the key players and their interests and connections as well as supplying a detailed analysis of the effects of the Iraqi ‘government’ signing away not only its one and only natural resource, oil, but in doing so, also renouncing its sovereignty and democratic control over it. As the report states, “PSAs are effectively immune from public scrutiny and lock governments into economic terms that cannot be altered for decadesâ€. The potential losses to the Iraqi people are staggering, the most conservative estimates puts it at $94 billion over the usual (25 year length of a PSA contract) assuming oil at $40 per barrel and $250 billion if the cost is $50 per barrel! The degree of influence of both the US and UK governments over future Iraqi oil policy is revealed by the following “We discuss with the Iraqi Ministries their priorities on a regular basis.â€[4] Freedom of information requests on the nature of the discussions have been turned down because advice was “voluminousâ€.[5] So too with the US. When the Coalition Provisional Authority ‘handed over power’ to the Iraqi Interim Government, a senior US official said “We’re still here. We’ll be paying a lot of attention and we’ll have a lot of influence. We’re going to have the world’s largest diplomatic mission with a significant amount of political weight.â€[6] An important aspect of the debate around Iraq’s oil has hinged on the issue of ‘privatisation’ which has, according to the report obscured the nature of the PSA, for as the report states, it’s “who gets the revenue and who controls the way in which oil is developed†that counts. PSAs first appeared in Indonesia in the late 1960s (not surprisingly following the US-inspired and backed overthrow of Sukarno). PSAs are an “ingenious arrangement†as “PSAs shift the ownership of oil from companies to the state, and invert the flow of payments between state and company.†Traditionally, the relationship between the foreign oil companies and the state was based on royalty payments (and still is in the major oil- producing countries of the world such as Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela), with the oil company taking the investment risk. PSAs reverse this process. PSAs are an ingenious arrangement for although “… the oil is still legally in the hands of the state, foreign companies are compensated for their investment in oil production infrastructure and for the risks they take.†PSAs are “A convenient marriage between the politically useful symbolism of the production-sharing contract (appearance of a service contract to the state company acting as master) and the material equivalence of this contract model with concession/licence regimes in all significant aspects…The government can be seen to be running the show – and the company can run it behind the camouflage of legal title symbolising the assertion of national sovereignty.â€[7] The report states the following facts about PSAs A right to oil reserves. Companies want a deal that guarantees their right to extract the reserves for many years, thus ensuring their future growth and profits. Furthermore, they want a contract that allows them to ‘book’ these reserves – including them in their accounts – which increases their company value. Production sharing agreements, like concession contracts, permit companies to book reserves in their accounts. An opportunity to make large profits. Generally, oil companies make their profits from investing and risking their capital. In some cases, they lose their capital, for example when they drill a ‘dry well’. But in some cases they will find large and hugely profitable fields. Oil companies are therefore very different from service companies like Halliburton, which make money from fixed fees on predictable contracts. Oil companies aim for deals which may be more speculative, but which give them a chance of making super-profits. Production sharing agreements are designed to allow companies to achieve very large profits if successful. Predictability of tax and regulation. While companies can accept exploration risk (that they won’t find oil) or price risk (that the oil price falls), both being beyond their control, they try to manage ‘political risk’ (that tax or regulatory demands will increase) by locking in governments. They thus seek to bind governments into long-term contracts that fix the terms of their investment. Production sharing agreements generally last for 25 to 40 years with terms protected from potential change by incoming governments. PSAs are also incredibly complex legal documents that require an army of sophisticated legal eagles not only to draft but to understand. PSAs generally consist of several hundred pages of legal and financial language (often treated as commercially confidential). It is their complexity, not their simplicity, which is advantageous to oil companies … [O]il companies dislike royalties and prefer systems based in an assessment of profits, such as PSAs. The reason is that they want what they call ‘upside’ (i.e. opportunities for greater profits) – ways they can reduce their payments, rather than being subject to a fixed level of payment for oil extracted … The more complicated the system, the more opportunities there are for a company to maximise their share of the revenue by sophisticated use of accountancy techniques. What we call ‘creative accounting’ of the kind Enron was so adept at. And the potential profits are “staggeringâ€, as much 178 per cent compared to an average 12 per cent return on investment, assuming oil at $40 a barrel, not very likely in the near term. With current price at around $60 per barrel, the oil execs are salivating at the thought of getting their hands on the biggest oil reserves on the planet (from 100-200 billion barrels). “Production-sharing deals allow oil companies a favourable profit margin and, unlike royalty schemes, insulate them from losses incurred when the oil price drops. For years, big oil companies have been fighting for such agreements in countries such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.â€[8] The corporate lobby group ITIC (the International Tax & Investment Centre) with most of its 110 listed sponsors large corporations a quarter of which are oil companies is perhaps the best example of the role of big capital in ripping off Iraq and it advocates the use of PSAs. Yet the report’s assessment is that it is … difficult to overstate how radical a departure PSAs would be from normal practice, both in Iraq and in other comparable countries of the region … Iraq’s neighbours Kuwait, Iran and Saudi Arabia, foreign control of oil is ruled out by constitution or by national law. But the interim constitution forced on the Iraqi people made quite sure that the terms over which Iraq’s oil would extracted would not be subject to oversight or control by the Iraqi people, “Pre-empting both the Iraqi elections and the drafting of a new constitution, Allawi’s guidelines specified that while Iraq’s currently producing fields should be developed by the Iraq National Oil Company (INOC), all other fields should be developed by private companies, through the contractual mechanism of production sharing agreements (PSAs).â€[9] The meshing of state and business objectives is made clear by the report and the key role of PSAs play in the policies of both the US and the UK. If the US-UK oil companies and their political/military capos get their way Iraq “along with much of its future income, could be surrendering its democracy as soon as it achieves it.†That’s assuming it ever gets a democratic government. Notes [1] The terminology of PSAs labels the private companies as “contractorsâ€. This report illustrates that this label is misleading because PSAs give companies control over oil development and access to extensive profits. [2] Introductory paper on the Middle East by the UK, undated [1947], FRUS, 1947, Vol. V, p. 569, cited in Mark Curtis, The Ambiguities of Power (Zed Books, London, 1995), p. 21 [3] US Department of Commerce, Memorandum for the President, Transmittal of the Report on the US-UK Energy Dialogue, 30 July 2003 [4] Dr Kim Howells MP, answer to Parliamentary Question by Harry Cohen MP, 12 July 2005, Hansard column 878W [5] James McLaughlin (Iraq Policy Unit, Foreign & Commonwealth Office), letter to Lorne Stockman (PLATFORM), response to request under the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information, 9 December 2004 [6] Jim Krane, “US will retain sovereign power in Iraq,†Associated Press, 21 March, 2004 [7] Professor Thomas W Wälde, an expert in oil law at the University of Dundee, ‘The current status of international petroleum investment: regulating, licensing, taxing and contracting’, in CEPMLP Journal, Vol 1, no.5, July 1995 (pub. University of Dundee) [8] Carola Hoyos, ‘Exiles Call for Iraq to Let in Oil Companies’, Financial Times, 7 April 2003 [9] Energy Compass, ‘Iraq: Puzzling over the future’, 1 October 2004 Crude Designs – The rip-off of Iraq’s oil wealth. Lead Publisher PLATFORM is an interdisciplinary organisation working on issues of environmental and social justice. http://www.carbonweb.org US co-publishers Global Policy Forum monitors policy making at the United Nations, promotes accountability of global decisions, educates and mobilizes for global citizen participation, and advocates on vital issues of international peace and justice. http://www.globalpolicy.org The Institute for Policy Studies. strengthens social movements with independent research, visionary thinking, and links to the grassroots, scholars and elected officials.http://www.ips-dc.org Oil Change International campaigns to expose the true costs of oil and facilitate the coming transition towards clean energy. We are dedicated to identifying and overcoming political barriers to that transition. http://www.priceofoil.org UK co-publishers The New Economics Foundation (NEF) works to construct a new economy centred on people and the environment. http://www.neweconomics.org War on Want is a UK-based campaigning charity. Founded in 1951 it has links to the labour movement and supports progressive, people-centred development projects around the world. http://www.waronwant.org
Ostensibly, the purpose of the Iraq invasion was to bring freedom and democracy to an oppressed people living under a regime of fear (if you believe the Bush people). I think there was something in there about ending terrorism too. So how can we condone warm relations with an "ally" country that allows this to happen to a rape victim? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7106234.stm Is that promoting freedom and human rights? Some cite our supposed alliance with the Saudis against terrorism. But Saudi Arabia is the spiritual center of Wahabism. And where is the AQ in Afghanistan getting its money? I doubt the local goat farmers are passing the hat around. Why not just admit it's all realpolitik, and our governments will do whatever's expedient to make sure we can get our oil? Especially after Gordon Brown's cozy meeting with the Saudi king last week. For the record, I am not anti-Islam, anti-American, or anti-anything but sickening hypocrisy.
Politics - 9 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Saudi Arabia, a dictatorship, has OIL. That's your justification.
2 :
They can't, of course. Nor can the relationship with Pakistan be justified, or a whole number of questionable regimes from around the world. But the public hears what the powers that be want them to hear. Aside from a small minority of people who have taken it upon themselves to seek information about the way the world truly works, the rest are subjected to the mass media machine that bombards them with propaganda on a daily basis. Thus is America's worldview distorted. If the public were truly informed, I don't think they would stand for what either of the main political machine stands for. I remain optimistic in that I believe that deep down, the mass of the population is still fundamentally moral and that they would object to profiteering.
3 :
Do you like to drive your vehicle? Heat your home? Live in a consumer society and buy things? Of course the Saudi dont promote human rights but they have oil.....welcome to the real world. In WW2 the US/UK allied with the Soviet Union to defeat Germany. By then Stalin had killed as many people as Hitler's Germany (starvation in the 1930s) Cassacks, Polish officers and yet they were on "our side"..
4 :
They really can`t........ but for oil they`re prepared to do anything.
5 :
oil
6 :
Oil, the international lubricant.
7 :
I agree, and I applaud you for not believing everything youre told. In fact, Saudi Arabia is not the only ally that has civil rights violations. Turkey oppresses the Kurds as Iraq did. We just dont hear about it on the news. Youre right, its all about (bad) diplomacy. Its about securing our national interests under the auspises of maintaning order. Those who actually research the issue find that it the governments justification doesnt hold up to scrutiny. How did we get to Iraq from the twin towers anyway? There was NO connection. None of the hijacksers were from Iraq... They were from Saudi Arabia - a place that uses stoning and has absurd laws reguarding women. The atrocities in this article are not unusual for this country. Theres a long, documented history of twisted laws and even more twisted punishments in Saudi Arabia. No wonder why the middle east thinks were hippocrites. If we want to prove how much better we are, we need to stand up against our governments bad decisions. We have a constitutional RIGHT to make our government uphold OUR values. Not the values of warped foreign monarchs, corrupt CEOs, or religious fanatics (sorry, I just had to include everyone. No disrespect to reasonable religious adherents).
8 :
Saudi Arabia not only has oil ,but along with China they are lending money to Bush daily . Our National debt is raised by $1.48 billion dollars a day for over the last 15 months now.
9 :
Anybody who has read William Engdahl’s excellent book ‘A Century of War – Anglo-American oil politics and the New World Order’ (reviewed here), will not be surprised to learn that the convoluted machinations of those who rule empires, whether past or present, are intrinsic to the workings of the ruling class. History reveals that a mere handful relatively speaking of individuals are able to determine the fate of millions through the economic and political power they wield. The role of the political class that represents the interests of the owners of economic power is to maintain the rule of the owners of capital by making damn sure that opposition is neutralised and/or made to look ridiculous or ultimately ‘removed’. Hence the ‘loony left’, ‘fellow travellers’, ‘dinosaurs’ et al are but a few of the pejoratives the corporate/state-run media use to marginalise the views of those who oppose such power. But in times of crisis and failing propaganda and persuasion, more extreme measures need to be taken and such people and movements need to be re-labelled as ‘extremists’ or a ‘danger to the state’. Laws are passed making such opposition illegal, such as those now being enacted, even thinking ‘seditious’ thoughts become the subject of the state’s wrath. A quick scan of the media reveals the tactics used; President Chavez is described as a ‘leftist with authoritarian ambitions’, Castro as a ‘Marxist dictator’, and anybody who opposes the rule of capital is invariably labelled as an ‘opponent of the free market’ or ‘anti-privatisation’; a ‘demagogue’ and so on and so forth. Attempts are made to link ‘leftists’ to ‘extremists’ and even to ‘terrorists’. Such terms, in use for so long, trigger conditioned reflexes in the reader, the associations are buried deep in the public’s mind as ‘received opinion’; all thinking ceases; we metaphorically salivate when we hear or read the terms and dismiss such people and ideas as beyond the pale or even dangerous to our health. Critics of those of us who analyse the workings of our rulers are quick to dismiss us as ‘conspiracists’, nutty people who apparently have nothing else to do with our time but weave complex plots, spun out of what are, at least according to the pundits, accidents of time and place, mere serendipity. This is of course a tactic to relegate our opinions to ‘Area 51’, and obviously there are those who do spin complex webs, making connections where none exist. But connections do exist between events, else there would be no cause and effect, no one with interests and objectives they’d rather not reveal to the world for what they are, vested interests and real criminal conspiracies. That it’s governments or business doing the conspiring doesn’t make them any the less conspiracies, indeed it makes them all the more dangerous because of the immense power they wield. Without connections the world would be one of chaos and happenstance, a world where as Margaret Thatcher said, “there is no such thing as societyâ€, an obviously loony idea but one that has a subversive appeal, as it implies that circumstances are ultimately beyond our control hence why bother as there is nothing we can do about it. The implication is that we are at the mercy of ‘natural’ forces, hence capitalism for example, is a ‘force of nature’. The intended result of course is that we adopt a position of fatalism, very convenient for our rulers, they can get on with the business of ruling undisturbed by ‘winters of discontent’. The problem of course is that any investigation of events does reveal vested interests, possessing economic and political power is not an accident and rarely is its possession the result of good intentions or a social conscience. As Engdahl’s book reveals, the past 100 years and more have been shaped by a small group of individuals who possess vast wealth intimately connected to an equally small group of people who possess enormous political power. The centres of their economic power are predictably energy, banking, weapons and communications and maintaining control of such enormous power inevitably connects directly into the comparable key areas of government; trade, investment, ‘defence’ and foreign policy. Those who sit on the boards of big corporations are also found in key government positions and they regularly make the trip back and forth between the two in a revolving door relationship. The examples are numerous, the most obvious being for example in the UK, the relationship between the Blair government and British Petroleum or in the US, between the Bush regime and Halliburton and the big oil companies. Is identifying such connections an invention, a conspiracy or a reflection of the common interests of those who hold economic power and the political class that seeks to maintain an environment that preserves that power? Most importantly, to what lengths will they go in order to maintain their power? Considering what’s at stake it is no surprise that there is virtually nothing they won’t do in order to maintain the status quo including murdering their own citizens, attacking sovereign states, concocting ‘threats’ and fabricating entire ‘histories’ to justify their piratical ways. The apologists for such activities would have us believe that such actions belong to the past, the past being conveniently, well before the current crop of rulers inherited power. St. Paul, on the road to Damascus is said to have gone through a major conversion, he proverbially ‘saw the light’ and in all likelihood there are many of us who experienced a comparable flash of illumination when the forces of Darkness invaded Iraq and came to rational and well-founded conclusions about the relationship between war and economics – the two go hand-in-hand, to pretend otherwise is either sheer ignorance or deliberate deception. The mainstream media was (and still is) all to quick to condemn all those who cried ‘it’s all about oil’ as ‘conspiracists’ and in their haste to condemn us they revealed much about their own ideological leanings, leanings that would have us believe that the invaders were actually operating out of concern for the Iraqi people. Indeed, the mainstream media was awash with apologists for the invaders. Most are now noticeable by their absence given the results of the invasion and occupation. Most noticeable is the absence of any alternative explanation for the invasion except the laughable “failure of intelligenceâ€, which only a cretin would actually believe. By 2010 we will need on the order of an additional fifty million barrels a day. So where is the oil going to come from? .… While many regions of the world offer great oil opportunities, the Middle East with two thirds of the world’s oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies – Dick Cheney in 1999, then CEO of oil services company Halliburton So, is it all about oil? For over 100 years oil has been lifeblood of capitalism, two world wars have been waged over possession of it, but not merely its possession but because without it, the larger economic objectives of capitalism would be unrealisable, hence to say it’s all about oil is only part of the answer. Oil fuels the armies, powers the factories and control of its production and distribution enables the West to exert control over the natural resources needed to make the entire shambolic enterprise lurch from crisis to crisis and of course, make profits for the shareholders. It is, when all’s said and done, astounding simple, one might say juvenile were it all not so murderous of millions. British officials believed that the area [the Middle East] was a “vital prize for any power interested in world or domination[2], while their US counterparts saw the oil resources of Saudi Arabia as a “stupendous source of strategic power and one of the greatest material prizes in world historyâ€. A report, ‘Crude Designs – The rip-off of Iraq’s oil wealth’, available here, is a comprehensive analysis of the centrality of oil to the invasion of Iraq and for anyone who is really interested in the real motivations behind the invasion and occupation, it is required reading. I’ll do my best to produce an overview of its findings as understanding what is really going on is central to countering all the nonsense surrounding the policies and actions of our governments and those who would condemn us as ‘conspiracists’ or defend the motivations of our rulers as ‘humanitarian’. Much has been made in the corporate/state-run media of Blair being some kind of ‘restraining influence’ on Bush and the ‘neo-cons’ but as the report makes abundantly clear, US-UK foreign and energy and military policies are ‘joined at the hip’ and have been so for the past century and in spite of the rivalries. As Jack Straw made clear in January 2003, “…one of the Foreign Office’s seven priorities was “to bolster the security of British and global energy supplies.†The geography of such a strategy had been spelled out in the 1998 Strategic Defence Review White Paper: Outside Europe our interests are most likely to be affected by events in the Gulf and Mediterranean. Instability in these areas also carries wider risks. We have particularly important national interests and close friendships in the Gulf. Oil supplies from the Gulf are crucial to the world economy.†And lest anyone think that the UK government’s relationship with the major oil companies is not central, a later paper states that a key objective is to “improve investment regimes and energy sector management in these regions [the Middle East, parts of Africa and the former Soviet Union], focusing on key links in the supply chain to the UK [emph. in the original]†And, as the report demonstrates the US-UK relationship is no ‘one-night- stand’, but an on-going relationship a century-old. Moreover the label ‘neo-con’ is a total misnomer, for whilst it may well be true that Bush is some kind of weird Christian fundamentalist and his close associates are heavily involved with Israel’s imperialist strategy, it is a big mistake to confuse the ideology of Bush or that of Israel with the fundamental strategic/economic interests of the US (and UK). This is made abundantly clear by the ‘parting of the ways’ of the ‘traditionalists’ within the US ruling elite currently taking place as the Middle East strategy of the Bush regime goes pear-shaped, revealing the fact that as long as objectives can be realised, Bush’s ‘peculiar’ ideas are neither here nor there in the larger scheme of things. Importantly, the policies of America and Britain are coordinated. The US-UK Energy Dialogue – a bilateral initiative established during the April 2002 meeting of Prime Minister Blair and President Bush in Crawford, Texas,[3] and designed to “enhance coordination and cooperation on energy issues†– demonstrates the close convergence of Anglo-American views and interests on Middle Eastern oil. The relationship between economics and politics is revealed by the following quote taken from the Executive Summary The development model being promoted in Iraq, and supported by key figures in the [Iraqi] Oil Ministry, is based on contracts known as production sharing agreements (PSAs), which have existed in the oil industry since the late 1960s. Oil experts agree that their purpose is largely political; technically they keep legal ownership in state hands, while practically delivering oil companies the same results as the concession agreements they replaced.[1] The report describes the background as well as the context leading up to the invasion and occupation; the key players and their interests and connections as well as supplying a detailed analysis of the effects of the Iraqi ‘government’ signing away not only its one and only natural resource, oil, but in doing so, also renouncing its sovereignty and democratic control over it. As the report states, “PSAs are effectively immune from public scrutiny and lock governments into economic terms that cannot be altered for decadesâ€. The potential losses to the Iraqi people are staggering, the most conservative estimates puts it at $94 billion over the usual (25 year length of a PSA contract) assuming oil at $40 per barrel and $250 billion if the cost is $50 per barrel! The degree of influence of both the US and UK governments over future Iraqi oil policy is revealed by the following “We discuss with the Iraqi Ministries their priorities on a regular basis.â€[4] Freedom of information requests on the nature of the discussions have been turned down because advice was “voluminousâ€.[5] So too with the US. When the Coalition Provisional Authority ‘handed over power’ to the Iraqi Interim Government, a senior US official said “We’re still here. We’ll be paying a lot of attention and we’ll have a lot of influence. We’re going to have the world’s largest diplomatic mission with a significant amount of political weight.â€[6] An important aspect of the debate around Iraq’s oil has hinged on the issue of ‘privatisation’ which has, according to the report obscured the nature of the PSA, for as the report states, it’s “who gets the revenue and who controls the way in which oil is developed†that counts. PSAs first appeared in Indonesia in the late 1960s (not surprisingly following the US-inspired and backed overthrow of Sukarno). PSAs are an “ingenious arrangement†as “PSAs shift the ownership of oil from companies to the state, and invert the flow of payments between state and company.†Traditionally, the relationship between the foreign oil companies and the state was based on royalty payments (and still is in the major oil- producing countries of the world such as Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela), with the oil company taking the investment risk. PSAs reverse this process. PSAs are an ingenious arrangement for although “… the oil is still legally in the hands of the state, foreign companies are compensated for their investment in oil production infrastructure and for the risks they take.†PSAs are “A convenient marriage between the politically useful symbolism of the production-sharing contract (appearance of a service contract to the state company acting as master) and the material equivalence of this contract model with concession/licence regimes in all significant aspects…The government can be seen to be running the show – and the company can run it behind the camouflage of legal title symbolising the assertion of national sovereignty.â€[7] The report states the following facts about PSAs A right to oil reserves. Companies want a deal that guarantees their right to extract the reserves for many years, thus ensuring their future growth and profits. Furthermore, they want a contract that allows them to ‘book’ these reserves – including them in their accounts – which increases their company value. Production sharing agreements, like concession contracts, permit companies to book reserves in their accounts. An opportunity to make large profits. Generally, oil companies make their profits from investing and risking their capital. In some cases, they lose their capital, for example when they drill a ‘dry well’. But in some cases they will find large and hugely profitable fields. Oil companies are therefore very different from service companies like Halliburton, which make money from fixed fees on predictable contracts. Oil companies aim for deals which may be more speculative, but which give them a chance of making super-profits. Production sharing agreements are designed to allow companies to achieve very large profits if successful. Predictability of tax and regulation. While companies can accept exploration risk (that they won’t find oil) or price risk (that the oil price falls), both being beyond their control, they try to manage ‘political risk’ (that tax or regulatory demands will increase) by locking in governments. They thus seek to bind governments into long-term contracts that fix the terms of their investment. Production sharing agreements generally last for 25 to 40 years with terms protected from potential change by incoming governments. PSAs are also incredibly complex legal documents that require an army of sophisticated legal eagles not only to draft but to understand. PSAs generally consist of several hundred pages of legal and financial language (often treated as commercially confidential). It is their complexity, not their simplicity, which is advantageous to oil companies … [O]il companies dislike royalties and prefer systems based in an assessment of profits, such as PSAs. The reason is that they want what they call ‘upside’ (i.e. opportunities for greater profits) – ways they can reduce their payments, rather than being subject to a fixed level of payment for oil extracted … The more complicated the system, the more opportunities there are for a company to maximise their share of the revenue by sophisticated use of accountancy techniques. What we call ‘creative accounting’ of the kind Enron was so adept at. And the potential profits are “staggeringâ€, as much 178 per cent compared to an average 12 per cent return on investment, assuming oil at $40 a barrel, not very likely in the near term. With current price at around $60 per barrel, the oil execs are salivating at the thought of getting their hands on the biggest oil reserves on the planet (from 100-200 billion barrels). “Production-sharing deals allow oil companies a favourable profit margin and, unlike royalty schemes, insulate them from losses incurred when the oil price drops. For years, big oil companies have been fighting for such agreements in countries such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.â€[8] The corporate lobby group ITIC (the International Tax & Investment Centre) with most of its 110 listed sponsors large corporations a quarter of which are oil companies is perhaps the best example of the role of big capital in ripping off Iraq and it advocates the use of PSAs. Yet the report’s assessment is that it is … difficult to overstate how radical a departure PSAs would be from normal practice, both in Iraq and in other comparable countries of the region … Iraq’s neighbours Kuwait, Iran and Saudi Arabia, foreign control of oil is ruled out by constitution or by national law. But the interim constitution forced on the Iraqi people made quite sure that the terms over which Iraq’s oil would extracted would not be subject to oversight or control by the Iraqi people, “Pre-empting both the Iraqi elections and the drafting of a new constitution, Allawi’s guidelines specified that while Iraq’s currently producing fields should be developed by the Iraq National Oil Company (INOC), all other fields should be developed by private companies, through the contractual mechanism of production sharing agreements (PSAs).â€[9] The meshing of state and business objectives is made clear by the report and the key role of PSAs play in the policies of both the US and the UK. If the US-UK oil companies and their political/military capos get their way Iraq “along with much of its future income, could be surrendering its democracy as soon as it achieves it.†That’s assuming it ever gets a democratic government. Notes [1] The terminology of PSAs labels the private companies as “contractorsâ€. This report illustrates that this label is misleading because PSAs give companies control over oil development and access to extensive profits. [2] Introductory paper on the Middle East by the UK, undated [1947], FRUS, 1947, Vol. V, p. 569, cited in Mark Curtis, The Ambiguities of Power (Zed Books, London, 1995), p. 21 [3] US Department of Commerce, Memorandum for the President, Transmittal of the Report on the US-UK Energy Dialogue, 30 July 2003 [4] Dr Kim Howells MP, answer to Parliamentary Question by Harry Cohen MP, 12 July 2005, Hansard column 878W [5] James McLaughlin (Iraq Policy Unit, Foreign & Commonwealth Office), letter to Lorne Stockman (PLATFORM), response to request under the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information, 9 December 2004 [6] Jim Krane, “US will retain sovereign power in Iraq,†Associated Press, 21 March, 2004 [7] Professor Thomas W Wälde, an expert in oil law at the University of Dundee, ‘The current status of international petroleum investment: regulating, licensing, taxing and contracting’, in CEPMLP Journal, Vol 1, no.5, July 1995 (pub. University of Dundee) [8] Carola Hoyos, ‘Exiles Call for Iraq to Let in Oil Companies’, Financial Times, 7 April 2003 [9] Energy Compass, ‘Iraq: Puzzling over the future’, 1 October 2004 Crude Designs – The rip-off of Iraq’s oil wealth. Lead Publisher PLATFORM is an interdisciplinary organisation working on issues of environmental and social justice. http://www.carbonweb.org US co-publishers Global Policy Forum monitors policy making at the United Nations, promotes accountability of global decisions, educates and mobilizes for global citizen participation, and advocates on vital issues of international peace and justice. http://www.globalpolicy.org The Institute for Policy Studies. strengthens social movements with independent research, visionary thinking, and links to the grassroots, scholars and elected officials.http://www.ips-dc.org Oil Change International campaigns to expose the true costs of oil and facilitate the coming transition towards clean energy. We are dedicated to identifying and overcoming political barriers to that transition. http://www.priceofoil.org UK co-publishers The New Economics Foundation (NEF) works to construct a new economy centred on people and the environment. http://www.neweconomics.org War on Want is a UK-based campaigning charity. Founded in 1951 it has links to the labour movement and supports progressive, people-centred development projects around the world. http://www.waronwant.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)