What's new

Saudi Prince Secretly Made $2B in 1985 Arms Deal

EagleEyes

ADMINISTRATOR
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
16,774
Reaction score
25
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
LONDON:Saudi Prince Secretly Made $2B in 1985 Arms Deal

by Kevin Sullivan, Washington Post Foreign Service
June 7th, 2007

Prince Bandar bin Sultan, a member of Saudi Arabia's royal family and the kingdom's former ambassador to the United States, pocketed about $2 billion in secret payments as part of a $80 billion arms deal between Britain and Saudi Arabia first signed in 1985, British media reported Thursday.

The reports revived questions about the British government's decision in December to drop a fraud investigation into the deal, which has been plagued by allegations of bribes and secret slush funds for almost two decades.

In remarks Thursday, Prime Minister Tony Blair did not comment directly on the reports made on the BBC and in the Guardian newspaper. But he repeated his often-made defense of the decision to drop the investigation on national security grounds.

"This investigation, if it had it gone ahead, would have involved the most serious allegations in investigations being made into the Saudi royal family," Blair said at a meeting of the Group of Eight nations in Germany.

He added, "My job is to give advice as to whether that is a sensible thing in circumstances where I don't believe the investigation incidentally would have led anywhere except to the complete wreckage of a vital strategic relationship for our country. . . . Quite apart from the fact that we would have lost thousands, thousands of British jobs."

Prince Bandar declined to comment, according to the news outlets. A spokesman for BAE Systems, the arms manufacturer involved, denied any wrongdoing and told the Guardian that the company had "acted in accordance with the relevant contracts." BAE Systems is Europe's largest defense contractor, with annual sales of more than $22 billion, according to the company Web site.

The contract, signed when Margaret Thatcher was prime minister, provided for the sale of 120 fighter jets and other military equipment to Saudi Arabia over more than 20 years. Saudi Arabia paid the British government in oil. Bandar helped negotiate the deal, known as Al Yamamah, which means "the dove" in Arabic.

According to the British media reports, BAE funneled secret payments into an account in Washington controlled by Bandar, who reportedly received at least 120 million pounds, or about $240 million at current exchange rates, every year for at least 10 years.

Bandar, who left Washington in 2005 after 22 years as ambassador and now serves as Saudi Arabia's national security adviser, reportedly used part of the money to operate his private Airbus aircraft.

Britain's Ministry of Defense was aware of and authorized the secret payments to Bandar despite repeated government denials that any such "commissions" had been paid, according to the reports. A ministry spokesman on Thursday declined to comment on the allegations because that "would involve disclosing confidential information about Al Yamamah and that would cause the damage that ending the investigation was designed to prevent."

The secret payments were reportedly discovered during an investigation by the government's Serious Fraud Office. British officials shut down that probe in December, citing national security concerns.

In January, Blair said that pursuing the investigation would have been "devastating for our relationship with an important country with whom we cooperate closely on terrorism, on security, on the Middle East peace process and a host of other issues."

Both the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the U.S. government protested the decision.

On Thursday, Jack Straw, a top Labor Party member of Parliament, said the government's prime concern in the case was maintaining security cooperation with Saudi Arabia at a time of increasing threats from Islamic extremists.


"There are some difficult choices to be made here but we face a very serious terrorist threat in this county," Straw said in Parliament. "We vitally need cooperation, as we have received, from, amongst others, Saudi Arabia, and the prime minister was absolutely right in not seeking to jeopardize that."

But Roger Berry, a Labor Party member who chairs a parliamentary committee that reviews arms deals, called for the reports to be "properly investigated."

"It's bad for British business, apart from anything else, if allegations of bribery popping around aren't investigated," Berry told BBC radio.

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14510
 
. . .
wrong; its greed & corruption

Inherent characteristic of Human Genome, a part of it.
Greed comes from the wish of being Greedy, The wish is geneated in the brain with some specific impulses of neurons, Curruption is the oppurtunity one uses in tis favour to nurture the impulse.
 
.
would not mind if couple of those millions were accidentally deposited in my NAT West account.
 
. .
The Third way to win big - or lose
By John Helmer in Moscow
http://www.saudiinfocus.com/en/show_art_det.asp?artid=427#
MOSCOW - The modern history of making money the easy way - by taking it from people who didn't know they had it, and couldn't notice when it was gone - is founded on the most elegant of the irreducible fractions, one-third.

According to a series of reports this month by David Leigh and Rob Evans of The Guardian in London, the influential Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan has been on the receiving end of a quarterly payment of 30 million pounds sterling (US$60 million) every three months for at least 10 years. That totals about 1.2 billion pounds. This purports to be an arranging fee for a series of arms purchases by the government of Saudi Arabia from British arms manufacturer BAE Systems. So far, the transaction series has been worth about 43 billion pounds. The money for Bandar was not characterized as commission, but as quasi-official fees for marketing services. In short, about 2.8% of deal value.

The sums look enormous, and they are. But the percentage is paltry. It hasn't proved to be illegal in the United Kingdom (bribery, fraud, perjury, racketeering, money-laundering, etc), because the prime minister put a stop to prosecution. The US government is about to decide whether it wants to go further.

The Guardian also reports that "accidentally released UK documents reveal that the basic price of the planes was inflated by 32%, to allow for an initial 600 million pounds in commissions". That means the British got all the deal value they thought they were entitled to; the extra was actually paid out of the Saudi public purse. The announced transaction price was a cover for concealing the larceny from the Saudi man in the street.

Someone in BAE may one day be obliged to testify as to why 32% was selected, not 33% - one-third. It looks as if it was the simplest way to accommodate the round figures that Bandar, his pop and their mates demanded from BAE's initial deal price. Possibly it was a religious decision - to avoid the third, and preserve the recipients' good fortune. For pious Muslims revere the Third no less than Christians and Jews - there are, for example, three holy cities for pilgrimage, Mecca, Medina and Jerusalem. Christians revere the Holy Trinity; and Jews divide themselves into three tribes, led by three patriarchs, chanting prayers three times a day; and so on. King Solomon made the point for all believers: "A three-ply cord is not easily severed."

In Moscow, the Third is the orthodox rule of business - it's the amount of deal value in Russian asset transactions, which is generated over real or fair value, to pay arranging fees, intermediary fees and shares. For example, when Roman Abramovich agreed in 2005 to sell his interests in the source of his fortune, Siberian Oil - the Sibneft oil company - to the Russian state company Gazprom, the deal price of $13 billion is understood to have included one-third for distribution to related interests. Allegations of personal corruption are rife, and spill into the anti-Vladimir Putin Western media from time to time.

But when in 2006 Abramovich's holding company bought a controlling stake in the Evraz steel group, Russia's largest steelmaker, for an undisclosed price, the deal is understood to have been paid, in part, from the Russian Third. And when and if the Kremlin orders Abramovich to transfer that stake to a state-controlled steelmaker such as Russpetsstal, a division of the arms monopoly Rosoboronexport, you can be certain that the valuation and deal price will be arranged to allow one-third to be creamed off and distributed to all sorts of people on all sides of the deal.

It is necessary to understand that in Moscow, as in Riyadh, the taking and then sharing of the Third is not wrong. More than that, it's that fraction that makes the deal possible in the first place. It's therefore normal business practice. Today, that is.

Russian asset history since 1991 is testimony to what the outside powers celebrated as the reform of all time, the destruction of Soviet economic, political and military power. In the case of natural resources underground, such as the world's largest reserves of gas, or of oil, nickel, platinum, etc, the assets were taken by a handful of men whose names were on the A-list for National Day celebrations at the British and US embassies. Their take was not 33%, but 100%. High-ranking government officials acquired nicknames reflecting what was supposed to be their shares in the process - "Pasha Mercedes" and "Misha Two-Percent" are well known for doing financially better than their monikers suggest.

Taking the assets back for the common good of Russians has been President Vladimir Putin's self-appointed task, and the one for which he is justifiably popular. (It should be remembered that the Russian Communist Party did not advocate doing to the oligarchs what Putin did - until after he had started.) It has been a difficult task. If prosecuting the asset thieves according to Russian law, and confiscating the assets, had been Putin's only option and modus operandi, there would not have been enough forensic accountants, prosecutors, judges and jail space to sustain the process.

And so it has happened that the Third has been devised to make the return of assets relatively quick and, from an administrative point of view, relatively non-disruptive of the revenue, profit and investment-generating process, on which the revival of the Russian state depends. This is different from the Bandar Bang - that third is paid by BAE to keep supplying a commodity the Saudi state doesn't need, for a price its people can't afford, for the enrichment of the ruling family, whose corruption is the principal reason they are obsessed with military security, and incidentally, the principal reason that the man named Osama bin Laden exists.

The Russian Third is different. It pays the state's administrators the premium that is needed to ensure that they have a greater incentive to return the assets than to allow the thieves to get away with their crimes. The Bandar Bang was enough for ex-president Boris Yeltsin and his family. The Russian Third is enough to pay for the transition.

Not to understand all this disqualifies a serious person from conducting business in Russia. Putin has been doing his best to educate those willing to learn. Last year, he taught Royal Dutch Shell, Mitsui, Mitsubishi and the Japanese government that the Bandar Bang payments they had made, a decade ago, for their concession to produce gas in the Sakhalin-2 field, in the Russian Far East, weren't a one-time transaction for profit-taking in perpetuity. They resisted at first, telling the world's media that their budget overruns, environmental losses and tax savings were legal, because Yeltsin and his gang had signed their agreement, and been paid for it. In time, they understood that resistance risked the loss of their entire stake. They therefore sold part down, to preserve the profitability of what was left.

Shell's chief executive officer, Jeroen van der Veer, was still not sure what lessons he had learned, so early this week, at a closed session of the economic summit in St Petersburg, he asked Putin to tell him again. Putin replied: "The rules of the game are very simple - honesty."

It is surprising that the management of British Petroleum, and the Russian shareholders of their highly lucrative production venture, TNK-BP, failed to realize that the lesson of Shell at Sakhalin would apply to them. However, just weeks after Gazprom acquired the control stake of Sakhalin-2, BP was prompting The Daily Telegraph to defend its Kovykta gas field development license from "Putin's land grab", and outgoing Prime Minister Tony Blair warned British investors in Russia that their positions weren't secure.

Kovykta, in the southeastern Siberian region of Irkutsk, has proven reserves of almost 2 trillion cubic meters, a volume so sizable that Putin has described it as equal to the entire gas stocks of Canada. But the reserves weren't always so large. The license for the Kovykta deposit was first issued in 1993, when reserves were about 600 billion cubic meters. Rusia Petroleum was the entity that acquired the license. At the time it was controlled almost equally by BP Amoco (31% stake) and Interros, the holding of Vladimir Potanin (26%). The Tyumen Oil Co (TNK) controlled by Mikhail Fridman, Victor Vekselberg and Len Blavatnik bought 6% in 2000, and a shareholder fight ensued, with each accusing the other of stealing. Those allegations were largely true, and have come back to haunt the successor company, TNK-BP, as well as BP and Potanin. The current shareholding in Rusia Petroleum is 63% for TNK-BP, 26% for Interros, and 11% for the Irkutsk regional government.

If BP's charges against the Russian stakeholders were to be believed, when BP was lobbying in Washington against US government credit guarantees for TNK, it is hardly surprising that Rusia Petroleum has broken a few Russian laws as well. But when Oleg Mitvol, enforcer of licensing regulations for Rosprirodnadzor, recently announced that Rusia Petroleum's license for Kovykta might be revoked, and then re-awarded, BP pressed the London lobbying button to cry foul.

No one can deny, however, that the stakeholders have been very reluctant to invest the money required to bring Kovykta up to the license requirement of 9 billion cubic meters of gas in 2006. Output was a paltry 34 million cubic meters instead. Mitvol spokesman Anna Hitrova told Asia Times Online: "We have not issued any press releases on Kovykta in recent time. Also, nothing is available on the list of violations [by Rusia Petroleum] from our agency. I can comment on only one, which is obvious and well known - non-fulfillment of production level to the targeted numbers."

The reality for the stakeholders is that they can hardly be expected to invest in the required output level until they are sure they can pipe the gas to China for export sale. They cannot do that, however, because Gazprom holds the export rights for gas in Russia. Thus BP, Fridman, Vekselberg and Potanin have all understood that the price they paid for the concession in 1993 is not a binding one. Kovykta, like all the other assets they lifted from the Yeltsin state, is a Putin franchise. The difference is that unless they accept the franchisor's terms, he will take it back. The stakeholders have spent about $500 million, and as a result, the franchise is now double its previous value. Are they plain lucky? Should they share?

Putin has made it clear that he isn't going to revoke the license. That would delay investment and production even longer. But he is insisting that Gazprom receive a stake in the project. The resistance to that suggested for a time that Kovykta might become Gazprom's entirely, and that TNK-BP and Interros would be ousted. That isn't in Gazprom's interest, because it would be obliged to come up with the financing to meet the same production and pipeline requirements.

And so the Kovykta negotiations have been about the Russian Third - how much TMK-BP and Interros should give up, how much Gazprom should acquire, and what investment obligations the existing and new shareholders will accept.

This is regular business in Russia. The only people who think it should be otherwise are those who think - like BAE and Bandar - that those who have been hugely disadvantaged by an asset deal almost 15 years ago should continue accepting the disadvantage forever. One thing no one seems to dispute: if you are foolish enough to think the Bandar Bang can last forever, you are stupid enough to deserve losing the lot.

John Helmer is the longest-serving foreign correspondent in Russia.

Some how the later part is not directly relevant but is interesting read.
 
. .
We can share it 50 : 50. After all the money is otherwise being spent by BAE on hookers and his daughters wedding/honeymoon etc as per British Newspapers.

Regards

Share what :lol:
BAE is trapped badly in this, they could be easily sued by prince and I'm sure prince had already tapped them for this reason.
Other wise BAE would end up delivering jets free of cost.
 
.
Share what :lol:
BAE is trapped badly in this, they could be easily sued by prince and I'm sure prince had already tapped them for this reason.
Other wise BAE would end up delivering jets free of cost.

I meant the money which they would be accidentally deposited in my account due to say an accounting glitch in BAE. On a serious note there are a lot of red faces not only in BAE but MOD here since the account for some reason was operated by the MOD under training expense.

I wonder how they accounted for sending hookers to Dorchestor Hotel in the books. Don't worry our press here will expose everthing sooner than later. Its making headlines every day here. The bootom line is most Sheikh make their fortunes through kickbacks and connections but can never be prosecuted in their countries.

Regards
 
.
Share what :lol:
BAE is trapped badly in this, they could be easily sued by prince and I'm sure prince had already tapped them for this reason.
Other wise BAE would end up delivering jets free of cost.

I meant the money which they would be accidentally deposited in my account due to say an accounting glitch in BAE. On a serious note there are a lot of red faces not only in BAE but MOD here since the account for some reason was operated by the MOD under training expense.

I wonder how they accounted for sending hookers to Dorchestor Hotel in the books. Don't worry our press here will expose everthing sooner than later. Its making headlines every day here. The bottom line is most Sheikh make their fortunes through kickbacks and connections but can never be prosecuted in their countries.

Regards
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom