Afghanistan may have 1 trillion dollar minerals potential
- Thread starter MastanKhan
- Start date
India can choose whichever they want, but as we have seen the indians are much clever, they work with many rival parties at the same time without losing none of them. but anyways, that was not my point, the point is that there are now alternative routes which are already being used and it has its effects i think. lets not to mix up supplies to the NATO with other commertial issues, nato will surely not use iran for supplies. as per the kill you mentioned, there will be agreement between the governments over the resources, it can be americans or any other country, we have the mineral and they have the skills/money/machinary, it is good to derive them out the earth and share it, otherwise for we people those minerals will be nothing but stone as we cant take them out.
i dont think so, affordability for the people is so low and it wont see any huge jump. but in kabul city house prices is already high.
i think iran has voted against india every time,now it's india's turn.so nothing different
rohailmalhi
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2009
- Messages
- 1,870
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
But i think better option will be get your locals train in the this mining field . first it will creat jobs for local and then take loan from World bank and put machinary to extract it urself dont give ur resources to anyone .Itss ur sole property and its benfit should only be to Afghnistan no one else.
Marxist
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2009
- Messages
- 2,894
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Afghanistan: rich in deposits, engulfed in danger
Afghanistan may be sitting on an estimated $1-trillion (U.S.) in untapped mineral deposits, but Canadian miners seem happy to let others take the lead in developing the discoveries.
Not only is Afghanistan one of the worlds most war-ravaged countries, but there is also the issue of how to transport commodities out of the landlocked country.
The risk is too high, regardless of the quality of the ore bodies, said Paul Blythe, chief executive officer of copper producer Quadra FNX Mining Ltd. of Vancouver.
The mineral discoveries were made by a small team of Pentagon officials and U.S. geologists as part of a move by Washington to help Afghanistan develop its economy.
According to the Pentagon, iron accounts for almost half of the countrys estimated mineral value, or $420-billion (U.S.). Copper comes second, with about $273-billion.
A New York Times article on the discovery quotes an internal Pentagon memo stating Afghanistan could become the Saudi Arabia of lithium, a material used in everything from batteries to BlackBerrys.
Veteran mining financier Robert Friedland, who has developed mining projects in such challenging locations as Mongolia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, is unconvinced about the potential for mining in Afghanistan.
Hopeless, Mr. Friedland said in an e-mail to The Globe and Mail .
Lithium is common as chips. The trillion dollar number is meaningless. ... Absurd, he added.
Patrick Highsmith, CEO of Lithium One Inc. in Vancouver, believes there may be potential in Afghanistan, depending on the lithiums purity.
That said, he isnt ready to begin exploring in the country either. We are happy to be working in safe places with great access, such as Argentina and Quebec, Mr. Highsmith said.
China, an aggressive buyer of resource projects in politically challenging countries, is undoubtedly the front-runner to benefit most from the development of Afghanistans mineral riches. The Asian economic superpower is already the largest foreign investor in Afghan resources.
In 2008, state-owned conglomerate China Metallurgical Group Corp. won a crowded auction for the right to develop the Aynak copper deposit in Afghanistan, believed to be one of the largest untapped copper projects in the world.
China Metallurgical bid $3.4-billion for the right to mine the deposit, $1-billion more than any of its competitors, which included privately held Hunter Dickinson Inc. of Vancouver as well as mining firms from the United States and India. Construction of the mine, set to begin production in 2012, is said to have been delayed as a result of the war in Afghanistan.
We feel like we were fortunate to come in second, said Robert Schafer, Hunter Dickinsons executive vice-president of business development.
He said the company might consider trying again in Afghanistan, but isnt yet convinced theres more to explore beyond Aynak.
Its just indications. Theres not anything you can hang your hat on and say We can turn this into a mine, he said.
Allegations of corruption have since surfaced involving the Chinese bid for Aynak. Last year, Afghanistans minister of mines, Muhammad Ibrahim Adel, was accused by U.S. officials of accepting a $30-million bribe to award the project to the Chinese bidders. He has since resigned from his post.
Rather than try and buy major projects in well-established mining jurisdictions such as North America and Australia where they could be rejected by the government, China has decided to invest in resources where many others fear to go. China Metallurgical, for example, also operates a copper mine in Sandaik, Pakistan.
With a file from Associated Press
Afghanistan: rich in deposits, engulfed in danger - The Globe and Mail
Afghanistan may be sitting on an estimated $1-trillion (U.S.) in untapped mineral deposits, but Canadian miners seem happy to let others take the lead in developing the discoveries.
Not only is Afghanistan one of the worlds most war-ravaged countries, but there is also the issue of how to transport commodities out of the landlocked country.
The risk is too high, regardless of the quality of the ore bodies, said Paul Blythe, chief executive officer of copper producer Quadra FNX Mining Ltd. of Vancouver.
The mineral discoveries were made by a small team of Pentagon officials and U.S. geologists as part of a move by Washington to help Afghanistan develop its economy.
According to the Pentagon, iron accounts for almost half of the countrys estimated mineral value, or $420-billion (U.S.). Copper comes second, with about $273-billion.
A New York Times article on the discovery quotes an internal Pentagon memo stating Afghanistan could become the Saudi Arabia of lithium, a material used in everything from batteries to BlackBerrys.
Veteran mining financier Robert Friedland, who has developed mining projects in such challenging locations as Mongolia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, is unconvinced about the potential for mining in Afghanistan.
Hopeless, Mr. Friedland said in an e-mail to The Globe and Mail .
Lithium is common as chips. The trillion dollar number is meaningless. ... Absurd, he added.
Patrick Highsmith, CEO of Lithium One Inc. in Vancouver, believes there may be potential in Afghanistan, depending on the lithiums purity.
That said, he isnt ready to begin exploring in the country either. We are happy to be working in safe places with great access, such as Argentina and Quebec, Mr. Highsmith said.
China, an aggressive buyer of resource projects in politically challenging countries, is undoubtedly the front-runner to benefit most from the development of Afghanistans mineral riches. The Asian economic superpower is already the largest foreign investor in Afghan resources.
In 2008, state-owned conglomerate China Metallurgical Group Corp. won a crowded auction for the right to develop the Aynak copper deposit in Afghanistan, believed to be one of the largest untapped copper projects in the world.
China Metallurgical bid $3.4-billion for the right to mine the deposit, $1-billion more than any of its competitors, which included privately held Hunter Dickinson Inc. of Vancouver as well as mining firms from the United States and India. Construction of the mine, set to begin production in 2012, is said to have been delayed as a result of the war in Afghanistan.
We feel like we were fortunate to come in second, said Robert Schafer, Hunter Dickinsons executive vice-president of business development.
He said the company might consider trying again in Afghanistan, but isnt yet convinced theres more to explore beyond Aynak.
Its just indications. Theres not anything you can hang your hat on and say We can turn this into a mine, he said.
Allegations of corruption have since surfaced involving the Chinese bid for Aynak. Last year, Afghanistans minister of mines, Muhammad Ibrahim Adel, was accused by U.S. officials of accepting a $30-million bribe to award the project to the Chinese bidders. He has since resigned from his post.
Rather than try and buy major projects in well-established mining jurisdictions such as North America and Australia where they could be rejected by the government, China has decided to invest in resources where many others fear to go. China Metallurgical, for example, also operates a copper mine in Sandaik, Pakistan.
With a file from Associated Press
Afghanistan: rich in deposits, engulfed in danger - The Globe and Mail
AstanoshKhan
<b>PTI: NAYA PAKISTANI</b>
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2009
- Messages
- 3,134
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
There is much more as there is one trillion dollars worth in Pakistan at Regi (a place in Peshawar) and it is gold in Balochistan but US of A is there not only because of these natural resources but also it is stopping oil flow to China, and pirates of Sudan is part of this strategy and so is cutting of Pakistan from China.
Spring Onion
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2006
- Messages
- 41,403
- Reaction score
- 19
- Country
- Location
This is another view i dont know how much it is true i am just posting for your information.
Afghanistan's Mineral Riches: A Conveniently Timed Zombie Story (Updated)
By Steve Hynd
Last night, the New York Times' James Risen "broke" what the mainstream media are insisting is a blockbuster story about Afghanistan's untapped mineral wealth - not just iron and copper but strategically significant minerals like lithium and all told valued at around $1 trillion.
Wow!
Only...not wow. When the NYT published Risen's story to the web last night, I tweeted "What a convenient time to find $1 trillion, eh?" and "Just as McChrystal's in big trouble, liberal thinktanks starting to shift anti-war, Pentagon publicizes $1 trillion Afghan treasure trove," because this is a zombie story, resurrected yet again for political purposes.
Afghanistan's mineral riches were well known to the Soviets in 1985 and a US government Country Study in 2002 went into detail about their knowledge. By 2005 the US Geological Service was being publicly exuberant in its assessment of Afghanistan's mineral resources (PDF). It published other public reports about the "Significant Potential for Undiscovered Resources in Afghanistan" in 2007, one of whichfocussed on non-fuel minerals. In 2008, it was Afghan reserves of oil and gas that was making the news and in 2009, as Reuters was reporting on Afghanistan's vast mineral wealth and McLatchy was noting China's interest, rights to the vast iron deposits were already up for tender.
Blake Hounshell is just as sceptical as I am, writing last night:
the findings on which the story was based are online and have been since 2007, courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey. More information is available on the Afghan mining ministry's website, including a report by the British Geological Survey (and there's more here). You can also take a look at the USGS's documentation of the airborne part of the survey here, including the full set of aerial photographs.
Nowhere have I found that $1 trillion figure mentioned, which Risen suggests was generated by a Pentagon task force seeking to help the Afghan government develop its resources (looking at the chart accompanying the article, though, it appears to be a straightforward tabulation of the total reserve figures for each mineral times current the current market price). According to Risen, that task force has begun prepping the mining ministry to start soliciting bids for mineral rights in the fall.
Don't get me wrong. This could be a great thing for Afghanistan, which certainly deserves a lucky break after the hell it's been through over the last three decades.
But I'm (a) skeptical of that $1 trillion figure; (b) skeptical of the timing of this story, given the bad news cycle, and (c) skeptical that Afghanistan can really figure out a way to develop these resources in a useful way. It's also worth noting, as Risen does, that it will take years to get any of this stuff out of the ground, not to mention enormous capital investment.
Exactly. These reserves are very real but they don't help Afghanistan right now one bit and they're unlikely to really help Afghanistan down the line since the evidence says that corrupt societies that suddenly find themselves in possession of mineral wealth only get more corrupt. So, unless you're willing to encompass the conspiracy theory that the US invaded Afghanistan, at a cost of $1 trillion and rising fast, so that one day some corporations might make a few billions (and some will) we have to ask what was the point of resurrecting this zombie and painting it up so fine for Mardi Gras?
Well, although Risen's lede says the news came from "senior American government officials" it's easy to see which agency wants us reading about massive strategic reserves in Afghanistan right now. The story came from the Pentagon. Risen quotes extensively from Paul A. Brinkley, "deputy undersecretary of defense for business and leader of the Pentagon team that discovered the deposits" and has General Petraeus saying that “There is stunning potential here...I think potentially it is hugely significant.”
The timing is significant. In the last week, I've had several liberal think-tankers tell me privately that General McChrystal and the Pentagon's beloved COIN ideology are about to have what Gareth Porter terms a "2006 moment". With a slew of bad news about delays, unsuccessful offensives, unreliable local allies and offensives that cannot be called offensives in the past few weeks, those think-tankers expect President Obama to hold McChrystal, Petraeus and Mullen to their promise, as described by Jonathan Alter recently:
Inside the Oval Office, Obama asked Petraeus, “David, tell me now. I want you to be honest with me. You can do this in 18 months?”
“Sir, I’m confident we can train and hand over to the ANA [Afghan National Army] in that time frame,” Petraeus replied.
“Good. No problem,” the president said. “If you can’t do the things you say you can in 18 months, then no one is going to suggest we stay, right?”
“Yes, sir, in agreement,” Petraeus said.
“Yes, sir,” Mullen said.
The president was crisp but informal. “Bob, you have any problems?” he asked Gates, who said he was fine with it.
The president then encapsulated the new policy: in quickly, out quickly, focus on Al Qaeda, and build the Afghan Army. “I’m not asking you to change what you believe, but if you don’t agree with me that we can execute this, say so now,” he said. No one said anything.
“Tell me now,” Obama repeated.
“Fully support, sir,” Mullen said.
“Ditto,” Petraeus said.
Obama was trying to turn the tables on the military, to box them in after they had spent most of the year boxing him in. If, after 18 months, the situation in Afghanistan had stabilized as he expected, then troops could begin to come home. If conditions didn’t stabilize enough to begin an orderly withdrawal of U.S. forces (or if they deteriorated further), that would undermine the Pentagon’s belief in the effectiveness of more troops.
The commanders couldn’t say they didn’t have enough time to make the escalation work because they had specifically said, under explicit questioning, that they did.
There are careers on the line, not to mention the credibility of the whole counterinsurgency doctrine in which the Pentagon and its supporters have invested so much. As Marc Ambinder writes:
The general perception about the war here and overseas is that the counterinsurgency strategy has failed to prop up Hamid Karzai's government in critical areas, and is destined to ultimately fail. This is not how the war was supposed to be going, according to the theorists and policy planners in the Pentagon's policy shop.
What better way to remind people about the country's potential bright future -- and by people I mean the Chinese, the Russians, the Pakistanis, and the Americans -- than by publicizing or re-publicizing valid (but already public) information about the region's potential wealth?
The Obama administration and the military know that a page-one, throat-clearing New York Times story will get instant worldwide attention. The story is accurate, but the news is not that new; let's think a bit harder about the context.
But I think Michael Cohen is partly wrong about the intended audience for this NYT zombie story. Michael writes:
exactly how clueless are the leakers at DoD? Did they somehow think that this "blockbuster" story would change attitudes about Afghanistan after every day last week there was another article about precisely how bad the mission there is going? ...
There is nothing in this story that changes the fundamental incoherence of the current mission in Afghanistan. There is nothing here that will change the dynamics on the ground in Afghanistan and the reality of a corrupt, illegitimate Afghan government, an adaptable insurgent force and a June 2011 deadline for the commencement of US troop withdrawals.
The only thing this story shows is the desperation of the Pentagon in planting pie-in-the-sky news stories about Afghanistan and trying to salvage the lost cause that is our current mission there.
He is right as far as most of us unwashed peons are concerned. However, guaranteed U.S. access to "strategic reserves" of "strategic minerals", where possession is nine tenths of the game and the resources are just as valuable still in the ground as mined and processed for market, is a heady brew to mostly-hawkish senior policymakers and Very Serious think-tankers, especially if the end of the sentence goes 'and China doesn't get them". Risen's stenography isn't aimed at us, but at them and will be used to add some geopolitical weight to the arguements McChrystal and others are already beginning to make as to why they should be allowed to break their promise to Obama and the U.S. should stay in Afghanistan a few years longer.
Update: Katie Drummond at Danger Room puts it bluntly: "No, The U.S. Didn’t Just ‘Discover’ a $1T Afghan Motherlode":
One retired senior U.S official is calling the government’s mineral announcement “pretty silly,” Politico is reporting. “When I was living in Kabul in the early 1970’s the [U.S. government], the Russians, the World Bank, the UN and others were all highly focused on the wide range of Afghan mineral deposits. Cheap ways of moving the ore to ocean ports has always been the limiting factor.”
At least two American geologists have been advising the Pentagon on Afghanistan’s wealth of mineral resources for years. Bonita Chamberlin, a geologist who spent 25 years working in Afghanistan, “identified 91 minerals, metals and gems at 1,407 potential mining sites,” the Los Angeles Times reported in 2001. She even wrote a book, “Gemstones in Afghanistan,” on the topic. And Chamberlin worked directly with the Pentagon, after they commissioned her to report on sandstone and limestone caves mere weeks after 9/11.
“I am quite surprised that the military is announcing this as some ‘new’ and ’surprising” discovery,’ she told Danger Room in an email. “This is NOT new. Perhaps this also hints at the real reason why we would be so intent on this war…”.
And James Joyner at the New Atlanticist has a good roundup of reaction as he warns "Beware the hype".
Update 2: readers will have noticed I originally day-dreamed my way to mentioning the wrong country in my post headline, mentioning Iraq instead of Afghanistan. A friend emails: "Man, I didn't even realize it, I just subconsciously blurred it all together. 'Oh, Iraq, Afghanistan, OK.' Somewhere Karl Rove just got a boner."
Just goes to show how pernicious that bit of framing was. And on that note, Dave earlier noted the similarity between this current story and past tales of massive oil reserves in Anbar that we were told would even out the factional inequalities in Iraq and make that nation a happy-happy-joy-joy land. And we've seen how all that oil out of Anbar has done that. Ummm....
Update 3: Josh Mull agrees with me about the target audience.
This story is aimed at the elites who make the wars. The Pentagon has handed the hawks in Washington a powerful factoid to be used and re-used endlessly in pursuit of their war.
How do we know this? Well, there are some very obvious clues. The article is loaded with crunchy, fact-y bits that appear substantive, but in reality have nothing to do with what’s actually at stake. Does it matter that they have rare-earth minerals and lithium for laptops and so on? No, it doesn’t matter if they struck the mother lode of chocolate ice cream. As Blake Hounsel writes, they don’t even have concrete, much less a sophisticated, multi-billion dollar mining industry capable of extracting, processing, and marketing these minerals to international companies. They want it to look like a lot of information ("Wow, lookit all the minerals!") but not actually answer any real questions ("Wait, can they even get it?").
Think-tankers love this kind of crap. They’d like nothing better than to somehow fit COIN and iPads (like most in the media, they’re commercial shills for both) into the same article. If you like your Macbook and your Prius and that application that makes your telephone fart, well, you’d better support our batshit crazy idea of invading and bombing Afghan into a peaceful democracy. Otherwise the Chinese will steal all of that copper, and they don’t give us anything (except everything).
And the Pentagon has now said that the specific figure is $908 billion. Because when you're working with zombies on such a large scale, a precise figure helps make the idea that it's all just lying around waiting for us (or China) to pick up a bit more believable, you see.
Update 4: I told you the VSPs would buy the narrative behind the story.
"Obama's war just became more important and more complicated at the same time," said Bruce Riedel, a former CIA officer who helped advise the administration last year when it was rethinking its Afghanistan strategy.
Riedel said that if the U.S. can provide the Afghans security and logistics to build up its mining capacity, Afghanistan's international stock will suddenly become more valuable. But there are a host of complications — competing industries and countries, corruption and war.
"If this was Pennsylvania, it'd turn out one way," he said. "But this is Afghanistan."
In other words, "we gotta stay now, or China wins!"
http://www.newshoggers.com/blog/2010/06/iraqs-mineral-riches-a-conveniently-timed-zombie-story.html
Afghanistan's Mineral Riches: A Conveniently Timed Zombie Story (Updated)
By Steve Hynd
Last night, the New York Times' James Risen "broke" what the mainstream media are insisting is a blockbuster story about Afghanistan's untapped mineral wealth - not just iron and copper but strategically significant minerals like lithium and all told valued at around $1 trillion.
Wow!
Only...not wow. When the NYT published Risen's story to the web last night, I tweeted "What a convenient time to find $1 trillion, eh?" and "Just as McChrystal's in big trouble, liberal thinktanks starting to shift anti-war, Pentagon publicizes $1 trillion Afghan treasure trove," because this is a zombie story, resurrected yet again for political purposes.
Afghanistan's mineral riches were well known to the Soviets in 1985 and a US government Country Study in 2002 went into detail about their knowledge. By 2005 the US Geological Service was being publicly exuberant in its assessment of Afghanistan's mineral resources (PDF). It published other public reports about the "Significant Potential for Undiscovered Resources in Afghanistan" in 2007, one of whichfocussed on non-fuel minerals. In 2008, it was Afghan reserves of oil and gas that was making the news and in 2009, as Reuters was reporting on Afghanistan's vast mineral wealth and McLatchy was noting China's interest, rights to the vast iron deposits were already up for tender.
Blake Hounshell is just as sceptical as I am, writing last night:
the findings on which the story was based are online and have been since 2007, courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey. More information is available on the Afghan mining ministry's website, including a report by the British Geological Survey (and there's more here). You can also take a look at the USGS's documentation of the airborne part of the survey here, including the full set of aerial photographs.
Nowhere have I found that $1 trillion figure mentioned, which Risen suggests was generated by a Pentagon task force seeking to help the Afghan government develop its resources (looking at the chart accompanying the article, though, it appears to be a straightforward tabulation of the total reserve figures for each mineral times current the current market price). According to Risen, that task force has begun prepping the mining ministry to start soliciting bids for mineral rights in the fall.
Don't get me wrong. This could be a great thing for Afghanistan, which certainly deserves a lucky break after the hell it's been through over the last three decades.
But I'm (a) skeptical of that $1 trillion figure; (b) skeptical of the timing of this story, given the bad news cycle, and (c) skeptical that Afghanistan can really figure out a way to develop these resources in a useful way. It's also worth noting, as Risen does, that it will take years to get any of this stuff out of the ground, not to mention enormous capital investment.
Exactly. These reserves are very real but they don't help Afghanistan right now one bit and they're unlikely to really help Afghanistan down the line since the evidence says that corrupt societies that suddenly find themselves in possession of mineral wealth only get more corrupt. So, unless you're willing to encompass the conspiracy theory that the US invaded Afghanistan, at a cost of $1 trillion and rising fast, so that one day some corporations might make a few billions (and some will) we have to ask what was the point of resurrecting this zombie and painting it up so fine for Mardi Gras?
Well, although Risen's lede says the news came from "senior American government officials" it's easy to see which agency wants us reading about massive strategic reserves in Afghanistan right now. The story came from the Pentagon. Risen quotes extensively from Paul A. Brinkley, "deputy undersecretary of defense for business and leader of the Pentagon team that discovered the deposits" and has General Petraeus saying that “There is stunning potential here...I think potentially it is hugely significant.”
The timing is significant. In the last week, I've had several liberal think-tankers tell me privately that General McChrystal and the Pentagon's beloved COIN ideology are about to have what Gareth Porter terms a "2006 moment". With a slew of bad news about delays, unsuccessful offensives, unreliable local allies and offensives that cannot be called offensives in the past few weeks, those think-tankers expect President Obama to hold McChrystal, Petraeus and Mullen to their promise, as described by Jonathan Alter recently:
Inside the Oval Office, Obama asked Petraeus, “David, tell me now. I want you to be honest with me. You can do this in 18 months?”
“Sir, I’m confident we can train and hand over to the ANA [Afghan National Army] in that time frame,” Petraeus replied.
“Good. No problem,” the president said. “If you can’t do the things you say you can in 18 months, then no one is going to suggest we stay, right?”
“Yes, sir, in agreement,” Petraeus said.
“Yes, sir,” Mullen said.
The president was crisp but informal. “Bob, you have any problems?” he asked Gates, who said he was fine with it.
The president then encapsulated the new policy: in quickly, out quickly, focus on Al Qaeda, and build the Afghan Army. “I’m not asking you to change what you believe, but if you don’t agree with me that we can execute this, say so now,” he said. No one said anything.
“Tell me now,” Obama repeated.
“Fully support, sir,” Mullen said.
“Ditto,” Petraeus said.
Obama was trying to turn the tables on the military, to box them in after they had spent most of the year boxing him in. If, after 18 months, the situation in Afghanistan had stabilized as he expected, then troops could begin to come home. If conditions didn’t stabilize enough to begin an orderly withdrawal of U.S. forces (or if they deteriorated further), that would undermine the Pentagon’s belief in the effectiveness of more troops.
The commanders couldn’t say they didn’t have enough time to make the escalation work because they had specifically said, under explicit questioning, that they did.
There are careers on the line, not to mention the credibility of the whole counterinsurgency doctrine in which the Pentagon and its supporters have invested so much. As Marc Ambinder writes:
The general perception about the war here and overseas is that the counterinsurgency strategy has failed to prop up Hamid Karzai's government in critical areas, and is destined to ultimately fail. This is not how the war was supposed to be going, according to the theorists and policy planners in the Pentagon's policy shop.
What better way to remind people about the country's potential bright future -- and by people I mean the Chinese, the Russians, the Pakistanis, and the Americans -- than by publicizing or re-publicizing valid (but already public) information about the region's potential wealth?
The Obama administration and the military know that a page-one, throat-clearing New York Times story will get instant worldwide attention. The story is accurate, but the news is not that new; let's think a bit harder about the context.
But I think Michael Cohen is partly wrong about the intended audience for this NYT zombie story. Michael writes:
exactly how clueless are the leakers at DoD? Did they somehow think that this "blockbuster" story would change attitudes about Afghanistan after every day last week there was another article about precisely how bad the mission there is going? ...
There is nothing in this story that changes the fundamental incoherence of the current mission in Afghanistan. There is nothing here that will change the dynamics on the ground in Afghanistan and the reality of a corrupt, illegitimate Afghan government, an adaptable insurgent force and a June 2011 deadline for the commencement of US troop withdrawals.
The only thing this story shows is the desperation of the Pentagon in planting pie-in-the-sky news stories about Afghanistan and trying to salvage the lost cause that is our current mission there.
He is right as far as most of us unwashed peons are concerned. However, guaranteed U.S. access to "strategic reserves" of "strategic minerals", where possession is nine tenths of the game and the resources are just as valuable still in the ground as mined and processed for market, is a heady brew to mostly-hawkish senior policymakers and Very Serious think-tankers, especially if the end of the sentence goes 'and China doesn't get them". Risen's stenography isn't aimed at us, but at them and will be used to add some geopolitical weight to the arguements McChrystal and others are already beginning to make as to why they should be allowed to break their promise to Obama and the U.S. should stay in Afghanistan a few years longer.
Update: Katie Drummond at Danger Room puts it bluntly: "No, The U.S. Didn’t Just ‘Discover’ a $1T Afghan Motherlode":
One retired senior U.S official is calling the government’s mineral announcement “pretty silly,” Politico is reporting. “When I was living in Kabul in the early 1970’s the [U.S. government], the Russians, the World Bank, the UN and others were all highly focused on the wide range of Afghan mineral deposits. Cheap ways of moving the ore to ocean ports has always been the limiting factor.”
At least two American geologists have been advising the Pentagon on Afghanistan’s wealth of mineral resources for years. Bonita Chamberlin, a geologist who spent 25 years working in Afghanistan, “identified 91 minerals, metals and gems at 1,407 potential mining sites,” the Los Angeles Times reported in 2001. She even wrote a book, “Gemstones in Afghanistan,” on the topic. And Chamberlin worked directly with the Pentagon, after they commissioned her to report on sandstone and limestone caves mere weeks after 9/11.
“I am quite surprised that the military is announcing this as some ‘new’ and ’surprising” discovery,’ she told Danger Room in an email. “This is NOT new. Perhaps this also hints at the real reason why we would be so intent on this war…”.
And James Joyner at the New Atlanticist has a good roundup of reaction as he warns "Beware the hype".
Update 2: readers will have noticed I originally day-dreamed my way to mentioning the wrong country in my post headline, mentioning Iraq instead of Afghanistan. A friend emails: "Man, I didn't even realize it, I just subconsciously blurred it all together. 'Oh, Iraq, Afghanistan, OK.' Somewhere Karl Rove just got a boner."
Just goes to show how pernicious that bit of framing was. And on that note, Dave earlier noted the similarity between this current story and past tales of massive oil reserves in Anbar that we were told would even out the factional inequalities in Iraq and make that nation a happy-happy-joy-joy land. And we've seen how all that oil out of Anbar has done that. Ummm....
Update 3: Josh Mull agrees with me about the target audience.
This story is aimed at the elites who make the wars. The Pentagon has handed the hawks in Washington a powerful factoid to be used and re-used endlessly in pursuit of their war.
How do we know this? Well, there are some very obvious clues. The article is loaded with crunchy, fact-y bits that appear substantive, but in reality have nothing to do with what’s actually at stake. Does it matter that they have rare-earth minerals and lithium for laptops and so on? No, it doesn’t matter if they struck the mother lode of chocolate ice cream. As Blake Hounsel writes, they don’t even have concrete, much less a sophisticated, multi-billion dollar mining industry capable of extracting, processing, and marketing these minerals to international companies. They want it to look like a lot of information ("Wow, lookit all the minerals!") but not actually answer any real questions ("Wait, can they even get it?").
Think-tankers love this kind of crap. They’d like nothing better than to somehow fit COIN and iPads (like most in the media, they’re commercial shills for both) into the same article. If you like your Macbook and your Prius and that application that makes your telephone fart, well, you’d better support our batshit crazy idea of invading and bombing Afghan into a peaceful democracy. Otherwise the Chinese will steal all of that copper, and they don’t give us anything (except everything).
And the Pentagon has now said that the specific figure is $908 billion. Because when you're working with zombies on such a large scale, a precise figure helps make the idea that it's all just lying around waiting for us (or China) to pick up a bit more believable, you see.
Update 4: I told you the VSPs would buy the narrative behind the story.
"Obama's war just became more important and more complicated at the same time," said Bruce Riedel, a former CIA officer who helped advise the administration last year when it was rethinking its Afghanistan strategy.
Riedel said that if the U.S. can provide the Afghans security and logistics to build up its mining capacity, Afghanistan's international stock will suddenly become more valuable. But there are a host of complications — competing industries and countries, corruption and war.
"If this was Pennsylvania, it'd turn out one way," he said. "But this is Afghanistan."
In other words, "we gotta stay now, or China wins!"
http://www.newshoggers.com/blog/2010/06/iraqs-mineral-riches-a-conveniently-timed-zombie-story.html
CAPTAIN AMERICA
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2010
- Messages
- 848
- Reaction score
- 0
In 2007, about 23% of U.S. "imported" oil came from the Middle East. This percentage includes the following countries: Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain. Saudi Arabia makes us 17% of that 23%. This is according to the U.S. Department of Economics.
5 percent comes from Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar , United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain and you all still think the invasion of Iraq was over oil......now I understand the 81 percentile IQs and as far as China being involved in Afganistan and Pakistan, welcome and good luck.
Last edited:
Thomas
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,688
- Reaction score
- 0
Whoever thinks that U.S. companies are going to come in and strip Afghanistan's minerals. Do not understand the realities of that industry. Most of the world Mining conglomerates are not U.S. but Canadian, British, South African, Australian, and to a lesser extent Chinese. Even in the U.S. most of the major mines are foreign owned.
bc040400065
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2010
- Messages
- 1,092
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
June 14, 2010
Value of Afghanistans mineral discovery needs to be dealt with cautiously
David Robertson, Business Correspondent
The good news from the men at the Pentagon is that beneath the landmines Afghanistan is sitting on a goldmine.
Exactly when they took their degrees in geology is unclear but officials have estimated that Afghanistans mineral resources could be worth $1 trillion.
This suspiciously round number appears to be based on geological surveys made decades ago as well as recent on-the-ground research.
How thorough that could have been is open to debate, given that it takes the worlds best miners about a decade to explore a new area.
Factor in Afghanistans size, and the Pentagon must have had an army of geologists working in the country since immediately after 9/11 to have accurately studied its terrain.
The $1 trillion figure is, therefore, highly misleading. It is a theoretical number and may have little relation to the value of resources that could actually be exploited.
After all, you can dig up any garden in the UK and find copper, iron and all manner of other metals and minerals. The North Sea alone contains an estimated $207 billion of gold.
The difference between a British garden and the vast mines of Australia and South Africa is that minerals and metals are found there in quantities and concentrations that make it economical to extract.
It will be of little benefit to Afghanistan if its $1 trillion of mineral resources would cost $2 trillion to dig up.
The Americans have also made an error in publicising this guesstimate of Afghanistans mineral wealth because it will raise expectations and thereby inflate future facilitation payments.
It is an unwritten rule among mining companies that you never get too specific about the potential value of deposits in developing countries as it only serves to inflate the bribes that are requested.
Afghanistans former Minister of Mines has already been accused by the Americans of receiving a $30 million bribe to allocate mining licences.
Even if there were $1 trillion of mineral resources in Afghanistan, and even if those resources were economically viable, it would be years before a large Western miner considered going anywhere near the country.
BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto, Xstrata and Anglo American the worlds largest miners have no intention of moving into Afghanistan because the risk is far greater than the reward.
It would cost $5 billion or more to develop a large copper, iron ore or gold mine in Afghanistan and potentially a further $5 billion to build the necessary infrastructure (roads, railways, etc).
No company will risk that sort of money in a country where the Government does not control all the territory and contract law is far from solid.
The only people to have shown an interest in Afghanistans mines so far are the Chinese because, unlike a private company, they can tie agreements to foreign aid, loans and arms deals things that Kabul will not want to renege on.
It is possible that Chinas grab for Afghan resources has prompted the Pentagons attempt to generate some interest from the rest of the world in the countrys resources.
The Americans might not like the idea of someone else benefiting from its military commitment to Afghanistan but Chinese mines might still be preferable to poppy fields.
Value of Afghanistan’s mineral discovery needs to be dealt with cautiously - Times Online
Value of Afghanistans mineral discovery needs to be dealt with cautiously
David Robertson, Business Correspondent
The good news from the men at the Pentagon is that beneath the landmines Afghanistan is sitting on a goldmine.
Exactly when they took their degrees in geology is unclear but officials have estimated that Afghanistans mineral resources could be worth $1 trillion.
This suspiciously round number appears to be based on geological surveys made decades ago as well as recent on-the-ground research.
How thorough that could have been is open to debate, given that it takes the worlds best miners about a decade to explore a new area.
Factor in Afghanistans size, and the Pentagon must have had an army of geologists working in the country since immediately after 9/11 to have accurately studied its terrain.
The $1 trillion figure is, therefore, highly misleading. It is a theoretical number and may have little relation to the value of resources that could actually be exploited.
After all, you can dig up any garden in the UK and find copper, iron and all manner of other metals and minerals. The North Sea alone contains an estimated $207 billion of gold.
The difference between a British garden and the vast mines of Australia and South Africa is that minerals and metals are found there in quantities and concentrations that make it economical to extract.
It will be of little benefit to Afghanistan if its $1 trillion of mineral resources would cost $2 trillion to dig up.
The Americans have also made an error in publicising this guesstimate of Afghanistans mineral wealth because it will raise expectations and thereby inflate future facilitation payments.
It is an unwritten rule among mining companies that you never get too specific about the potential value of deposits in developing countries as it only serves to inflate the bribes that are requested.
Afghanistans former Minister of Mines has already been accused by the Americans of receiving a $30 million bribe to allocate mining licences.
Even if there were $1 trillion of mineral resources in Afghanistan, and even if those resources were economically viable, it would be years before a large Western miner considered going anywhere near the country.
BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto, Xstrata and Anglo American the worlds largest miners have no intention of moving into Afghanistan because the risk is far greater than the reward.
It would cost $5 billion or more to develop a large copper, iron ore or gold mine in Afghanistan and potentially a further $5 billion to build the necessary infrastructure (roads, railways, etc).
No company will risk that sort of money in a country where the Government does not control all the territory and contract law is far from solid.
The only people to have shown an interest in Afghanistans mines so far are the Chinese because, unlike a private company, they can tie agreements to foreign aid, loans and arms deals things that Kabul will not want to renege on.
It is possible that Chinas grab for Afghan resources has prompted the Pentagons attempt to generate some interest from the rest of the world in the countrys resources.
The Americans might not like the idea of someone else benefiting from its military commitment to Afghanistan but Chinese mines might still be preferable to poppy fields.
Value of Afghanistan’s mineral discovery needs to be dealt with cautiously - Times Online
gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
How dare you present facts...?!?!
Iggy
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2009
- Messages
- 8,300
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Oops seems like Indians also invading Afghanistan
5 Indian firms to bid for Afghan mines - India - The Times of India
5 Indian firms to bid for Afghan mines
NEW DELHI: China has first-mover advantage but India stands to gain hugely in Afghanistan if its apparently huge mineral deposits are ready to be tapped. As reports spread about Afghanistan’s untold mineral wealth, five Indian companies are among seven that have been shortlisted by Kabul to bid for huge iron ore mines there.
Afghanistan’s mineral riches are nothing new — despite US media reports highlighting a $1 trillion mineral and rare metals finds in Afghanistan as “unknown”. These reports come at a time when Afghan war officially surpassed Vietnam as America’s longest war.
China won the Aynak copper mines in an international bid in Afghanistan in 2008 for a whopping $4 billion. In 2009, the US Geological Survey told the Hamid Karzai government that Afghanistan, one of the poorest countries in the world fighting one of the deadliest wars, was sitting on huge deposits that could transform the country in a way currently unimaginable.
In 2009, Karzai sent out senior cabinet ministers across countries to scout for investment. His then minister for mines Mohammed Ibrahim Adel told foreign investors that according to the USGS, Afghanistan’s north is estimated to hold between 600 to 700 billion cubic metres of natural gas and the country has some 25 million tonnes of oil in four basins. Adel was later removed by Karzai on account of rumours that he had made $20 million from the Chinese Metallurgical Corporation for the Aynak deal.
Afghanistan’s iron ore deposits are estimated at between five to six billion tonnes. In 2009, five Indian companies, Vedanta group’s Sesa Goa, Essar Minerals, Ispat Industries, JSW Steel and Rashtriya Ispat Nigam joined Chinese companies for a bid on the 1.8 billion tonne Hajigak iron ore mines in the Hindu Kush mountains.
In January 2010, the Karzai government put the bids on hold as corruption concerns took over. In fact, the iron projects will have to be bid for again for the same reason. But the promise of Afghanistan’s wealth may make the war a bit more palatable to western governments which are chafing at the bit in their desire to pull out troops from what seems like an unwinnable war.
5 Indian firms to bid for Afghan mines - India - The Times of India
5 Indian firms to bid for Afghan mines
NEW DELHI: China has first-mover advantage but India stands to gain hugely in Afghanistan if its apparently huge mineral deposits are ready to be tapped. As reports spread about Afghanistan’s untold mineral wealth, five Indian companies are among seven that have been shortlisted by Kabul to bid for huge iron ore mines there.
Afghanistan’s mineral riches are nothing new — despite US media reports highlighting a $1 trillion mineral and rare metals finds in Afghanistan as “unknown”. These reports come at a time when Afghan war officially surpassed Vietnam as America’s longest war.
China won the Aynak copper mines in an international bid in Afghanistan in 2008 for a whopping $4 billion. In 2009, the US Geological Survey told the Hamid Karzai government that Afghanistan, one of the poorest countries in the world fighting one of the deadliest wars, was sitting on huge deposits that could transform the country in a way currently unimaginable.
In 2009, Karzai sent out senior cabinet ministers across countries to scout for investment. His then minister for mines Mohammed Ibrahim Adel told foreign investors that according to the USGS, Afghanistan’s north is estimated to hold between 600 to 700 billion cubic metres of natural gas and the country has some 25 million tonnes of oil in four basins. Adel was later removed by Karzai on account of rumours that he had made $20 million from the Chinese Metallurgical Corporation for the Aynak deal.
Afghanistan’s iron ore deposits are estimated at between five to six billion tonnes. In 2009, five Indian companies, Vedanta group’s Sesa Goa, Essar Minerals, Ispat Industries, JSW Steel and Rashtriya Ispat Nigam joined Chinese companies for a bid on the 1.8 billion tonne Hajigak iron ore mines in the Hindu Kush mountains.
In January 2010, the Karzai government put the bids on hold as corruption concerns took over. In fact, the iron projects will have to be bid for again for the same reason. But the promise of Afghanistan’s wealth may make the war a bit more palatable to western governments which are chafing at the bit in their desire to pull out troops from what seems like an unwinnable war.
