• 55 mins OPEC/Non-OPEC Seek Consensus On Deal Before Nov Summit
  • 2 hours London Stock Exchange Boss Defends Push To Win Aramco IPO
  • 3 hours Rosneft Signs $400M Deal With Kurdistan
  • 6 hours Kinder Morgan Warns About Trans Mountain Delays
  • 12 hours India, China, U.S., Complain Of Venezuelan Crude Oil Quality Issues
  • 17 hours Kurdish Kirkuk-Ceyhan Crude Oil Flows Plunge To 225,000 Bpd
  • 21 hours Russia, Saudis Team Up To Boost Fracking Tech
  • 1 day Conflicting News Spurs Doubt On Aramco IPO
  • 1 day Exxon Starts Production At New Refinery In Texas
  • 1 day Iraq Asks BP To Redevelop Kirkuk Oil Fields
  • 2 days Oil Prices Rise After U.S. API Reports Strong Crude Inventory Draw
  • 2 days Oil Gains Spur Growth In Canada’s Oil Cities
  • 2 days China To Take 5% Of Rosneft’s Output In New Deal
  • 2 days UAE Oil Giant Seeks Partnership For Possible IPO
  • 2 days Planting Trees Could Cut Emissions As Much As Quitting Oil
  • 2 days VW Fails To Secure Critical Commodity For EVs
  • 2 days Enbridge Pipeline Expansion Finally Approved
  • 2 days Iraqi Forces Seize Control Of North Oil Co Fields In Kirkuk
  • 2 days OPEC Oil Deal Compliance Falls To 86%
  • 3 days U.S. Oil Production To Increase in November As Rig Count Falls
  • 3 days Gazprom Neft Unhappy With OPEC-Russia Production Cut Deal
  • 3 days Disputed Venezuelan Vote Could Lead To More Sanctions, Clashes
  • 3 days EU Urges U.S. Congress To Protect Iran Nuclear Deal
  • 3 days Oil Rig Explosion In Louisiana Leaves 7 Injured, 1 Still Missing
  • 3 days Aramco Says No Plans To Shelve IPO
  • 6 days Trump Passes Iran Nuclear Deal Back to Congress
  • 6 days Texas Shutters More Coal-Fired Plants
  • 6 days Oil Trading Firm Expects Unprecedented U.S. Crude Exports
  • 6 days UK’s FCA Met With Aramco Prior To Proposing Listing Rule Change
  • 6 days Chevron Quits Australian Deepwater Oil Exploration
  • 6 days Europe Braces For End Of Iran Nuclear Deal
  • 7 days Renewable Energy Startup Powering Native American Protest Camp
  • 7 days Husky Energy Set To Restart Pipeline
  • 7 days Russia, Morocco Sign String Of Energy And Military Deals
  • 7 days Norway Looks To Cut Some Of Its Generous Tax Breaks For EVs
  • 7 days China Set To Continue Crude Oil Buying Spree, IEA Says
  • 7 days India Needs Help To Boost Oil Production
  • 7 days Shell Buys One Of Europe’s Largest EV Charging Networks
  • 7 days Oil Throwback: BP Is Bringing Back The Amoco Brand
  • 7 days Libyan Oil Output Covers 25% Of 2017 Budget Needs
Alt Text

Why Petrol Powered Cars Aren’t Going Anywhere

Internal combustion engines are still…

Alt Text

Are Combustion Engines Reaching Peak Demand?

As countries announce plans to…

Alt Text

Oil Prices Rise Amid Falling U.S. Rig Count

Oil prices inched higher on…

U.S. Military - Major Iran Sanctions Buster?

U.S. Military - Major Iran Sanctions Buster?

The title of the 30 January report by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) Office of Special Projects says it all.

“AFGHAN NATIONAL SECURITY FORCES: LIMITED VISIBILITY OVER FUEL IMPORTS INCREASES THE RISK THAT U.S.-FUNDED FUEL PURCHASES COULD VIOLATE U.S. ECONOMIC SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAN.”(http://www.sigar.mil/pdf/alerts/2013-01-30-alert-sp-13-2.pdf).

Who is SIGAR?

According to its website, “SIGAR employees travel throughout Afghanistan to complete their mission. As of March 2012, Congress has provided over $89.5 billion in humanitarian and reconstruction assistance to Afghanistan. These funds are used to build the Afghan National Security Forces, promote good governance, conduct development assistance, and engage in counter-narcotics and anti-corruption efforts. Congress created the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) to provide independent and objective oversight of Afghanistan reconstruction projects and activities. Under the authority of Section 1229 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (P.L. 110-181), SIGAR conducts audits and investigations to: 1) promote efficiency and effectiveness of reconstruction programs and 2) detect and prevent waste, fraud, and abuse.”

And what exactly have those doughty SIGAR employees discovered in their peregrinations throughout Afghanistan?

“The fact that the United States has paid for the acquisition and delivery of imported fuel for the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF)—nearly $1.1 billion for the Afghan National Army (ANA) alone between fiscal years 2007 and 2012—raises concerns that U.S. funds could have been used to pay for imports of fuel potentially in violation of US economic sanctions against Iran.”

“SIGAR initiated this review in response to allegations it received of potential violations of U.S. sanctions in the purchase of fuel for the ANSF and to follow up on key issues regarding Afghanistan’s fuel imports identified in our quarterly reports and audits and investigations of ANA fuel. In this review, we sought to identify whether sufficient controls have been established in the ANSF fuel supply process to ensure the use of U.S. funding complies with U.S. and international sanctions against Iran. This review did not assess any procedures in place for assuring the quality of fuel imports purchased for the ANSF.”

Fulfilling its mandate, SIFGAR reported, “To conduct this review, we relied largely on data, documents, and interviews collected from the Department of Defense (DOD) during our ongoing audit of ANA fuel, Department of State and Department of the Treasury responses to SIGAR’s quarterly data call, and information collected in support of ongoing fuel investigations. We also reviewed reports and available data on Afghanistan fuel consumption and imports, U.S. government sanctions against Iran, relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions, fuel blanket purchase agreements (BPAs) for the ANSF, Afghan government budget documents, and prior reports on ANSF logistic capabilities and oversight. We conducted this review in Washington, D.C., from December 2012 to January 2013. This work was conducted under the authority of Public Law No. 110-181, as amended; the Inspector General Act of 1978; and the Inspector General Reform Act of 2008.”

This is not an insignificant finding, as International Security and NATO forces, led, by the U.S. along with U.S. contractors, are burning through approximately a million gallons of fuel per day, every single drop of which is imported, as Afghanistan has no indigenous production resources. Should DC anti-Russian hawks care to review the situation, the bulk of the fuel for ISAF is currently provided by Russian refineries.

Furthermore, the “in country” costs can be substantial. At some isolated “forward operating bases,” the cost of fuel can reach $400 a gallon, being supplied by parachute drop, some of which have not had overland fuel transports for nearly three years, shades of Dien Bien Phu, for those with historical memories..

In November 2012, SIGAR met with a senior Combined Security Transition Command – Afghanistan (CSTC-A) official in Afghanistan and discussed whether U.S. funding was being used to purchase Iranian fuel for ANSF. “In that meeting, the senior CSTC-A official stated that quality control testing measures were in place to test fuel but that it still may be a possibility that fuel purchases could include Iranian fuel, given the multiple sources involved in the fuel acquisition process for operations in Afghanistan. He stated that it is important to examine this topic, including the controls that are in place to prevent any violations of U.S. sanctions with Iran.”

The money quote from the SIGAR report?

“DOD’s lack of visibility—until recently—over the source of fuel purchased for the ANSF raises some concerns. DOD lacked certification procedures prior to November 2012 and had limited visibility over the import and delivery sub-contracts used by fuel vendors. As a result, DOD is unable to determine if any of the $1.1 billion in fuel purchased for the ANA between fiscal year 2007 and 2012 came from Iran, in violation of U.S. economic sanctions.”

When is a sanction not a sanction?

In a war zone?

When busted by an “ally?”

Pentagon top brass summoned to Capitol Hill to explain?

Congressional hearings, anyone?

By. John C.K. Daly of Oilprice.com




Back to homepage


Leave a comment

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News