Home     Writers     Op/Ed     Book Reviews     News     Bookstore     Photoshops     Submit     Search     Contact Us     Advertise  
  You are here: 

Sun

24

Dec

2006

Washington’s Game in Turkmenistan
Sunday, 24 December 2006 16:31
by Mike Whitney

Was the Bush administration involved in the death of Turkmenistan’s President, Saparmurat Niyazov?

After all, Niyazov met all the criteria for Bush’s policy of “regime change”. He controlled massive natural gas reserves and he refused to take orders directly from Washington. Typically, these are the only factors that are weighed when considering whether a change of leadership is in order.

Naturally, Niyazov was on the same “target list” as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez and Saddam Hussein, the other foreign leaders whose only real crime is that they control vital supplies of dwindling resources. This puts themat odds with the American oil giants whose plansto expand their corporate empire throughout Central Asia and the Middle East is now a matter of public record.

Turkmenistan has reserves which amount to 22.5 trillion cubic meters, the second largest supplies in all of Asia. At this point nearly all of Turkmenistan’s gas is pumped through Russian energy giant Gazprom’s pipelines. As economist Mikail Delyagin said, “Because of Gazprom’s mismanagement, the European part of Russia cannot exist without Turkmen gas. Control over it is a categorical imperative for Russia’s development during the next 10 years”. (Victor Yasmann RFE/RL Current Affairs)

Disruption of supplies from Turkmenistan would be a severe blow to Gazprom’s economic vitality.

The Bush team wants to build a pipeline under the Caspian Sea to pump natural gas reserves to the West through Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey and out the Mediterranean corridor or down through Bush’s “new colony” in Afghanistan through Pakistan to the coast.If the Bush plan goes forward it would be a major setback to Gazprom which depends on Turkmenistan’s gas to supply Ukraine and Europe. As Stratford says, “Without those shipments, Russian state energy firm Gazprom would find it impossible to satisfy both domestic Russian natural gas demand and fulfill its export contracts to Europe and Turkey”.


It would also sabotage Niyazov’s prior commitments to China which hassigned contracts for a pipeline to bring natural gas through Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. China’s future depends heavily on Turkmenistan. According to Alex Nicholson of the AP, “Niyazov promised to pipe 30 billion cubic meters of gas beginning January 2009. (China) also won an invitation last month to tap the giant Iolotan fields, which the late president declared, contained 7 trillion cubic meters of natural gas—or more than even Saudi Arabia’s proven reserves.”

“7 trillion cubic meters of natural gas”?!?

No wonder the Bush administration is paving the way for intervention.

At the very least, Niyazov’s death has turned out to be another “great opportunity” for Uncle Sam and it looks like Bush may have already put the pieces in place to take full advantage of it.

For example, as soon as Niyazov’s death was announced,his second in command, Ovez Atayev, was removed from power by Deputy Prime Minister, Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov, under trumped charges of “harassing and humiliating his daughter in law” or some other such nonsense.

Now, there’s a fortunate coincidence.

So, now the president is dead, his successor is under indictment and there are reports that a number of prominant ex-patriots will soon be returning to Turkmenistan to take part in the political “free-for-all”.

Haven’t we seen this performance before?

If this sounds like a script written in Washington, it’s probably because it was. Most of Bush’s stooges in Iraq were assembled outside of the country before the 2003 invasion and still have the administration’s unfailing support. The upcoming circus in Turkmenistan will probably be more of the same.

The media, of course, has played its traditional role of championing Washington’s interventions by demanding “free elections”; another comical part of the Bush-kabuki which never seems to change. Turkmenistan has no history of free elections, but the western press can be expected to follow the directives of their political overlords who will doubtless insist that Turkmenistan participate in Bush’s “Global Democratic Revolution”. (excluding democratically-elected Hamas, of course)

But Bush is facing fierce headwinds in Turkmenistan. If we look back at the “color coded” revolutions which were orchestrated by American NGOs and American intelligence agencies, we can see that (despite the planning and huge commitment of financial resources) they accomplished nothing of lasting value. Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan are back within Russia's orbit and Georgia will soon follow. (or freeze to death in the cold without access to Russia's natural gas)

Eurasia is Russia and China’s backyard and they’ve build up the necessary defenses to keep Washington out. Bush can waste-away in Afghanistan for another 5 or 6 years dreaming of "victory", but his “Grand Plan” for the region is basically in ruins. The United States will not prevail in Central Asia any more than it will in Iraq.

Nevertheless, the plan is going forward and Bush apparently has the requisite agents in place to give him hope for success. According the RIA Novosti, “Many people in the former president’s inner circle were oriented towards Europe.”

Indeed.

The power struggle is bound to be ferocious and Washington will be right in the “thick of it”. At this juncture, Bush has no choice but to pull out the stops and do everything in his power to establish an American client in Turkmenistan. The geopolitical stakes are too high to ignore. The country is perfectly situated between Russia and Iran on the Caspian Sea, the epicenter of the world’s remaining resources. In fact, the Pentagon’s own maps show Turkmenistan at the very center of CENTCOM’s global resource war; a pivotal location for military installations and pipeline corridors. It provides ready-access to an estimated 2 trillion in oil reserves in the Caspian Sea, as well as the massive natural gas supplies. At the same time, a change of leadership could block arch-rival Gazprom from extending its dominance throughout the region by handing over control to western energy corporations.

This is not a battle that the Washington warlords can afford to lose, but victory will not come easily. Neither Iran nor Russia can allow Bush to take over Turkmenistan without a fight. Iran would be surrounded on all sides by the US and cut off from its neighbors to the northbyhostile American forces. At the same time, US military bases would be set up evencloser to the Iranian capitalof Tehran.

For Russia, an American client in Turkmenistan wouldbe a stiff challenge to its role as the region’s superpower; creating the looming possibility that NATO would get an even bigger foothold in Central Asia and threaten the delicate balance of power.

Turkmenistan is a key piece in the new “Great Game”; the ongoing struggle for dominance in Central Asia. Whether Washington played a part in Niyazov’s untimely death or not is almost irrelevant. The Bush-Cheney oiligarchy have demonstrated a willingness to fight-to-the-death for every thimbleful of oil or natural gas left on planet earth. This makes the likelihood for a sudden eruption of violence Turkmenistan all the more probable.

As the weeks and months go by, we can expect to see the usual trappings of US involvement; the CIA-funded public demonstrations, the American-friendly "democracy promoting" coverage in the media, and the comical parade of ex-patriots who matriculated in US right-wing think tanks. The whole charade is being cobbled together as part of the failed strategy to control the world’s remaining resources.

The faces may vary, but the routine is always the same.
 
More from this author:
The Breaking Point (8653 Hits)
It was another bad week in Iraq. While bodies were piling up in the Baghdad morgue and the militia fighting steadily intensified, the Bush...
A Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy? (9550 Hits)
When Hillary Clinton said that her husband Bill was the target of “a vast right-wing conspiracy”, her critics just laughed at her. No...
Barking Mad (18118 Hits)
It’s not a comforting thought, but it’s the truth. As the situation in Iraq continues to deteriorate and the feckless congress concedes more...
More “Culture Wars” Gibberish from nutcase David Brooks (11840 Hits)
Most of us know David Brooks as the balding goofball on “The Jim Lehrer News Hour” who shrugs his shoulders and giggles gleefully whenever...
Why does Thailand have all the Luck? (9176 Hits)
About 2 weeks ago, 10 Soviet-era tanks clanked-along the main thoroughfare in downtown Bangkok and stopped in front of the Presidential Palace. Once...
Related Articles:
Long Black Veil: Tony Blair's Deadly Game of Muslim-Bashing (6131 Hits)
by Chris Floyd This is my latest piece for Truthout.org. I. For centuries in Britain, each sentence of death was accompanied by a...
Death to Infidels via Video Game (6441 Hits)
by William Fisher “This is the first time any Christian religious instructional video has recommended killing all non-Christians who...
American Jingoism: The Patriot GameAmerican Jingoism: The Patriot Game (6163 Hits)
by Edward Strong What could better reflect the collective psychosis of the American Empire than our mass obsession with the NFL, culminating in...
Subverting Iran - Washington’s Covert War Inside Iran (5009 Hits)
by Gregory Elich Much attention has been given to the Bush Administration’s preparations for possible war against Iran as well as its drive...
Bush, Gonzales and Specter: Winning a Cat-and-Mouse Game or Losing a Dogfight? (3799 Hits)
by Elizabeth de la Vega Sometimes you think you're winning a cat-and-mouse game, but it turns out you're losing a dogfight. Such was...


Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Trackback(0)
Comments (4)add comment

jb said:

0
Not as I understand it
>>>After all, Niyazov met all the criteria for Bush’s policy of “regime change”. He controlled massive natural gas reserves and he refused to take orders directly from Washington. Typically, these are the only factors that are weighed when considering whethera change of leadership is in order.
 
December 25, 2006
Votes: +0

jb2 said:

0
(part 2)

I think that on the contrary, this is an example of the hypocracy of the Bush and Neocon policy. The USA turned a blind eye to Niyazov's excesses while railing on about North Korea (a country without much in the way of fossil fuel I might add). That is probably because Niyazov was willing "play ball" (as we call it here in Amerrca) with the USA by allowing the USA flyover rights during the Afghanistan Campaign, and by taking a hard line against Islamic movements. No, Im afraid this is not an example of USA conspiricy. It is proof that we are more than happy to tolarate Kim Jong Il types (this guy sounds like he might even have been worse) if they are willing to "Play Ball" . I highly doubt that Niyazovs death was US orchestrated, more likely it is a sad example of the hyporcricy of our foreign policy and our stated intentions of bringing freedom to the world.
For these reasons, I don't think this article was very well thought out.
 
December 25, 2006
Votes: +0

cms said:

0
moonbat
Is there nothing you won't attribute to America. This is just idiotic. Do you suppose that the USA fed Turkmenbashi high-fat content food for the past three decades in a stealthy plan to clog his arteries? Morons. If there was a hint of polonium, then look for sinister putinesque intrigues. When a senior citizen has clogged arteries, look to his diet and lifestyle.
 
December 25, 2006
Votes: +0

cms said:

0
and I almost forgot
Merry Christmas!
 
December 25, 2006
Votes: +0

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

adsense

Top