This new video shows with more clarity the guy who is shooting at APPO.
It is clear, to me that pri supporters have little to say before the evidence,.. although they just don't care,...
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Monday, June 23, 2008
APPO and PRIistas Clash in Zaachila, Oaxaca
by Eliza Ruiz Jaimes, translated by Kristin Bricker
Noticias Voz e Imagen de Oaxaca, June 21, 2008
Supporters of the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO in its Spanish initials) were hit with rocks thrown by a group of thugs hired by the municipal president of Zaachila, Noe Pérez Martínez, as well as municipal police, who used stones, firecrackers, and firearms.
With barricades, residents prevented the state governor, Ulises Ruiz Ortiz (URO), from entering the community, where he was supposed to tour.
The protesters accused Natalio Pérez Tomás--father of the current municipal president--of having fired a weapon: "He fired directly at the crowd, fortunately he didn't hurt anyone." The tension between the groups was brought under control after assistant Secretary of State Joaquín Rodríguez Palacios' appeal to the APPO to control itself.
The governor had to cancel the signing of the State-Municipal agreement and the start of public works in the municipality. Various people were wounded during the violence, including Asrael Torres Carmona, 71 years old, who believes that the repressive force is concentrated in the Party of the Institutional Revolution (PRI in its Spanish initials).
In agreement with Jorge Aragón Martínez, the assistant secretary admitted that the PRIista group was the one who initiated the confrontation. According to him no police force intervened in the clashes, despite the fact that on Thursday dozens of members of the Police Unit for Special Operations (UPOE in its Spanish initials) roamed the streets and installed metal fences in an attempt to impede the demonstrators' passage.
In response, the main roads into downtown Zaachila were closed with burning logs, tires, and rearranged metal fences, grabbed by residents and members of David "El Alebrije" Venegas' collective, who was present during the protest against the governor.
The governor's event was scheduled for 12:00pm yesterday, but it couldn't happen due to the protests of the residents with Zapoteca roots. They met in and around the Municipal Palace in order to keep Ruiz Ortiz from appearing in the community.
The APPO supporters said the government was overconfident because Jorge "El Chucky" Franco Vargas, the current leader of the PRI, arrived to put down the protest against the new municipal leader of the PRI, "but here we aren't going to let in any repressors."
The bandanas returned to cover the faces of protest. The stones returned to be defensive weapons together with firecrackers and chants against URO. The demonstrators warned that the fact that they "tolerate" the government that Pérez Martínez represents doesn't mean that they forgive Ruiz Ortiz's actions in their community. "The struggle continues."
The people who were wounded with cuts and scrapes after the violence in la Villa are considering bringing charges. The residents' assembly will determine the next steps and the stance against the ruler. According to the APPO, Pérez Martínez doesn't represent them: "we will go before the State Congress to request the removal of that repressor," they warned.
******
As usual, Ulises and most media, local and national have avoided to mention that pri supporters fired at APPO. Next video is a report on national television, and there is no mention of the shooting,...
but there is another video that CLEARLY shows a guy who had been identified as pri-supporter, shooting at people. Furthermore that guy has been also identified as Natalio Pérez Tomás,... here is the video,..
Let's remember that Zaachila was declared autonomous and there is a governing committee that APPO formed two years ago (I think,..), and that there is a parallel government (the 'official') run by priistas,.. Like the country as a whole, Zaachila has two governments, one by the people (the legitimate) and one imposed by electoral insitutions (the official).
Noticias Voz e Imagen de Oaxaca, June 21, 2008
Supporters of the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO in its Spanish initials) were hit with rocks thrown by a group of thugs hired by the municipal president of Zaachila, Noe Pérez Martínez, as well as municipal police, who used stones, firecrackers, and firearms.
With barricades, residents prevented the state governor, Ulises Ruiz Ortiz (URO), from entering the community, where he was supposed to tour.
The protesters accused Natalio Pérez Tomás--father of the current municipal president--of having fired a weapon: "He fired directly at the crowd, fortunately he didn't hurt anyone." The tension between the groups was brought under control after assistant Secretary of State Joaquín Rodríguez Palacios' appeal to the APPO to control itself.
The governor had to cancel the signing of the State-Municipal agreement and the start of public works in the municipality. Various people were wounded during the violence, including Asrael Torres Carmona, 71 years old, who believes that the repressive force is concentrated in the Party of the Institutional Revolution (PRI in its Spanish initials).
In agreement with Jorge Aragón Martínez, the assistant secretary admitted that the PRIista group was the one who initiated the confrontation. According to him no police force intervened in the clashes, despite the fact that on Thursday dozens of members of the Police Unit for Special Operations (UPOE in its Spanish initials) roamed the streets and installed metal fences in an attempt to impede the demonstrators' passage.
In response, the main roads into downtown Zaachila were closed with burning logs, tires, and rearranged metal fences, grabbed by residents and members of David "El Alebrije" Venegas' collective, who was present during the protest against the governor.
The governor's event was scheduled for 12:00pm yesterday, but it couldn't happen due to the protests of the residents with Zapoteca roots. They met in and around the Municipal Palace in order to keep Ruiz Ortiz from appearing in the community.
The APPO supporters said the government was overconfident because Jorge "El Chucky" Franco Vargas, the current leader of the PRI, arrived to put down the protest against the new municipal leader of the PRI, "but here we aren't going to let in any repressors."
The bandanas returned to cover the faces of protest. The stones returned to be defensive weapons together with firecrackers and chants against URO. The demonstrators warned that the fact that they "tolerate" the government that Pérez Martínez represents doesn't mean that they forgive Ruiz Ortiz's actions in their community. "The struggle continues."
The people who were wounded with cuts and scrapes after the violence in la Villa are considering bringing charges. The residents' assembly will determine the next steps and the stance against the ruler. According to the APPO, Pérez Martínez doesn't represent them: "we will go before the State Congress to request the removal of that repressor," they warned.
******
As usual, Ulises and most media, local and national have avoided to mention that pri supporters fired at APPO. Next video is a report on national television, and there is no mention of the shooting,...
but there is another video that CLEARLY shows a guy who had been identified as pri-supporter, shooting at people. Furthermore that guy has been also identified as Natalio Pérez Tomás,... here is the video,..
Let's remember that Zaachila was declared autonomous and there is a governing committee that APPO formed two years ago (I think,..), and that there is a parallel government (the 'official') run by priistas,.. Like the country as a whole, Zaachila has two governments, one by the people (the legitimate) and one imposed by electoral insitutions (the official).
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Sobre la columna de Federico Arreola en el sdp del lunes 16 de junio
Cachondean a Calderón en España
Recibí una carta de un amigo de Madrid que trabaja muy cerca de la casa del embajador mexicano:
“Hoy vino Calderón a la casa del embajador... Pasó enfrente de mí. Iba en un coche de colección negro, y atrás marchaban, en fila, unos 20 Audis A6 nuevos, que le puso el gobierno español para sus acompañantes.
También vi varios Mercedes.
No exagero... Y unas 10 motos. La gente del vecindario, espantada de plano. Una señora no podía creer lo que veía, ya que en Madrid todos hemos visto pasar al Rey alguna vez y nunca ha traído un contingente tan impresionante.
El carro negro es un Rolls Royce que el Rey usa una vez al año. Nada más en el desfile militar.
No recuerdo haber visto a ninguna otra persona en ese automóvil. Excepto a Francisco Franco, ya que fue un regalo que le hicieron al dictador que terminó por quedarse el Rey. Había también un helicóptero sobrevolando al área. No faltaron las ambulancias y las motos Harleys rodeando al Rolls Royce.
Patrulleros por delante y por atrás. Etcétera. Y ya ves, antes el Rey había cachondeado
a Calderón y Zapatero también.
Otros políticos de los dos partidos se esmeraron en hacerlo sentir importante. Ni duda cabe, cuánta falta nos está haciendo a los españoles el petróleo mexicano. Para eso hemos enamorado a Calderón, que se ve cayó redondo en nuestra trampa de seducción. Pobres mexicanos, qué complejo de inferioridad tienen”.
Sobre la columna de Federico Arreola en el sdp del lunes 16 de junio
El que un presidente (espurio o no) vaya a otro país a ser ‘cachondeado’ creo que no tiene mucho que ver con los complejos y traumas que tenga la población a la que dice representar.
Yo le sugeriría al buen Arreola, que si es cierto que es vergonzosa la actuación de Felipe Calderón y algunos de sus funcionarios en el extranjero. Hacen uso exagerado de lujos y gastos que no corresponden con un país que se supone esta apenas desarrollándose.
Pero también le diría a su amigo, el español, que no se podía esperar otra cosa del heredero del fascismo y amante de los ‘buenos negocios’ Juan Carlos I. No es nuevo saber que el rey tiene el gusto muy desarrollado por los negocios. Por ello tal vez no sea gratis la publicación del libro ‘Juan Carlos I: ’30 años a cuerpo de rey’ donde se relatan hechos que describen a un hombre un tanto corrupto, prepotente, y bastante fascista.
Se dice que cuando ilegítimamente heredo el trono, no tenía dinero. Que su fortuna la hizo con negocios a la sombra de la figura real, usando su poder para ‘agilizar’ proyectos, también pidió dinero prestado (10 millones de euros) que pago permitiendo el uso del territorio español como base de lanzamiento en las guerras de Irak.
Ahora bien, Juan Carlos solo hizo lo que ha venido haciendo desde hace tres décadas tanto a españoles como a extranjeros: aseguro su participación en un negocio más. Que le prestó su coche personal y 20 mas a Calderón, si. Que Calderón es un hombre pequeño que se impresiona fácilmente y que con un poco de protocolo oficial y ‘cachondeo’ no duda en entregar el petróleo, también. Pero y que culpa tenemos el resto de los Mexicanos para que el amigo de Arreola nos diga que tenemos complejo de inferioridad?
En todo caso, Calderón es el que tiene el complejo de inferioridad, y en eso estamos completamente de acuerdo. Como lo estará él con el hecho de que Juan Carlos es un corrupto al que no le importa usar la soberanía española ni la vida de los soldados españoles con tal de obtener ganancias. Que canchondeo a Calderón, yo diría que es un asunto de ilegítimos.
ahi van unos videitos para recordar quien es juan carlos,...
como hizo su fortuna 'el rey'
y claro,.. el rey tambien tiene sus 'defensores' claro quien va a ser,... sino los medios de comunicacion,...
y sobre la 'transicion del franquismo al carlismo,.. y la cia (????) que echa por tierra el discursito democratico de juan carlos,..
Yo no se que puedan hacer los espanholes para controlar a su 'rey' en sus ansias por dinero,.. pero voy a mandar una carta a los diputados en Mexico para que ademas de darle permiso a Calderon de viajar al extranjero,.. que lo obligen a usar cinturon de castidad,.. para evitar futuros 'cachondeos',...
Recibí una carta de un amigo de Madrid que trabaja muy cerca de la casa del embajador mexicano:
“Hoy vino Calderón a la casa del embajador... Pasó enfrente de mí. Iba en un coche de colección negro, y atrás marchaban, en fila, unos 20 Audis A6 nuevos, que le puso el gobierno español para sus acompañantes.
También vi varios Mercedes.
No exagero... Y unas 10 motos. La gente del vecindario, espantada de plano. Una señora no podía creer lo que veía, ya que en Madrid todos hemos visto pasar al Rey alguna vez y nunca ha traído un contingente tan impresionante.
El carro negro es un Rolls Royce que el Rey usa una vez al año. Nada más en el desfile militar.
No recuerdo haber visto a ninguna otra persona en ese automóvil. Excepto a Francisco Franco, ya que fue un regalo que le hicieron al dictador que terminó por quedarse el Rey. Había también un helicóptero sobrevolando al área. No faltaron las ambulancias y las motos Harleys rodeando al Rolls Royce.
Patrulleros por delante y por atrás. Etcétera. Y ya ves, antes el Rey había cachondeado
a Calderón y Zapatero también.
Otros políticos de los dos partidos se esmeraron en hacerlo sentir importante. Ni duda cabe, cuánta falta nos está haciendo a los españoles el petróleo mexicano. Para eso hemos enamorado a Calderón, que se ve cayó redondo en nuestra trampa de seducción. Pobres mexicanos, qué complejo de inferioridad tienen”.
Sobre la columna de Federico Arreola en el sdp del lunes 16 de junio
El que un presidente (espurio o no) vaya a otro país a ser ‘cachondeado’ creo que no tiene mucho que ver con los complejos y traumas que tenga la población a la que dice representar.
Yo le sugeriría al buen Arreola, que si es cierto que es vergonzosa la actuación de Felipe Calderón y algunos de sus funcionarios en el extranjero. Hacen uso exagerado de lujos y gastos que no corresponden con un país que se supone esta apenas desarrollándose.
Pero también le diría a su amigo, el español, que no se podía esperar otra cosa del heredero del fascismo y amante de los ‘buenos negocios’ Juan Carlos I. No es nuevo saber que el rey tiene el gusto muy desarrollado por los negocios. Por ello tal vez no sea gratis la publicación del libro ‘Juan Carlos I: ’30 años a cuerpo de rey’ donde se relatan hechos que describen a un hombre un tanto corrupto, prepotente, y bastante fascista.
Se dice que cuando ilegítimamente heredo el trono, no tenía dinero. Que su fortuna la hizo con negocios a la sombra de la figura real, usando su poder para ‘agilizar’ proyectos, también pidió dinero prestado (10 millones de euros) que pago permitiendo el uso del territorio español como base de lanzamiento en las guerras de Irak.
Ahora bien, Juan Carlos solo hizo lo que ha venido haciendo desde hace tres décadas tanto a españoles como a extranjeros: aseguro su participación en un negocio más. Que le prestó su coche personal y 20 mas a Calderón, si. Que Calderón es un hombre pequeño que se impresiona fácilmente y que con un poco de protocolo oficial y ‘cachondeo’ no duda en entregar el petróleo, también. Pero y que culpa tenemos el resto de los Mexicanos para que el amigo de Arreola nos diga que tenemos complejo de inferioridad?
En todo caso, Calderón es el que tiene el complejo de inferioridad, y en eso estamos completamente de acuerdo. Como lo estará él con el hecho de que Juan Carlos es un corrupto al que no le importa usar la soberanía española ni la vida de los soldados españoles con tal de obtener ganancias. Que canchondeo a Calderón, yo diría que es un asunto de ilegítimos.
ahi van unos videitos para recordar quien es juan carlos,...
como hizo su fortuna 'el rey'
y claro,.. el rey tambien tiene sus 'defensores' claro quien va a ser,... sino los medios de comunicacion,...
y sobre la 'transicion del franquismo al carlismo,.. y la cia (????) que echa por tierra el discursito democratico de juan carlos,..
Yo no se que puedan hacer los espanholes para controlar a su 'rey' en sus ansias por dinero,.. pero voy a mandar una carta a los diputados en Mexico para que ademas de darle permiso a Calderon de viajar al extranjero,.. que lo obligen a usar cinturon de castidad,.. para evitar futuros 'cachondeos',...
Monday, May 19, 2008
Some questions and answers about the oil and the political battle to secure it
Is energy security a political, military or market problem?
Developed nations are facing a severe energy security crisis, according to many analysts. And at the heart of energy security are many of the most important political, economic and environmental questions facing the world.
Perennial tensions in the Middle East affect oil supplies. Russia falls out with its neighbours over the supply of gas. Stark warnings of environmental catastrophes demand big changes to energy use. Nuclear power is clearly back on the agenda in some nations.
However, Cambridge University’s Pierre Noël, argues in the FT that the increasing use of energy resources as political tools does not in fact justify a tough new paradigm for energy security policy. He argues that ensuring a free global market in energy is the best line of defence.
So what are the biggest energy security challenges for the world? And what are the best solutions? What, for example, is the role of energy hungry China? How should the European Union deal with Russia?
Our thanks to Dr Noël for answering these questions on Thursday, 17 January 2008.
............................................................................................................................................
’Energy Security’ has become a very frequently used term, but it also seems to be one of the most poorly defined. If we assume that a useful definition goes beyond the assumption that states who have energy are ’secure’ and states that don’t are not, what can you offer by way of a definition of Energy Security, and what are its key dimensions?Iain Grant, Alberta, Canada
Pierre Noël: The most popular definition of energy security mentions the ‘availability’ of energy, its ‘affordability’ and often its ‘environmental sustainability’. This is not a very useful definition.
Affordability is a relative notion: affordable to whom and to do what? Furthermore, energy commodities become less affordable when markets are tight, but that is the very condition for them to remain available. Adding environmental sustainability is not helpful because most of the time there is a clear tradeoff between the ‘affordability’ of energy and its environmental impact.
Clean energy is relatively expensive.
I would advocate a narrow definition of energy security, centered on the availability of energy to those who are willing to pay the market price. Energy insecurity can then be linked to situations when energy markets do not function properly. Energy security policies should be mostly aimed at ‘making markets work’ and letting them work when they do.
............................................................................................................................................
Who will get the last barrel of oil? The country the oil is extracted from, the country with the most money, or the country with the most weapons?Wayne Rogers, Canada
Pierre Noël: There will be many ‘last barrels’ consumed at the same time, probably by relatively poor people in relatively poor countries – some of them extracting oil.
............................................................................................................................................
Is the American policy of projecting military might across the oil-rich Persian Gulf and its support for reactionary governments in the region misguided? After all, even the most hot-headed revolutionaries in the region still need to export oil to survive so there is no meaningful threat to the west’s energy security, whereas the US policies ensure that democracy and pluralism will not take root in the area. Borzou Aram, London
Pierre Noël: Protecting the flow of oil to the world market probably does not require a permanent, massive US military presence in the Gulf. Some in Washington are openly talking about moving back to an “over the horizon” military posture.
The US has long acted as a policeman in the Middle East, simply deterring the “bad guys” (Iran, then Iraq) from unsettling the status quo. When deterrence failed with Saddam Hussein in 1990, the US did not hesitate to send massive military power to the region. Under GW Bush the policy has changed radically as the US has transformed itself into a political engineer in the Middle East, trying to re-draw the political and ideological map of the region.
This policy shift was certainly not required in terms of energy security and it has had negative energy security consequences – not only for the US but for all consumers.
............................................................................................................................................
Are Europe-based energy sources like wind and nuclear bringing more or less security of supply? Jean-Michel Glachant, University Paris Sud, France
Pierre Noël: Wind is an intermittent source of power supply, unpredictable and relatively concentrated geographically (Scotland in the UK example). Massively increasing the share of wind in the electricity mix, as Europe and the UK want to do, almost certainly decreases energy security (or, which is the same thing, increases the cost of maintaining the reliability of the electricity system).
Nuclear is probably neutral in terms of energy security compared to other non-intermittent sources (coal, natural gas).
The fact that wind and nuclear are ‘non-imported’ sources of energy is irrelevant as far as energy security is concerned.
............................................................................................................................................
There is a view that the current spike in energy prices is here to stay, at least for 5-10 years, due to underinvestment in oil and gas production infrastructure. Do you see this current period of high prices being different to those in the past in that they are stimulating a significant shift to alternative energy sources or will oil remain the main source of energy? If so, what do you see being the dominant trends in energy production? Adam Keats, London
Pierre Noël: I will not try to predict the price of oil! That said, the current period of high prices is clearly different from previous periods. Production outside OPEC and the Former Soviet Union has stopped growing, despite five full years of very high prices and record investment budgets from oil companies. It is probably very close to its maximum possible production. In that context, growing demand has come and ‘bumped up’ against production capacities in the Middle East, sending prices to the current levels.
If anything it will be more difficult, not less, to shift to alternatives this time. The 1970s oil shocks had triggered massive substitution, especially in the power generation and industrial sectors. Some of that might be replicable – at a cost – in developing countries, especially Asian emerging economies. But in the OECD oil demand is now highly concentrated in the transportation sector where price elasticities are low.
............................................................................................................................................
The current global energy market is anything but free. The biggest cartel in the history of market economy prevents national governments from responding with free market measures. Do you believe a free global market can exist with the presence of OPEC? Zhou Xi, Hong Kong
Pierre Noël: No market is perfect and the oil market works much, much better than most. All other things being equal, the price would be lower without OPEC, no doubt. But OPEC is here to stay and its market power is bound to increase with the peak in non-OPEC supply.
The relevant policy question is: ‘What should we as oil consumers do to ensure the highest possible level of energy security?’ The answer is:
1. Let the market work freely, always.
2. Maintain emergency storage
3. Invest in R&D for alternative transportation technologies and fuels.
The most important is No. 1.
............................................................................................................................................
Is it possible to calculate the cost in dollars per barrel of securing oil supply through US military intervention in the Mideast Gulf since the first Gulf crisis in 1990-91? Is this a wise foreign policy, and does it make the Pentagon the source of US energy policy rather than the Department of Energy? Ian Bourne, London
Pierre Noël: Academic studies have consistently valued the ‘energy security premium’ at between zero and $0.33/gallon. The price in the US is currently around $3/gallon.
Most of the US military presence in the Middle East is not required to protect the oil market.
............................................................................................................................................
Do you believe that we are living in a time of constricting oil supply based on the Hubbert Peak theory? Ambrose
Pierre Noël: I believe that oil supply will eventually peak. As it continues to grow, by definition it has not peaked yet!
............................................................................................................................................
What options do developing countries have in the future if US, Europe and others impose restrictions on the imports from the countries with no regulations on GHG emission reductions and force developing countries to adopt ’costly’ clean energy options, restricting power generation from cheap and abundantly available coal for their energy security? Hari, Auckland
Pierre Noël: Such taxes would increase the price of imported goods in developed countries (cheap Chinese goods would become a bit more expensive). I doubt it would significantly accelerate the transition of China towards a cleaner energy economy. But these taxes might be welcomed by European and American manufacturers.
............................................................................................................................................
In the case of China, for example, national oil companies are increasingly driven by government agenda to seek resources elsewhere, almost making oil deals into government diplomatic exchanges instead of business transactions. With China’s growing influence, do you believe that re-nationalisation of this sector is inevitable? Zhou Xi, Hong Kong
Pierre Noël: Chinese oil companies seem already to enjoy significant – though far from complete -- strategic autonomy, and will probably enjoy more in the future. They try to build portfolios of assets outside China and they go first where there is relatively less competition (places where international oil companies are reluctant or banned to go). Both the Chinese government and the resource-owner governments love to include these deals into wider diplomatic packages but these are primarily commercial deals which make commercial sense for the Chinese companies.
............................................................................................................................................
The Stern Report described climate change as ‘the greatest and widest-ranging market failure ever seen.’ Correcting market failures typically requires government, i.e. political intervention. How would a free market in global energy address these market failures and help us address the impacts of climate change? Chris Morrison, London
Pierre Noël: Energy markets themselves will simply not address climate change, at least not in a meaningful way. This is why I think it is not helpful to bundle energy security (strictly defined) and climate change into a single, wider definition of energy security. For climate change, the exact size of the market failure is disputed (Stern’s view of the size is clearly way above all other academic economists) but its existence is not and it is certainly a very large one. For energy security, the size of the market failure is usually vastly exaggerated by commentators and politicians.
............................................................................................................................................
I have two questions: 1) The EU and the Russian Federation (RF) have an evolving partnership in energy trade. Can this relationship create observable spill-over effects on the EU-RF political relations? 2) Turkey is an EU candidate country bordering Middle East, Balkans and the Caucasus. What kind of role would Turkey play with regard to the EU-RF energy trade relations? Argun Baskan, Turkey
Pierre Noël: I think that the best the EU can do is to organise its gas market in a way that minimises the impact of supply disruptions, whatever their origins and causes. Europe needs an integrated, competitive gas market which would vastly increase the level of security of supply enjoyed by European consumers. France and Germany fiercely resist because their big gas companies would lose their comfortable (and profitable) positions.
An integrated and competitive gas market in Europe would also trigger a complete re-structuring of the EU-Russia relationship, reducing Moscow’s ability to leverage its bilateral energy links in the foreign policy sphere.
Some see Turkey as a key transit country for Central Asian and Middle East gas exports to Europe. I do not think that Turkish membership of the EU would significantly increase the likelihood of such projects.
............................................................................................................................................
How do you see Asian countries, particularly China using sovereign wealth funds to secure energy resources? How important will the Straits of Malacca be for these countries’ foreign policies? Stephen Ranger, Seoul, Korea
Pierre Noël: The Malacca problem is vastly exaggerated. If the straight were closed, tankers would take a longer route to the South – freight rates would go up, end of story.
About sovereign funds: buying oil and gas reserves abroad will not provide Chinese consumers with any additional energy security. For China - as for every other country - energy security is mostly built at home. Oil supply insecurity in China (chronic shortages of oil products) is due to price regulations and restricted freedom to import crude and products. It has nothing to do with a lack of ‘control’ over oil reserves or shipping lanes.
............................................................................................................................................
About the expert: Dr Noël is at the University of Cambridge’s EPRG, an energy and environmental policy research group and also a Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. He has worked for almost 10 years on the interaction between foreign policies, energy markets and international security. He specialised in US international oil policy and now works also on Chinese energy security policies, the EU approach to international energy issues, and the geopolitics of natural gas markets.
Developed nations are facing a severe energy security crisis, according to many analysts. And at the heart of energy security are many of the most important political, economic and environmental questions facing the world.
Perennial tensions in the Middle East affect oil supplies. Russia falls out with its neighbours over the supply of gas. Stark warnings of environmental catastrophes demand big changes to energy use. Nuclear power is clearly back on the agenda in some nations.
However, Cambridge University’s Pierre Noël, argues in the FT that the increasing use of energy resources as political tools does not in fact justify a tough new paradigm for energy security policy. He argues that ensuring a free global market in energy is the best line of defence.
So what are the biggest energy security challenges for the world? And what are the best solutions? What, for example, is the role of energy hungry China? How should the European Union deal with Russia?
Our thanks to Dr Noël for answering these questions on Thursday, 17 January 2008.
............................................................................................................................................
’Energy Security’ has become a very frequently used term, but it also seems to be one of the most poorly defined. If we assume that a useful definition goes beyond the assumption that states who have energy are ’secure’ and states that don’t are not, what can you offer by way of a definition of Energy Security, and what are its key dimensions?Iain Grant, Alberta, Canada
Pierre Noël: The most popular definition of energy security mentions the ‘availability’ of energy, its ‘affordability’ and often its ‘environmental sustainability’. This is not a very useful definition.
Affordability is a relative notion: affordable to whom and to do what? Furthermore, energy commodities become less affordable when markets are tight, but that is the very condition for them to remain available. Adding environmental sustainability is not helpful because most of the time there is a clear tradeoff between the ‘affordability’ of energy and its environmental impact.
Clean energy is relatively expensive.
I would advocate a narrow definition of energy security, centered on the availability of energy to those who are willing to pay the market price. Energy insecurity can then be linked to situations when energy markets do not function properly. Energy security policies should be mostly aimed at ‘making markets work’ and letting them work when they do.
............................................................................................................................................
Who will get the last barrel of oil? The country the oil is extracted from, the country with the most money, or the country with the most weapons?Wayne Rogers, Canada
Pierre Noël: There will be many ‘last barrels’ consumed at the same time, probably by relatively poor people in relatively poor countries – some of them extracting oil.
............................................................................................................................................
Is the American policy of projecting military might across the oil-rich Persian Gulf and its support for reactionary governments in the region misguided? After all, even the most hot-headed revolutionaries in the region still need to export oil to survive so there is no meaningful threat to the west’s energy security, whereas the US policies ensure that democracy and pluralism will not take root in the area. Borzou Aram, London
Pierre Noël: Protecting the flow of oil to the world market probably does not require a permanent, massive US military presence in the Gulf. Some in Washington are openly talking about moving back to an “over the horizon” military posture.
The US has long acted as a policeman in the Middle East, simply deterring the “bad guys” (Iran, then Iraq) from unsettling the status quo. When deterrence failed with Saddam Hussein in 1990, the US did not hesitate to send massive military power to the region. Under GW Bush the policy has changed radically as the US has transformed itself into a political engineer in the Middle East, trying to re-draw the political and ideological map of the region.
This policy shift was certainly not required in terms of energy security and it has had negative energy security consequences – not only for the US but for all consumers.
............................................................................................................................................
Are Europe-based energy sources like wind and nuclear bringing more or less security of supply? Jean-Michel Glachant, University Paris Sud, France
Pierre Noël: Wind is an intermittent source of power supply, unpredictable and relatively concentrated geographically (Scotland in the UK example). Massively increasing the share of wind in the electricity mix, as Europe and the UK want to do, almost certainly decreases energy security (or, which is the same thing, increases the cost of maintaining the reliability of the electricity system).
Nuclear is probably neutral in terms of energy security compared to other non-intermittent sources (coal, natural gas).
The fact that wind and nuclear are ‘non-imported’ sources of energy is irrelevant as far as energy security is concerned.
............................................................................................................................................
There is a view that the current spike in energy prices is here to stay, at least for 5-10 years, due to underinvestment in oil and gas production infrastructure. Do you see this current period of high prices being different to those in the past in that they are stimulating a significant shift to alternative energy sources or will oil remain the main source of energy? If so, what do you see being the dominant trends in energy production? Adam Keats, London
Pierre Noël: I will not try to predict the price of oil! That said, the current period of high prices is clearly different from previous periods. Production outside OPEC and the Former Soviet Union has stopped growing, despite five full years of very high prices and record investment budgets from oil companies. It is probably very close to its maximum possible production. In that context, growing demand has come and ‘bumped up’ against production capacities in the Middle East, sending prices to the current levels.
If anything it will be more difficult, not less, to shift to alternatives this time. The 1970s oil shocks had triggered massive substitution, especially in the power generation and industrial sectors. Some of that might be replicable – at a cost – in developing countries, especially Asian emerging economies. But in the OECD oil demand is now highly concentrated in the transportation sector where price elasticities are low.
............................................................................................................................................
The current global energy market is anything but free. The biggest cartel in the history of market economy prevents national governments from responding with free market measures. Do you believe a free global market can exist with the presence of OPEC? Zhou Xi, Hong Kong
Pierre Noël: No market is perfect and the oil market works much, much better than most. All other things being equal, the price would be lower without OPEC, no doubt. But OPEC is here to stay and its market power is bound to increase with the peak in non-OPEC supply.
The relevant policy question is: ‘What should we as oil consumers do to ensure the highest possible level of energy security?’ The answer is:
1. Let the market work freely, always.
2. Maintain emergency storage
3. Invest in R&D for alternative transportation technologies and fuels.
The most important is No. 1.
............................................................................................................................................
Is it possible to calculate the cost in dollars per barrel of securing oil supply through US military intervention in the Mideast Gulf since the first Gulf crisis in 1990-91? Is this a wise foreign policy, and does it make the Pentagon the source of US energy policy rather than the Department of Energy? Ian Bourne, London
Pierre Noël: Academic studies have consistently valued the ‘energy security premium’ at between zero and $0.33/gallon. The price in the US is currently around $3/gallon.
Most of the US military presence in the Middle East is not required to protect the oil market.
............................................................................................................................................
Do you believe that we are living in a time of constricting oil supply based on the Hubbert Peak theory? Ambrose
Pierre Noël: I believe that oil supply will eventually peak. As it continues to grow, by definition it has not peaked yet!
............................................................................................................................................
What options do developing countries have in the future if US, Europe and others impose restrictions on the imports from the countries with no regulations on GHG emission reductions and force developing countries to adopt ’costly’ clean energy options, restricting power generation from cheap and abundantly available coal for their energy security? Hari, Auckland
Pierre Noël: Such taxes would increase the price of imported goods in developed countries (cheap Chinese goods would become a bit more expensive). I doubt it would significantly accelerate the transition of China towards a cleaner energy economy. But these taxes might be welcomed by European and American manufacturers.
............................................................................................................................................
In the case of China, for example, national oil companies are increasingly driven by government agenda to seek resources elsewhere, almost making oil deals into government diplomatic exchanges instead of business transactions. With China’s growing influence, do you believe that re-nationalisation of this sector is inevitable? Zhou Xi, Hong Kong
Pierre Noël: Chinese oil companies seem already to enjoy significant – though far from complete -- strategic autonomy, and will probably enjoy more in the future. They try to build portfolios of assets outside China and they go first where there is relatively less competition (places where international oil companies are reluctant or banned to go). Both the Chinese government and the resource-owner governments love to include these deals into wider diplomatic packages but these are primarily commercial deals which make commercial sense for the Chinese companies.
............................................................................................................................................
The Stern Report described climate change as ‘the greatest and widest-ranging market failure ever seen.’ Correcting market failures typically requires government, i.e. political intervention. How would a free market in global energy address these market failures and help us address the impacts of climate change? Chris Morrison, London
Pierre Noël: Energy markets themselves will simply not address climate change, at least not in a meaningful way. This is why I think it is not helpful to bundle energy security (strictly defined) and climate change into a single, wider definition of energy security. For climate change, the exact size of the market failure is disputed (Stern’s view of the size is clearly way above all other academic economists) but its existence is not and it is certainly a very large one. For energy security, the size of the market failure is usually vastly exaggerated by commentators and politicians.
............................................................................................................................................
I have two questions: 1) The EU and the Russian Federation (RF) have an evolving partnership in energy trade. Can this relationship create observable spill-over effects on the EU-RF political relations? 2) Turkey is an EU candidate country bordering Middle East, Balkans and the Caucasus. What kind of role would Turkey play with regard to the EU-RF energy trade relations? Argun Baskan, Turkey
Pierre Noël: I think that the best the EU can do is to organise its gas market in a way that minimises the impact of supply disruptions, whatever their origins and causes. Europe needs an integrated, competitive gas market which would vastly increase the level of security of supply enjoyed by European consumers. France and Germany fiercely resist because their big gas companies would lose their comfortable (and profitable) positions.
An integrated and competitive gas market in Europe would also trigger a complete re-structuring of the EU-Russia relationship, reducing Moscow’s ability to leverage its bilateral energy links in the foreign policy sphere.
Some see Turkey as a key transit country for Central Asian and Middle East gas exports to Europe. I do not think that Turkish membership of the EU would significantly increase the likelihood of such projects.
............................................................................................................................................
How do you see Asian countries, particularly China using sovereign wealth funds to secure energy resources? How important will the Straits of Malacca be for these countries’ foreign policies? Stephen Ranger, Seoul, Korea
Pierre Noël: The Malacca problem is vastly exaggerated. If the straight were closed, tankers would take a longer route to the South – freight rates would go up, end of story.
About sovereign funds: buying oil and gas reserves abroad will not provide Chinese consumers with any additional energy security. For China - as for every other country - energy security is mostly built at home. Oil supply insecurity in China (chronic shortages of oil products) is due to price regulations and restricted freedom to import crude and products. It has nothing to do with a lack of ‘control’ over oil reserves or shipping lanes.
............................................................................................................................................
About the expert: Dr Noël is at the University of Cambridge’s EPRG, an energy and environmental policy research group and also a Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. He has worked for almost 10 years on the interaction between foreign policies, energy markets and international security. He specialised in US international oil policy and now works also on Chinese energy security policies, the EU approach to international energy issues, and the geopolitics of natural gas markets.
Bush seeking Saudis' help on oil prices
This is from the Seattle times,..
=====
By Kevin G. Hall
McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — In April 1986, Vice President George H.W. Bush traveled to Saudi Arabia with a stern warning. Record low oil prices of $10 a barrel threatened the U.S. oil industry and U.S. national security. If prices don't rise, he warned, perhaps a U.S. tariff on imported oil would do the job.
More than 22 years later, his son George W. Bush is on a similar mission, but with the opposite goal in mind. President Bush meets today with Saudi King Abdullah and will lobby for help in bringing down world oil prices, which have raced past $125 a barrel.
Then and now, the Saudis are the only oil power with enough unused production capacity to make a difference on price if they increase supply. But the hard fact is that the world oil market has changed, and Saudi Arabia is far from the only producer holding the fate of U.S. consumers in its hands. Even if the Saudis increase production, shortfalls elsewhere, along with rising global demand, can offset their efforts — and are.
Many Americans grumbling at the gas pump are quick to blame the Saudis for their woes — just as many might be surprised to learn that Saudi Arabia trails Canada and Mexico as the chief suppliers of foreign oil to the United States and isn't far ahead of Venezuela, Nigeria and Angola. Saudi Arabia provided 14 percent of U.S. oil imports in 2006. Still, if it boosted production significantly, added world supplies would tend to drive global oil prices down, regardless of who bought its exports.
Saudi Arabia is the world's only significant swing producer: Its oil production can be ratcheted up or down to lower or raise prices worldwide. (Iraq potentially could do the same if it achieved stability, but that's not a near-term prospect.)
So what have the Saudis done since 2005, when oil prices climbed above $70 a barrel, then $80, then $90, and this year broke the once-unthinkable threshold of $100? They have increased production capacity, meaning that in a pinch they could make up the difference between global demand and available supply. They now can produce 11 million barrels per day, or bpd, and expect that number to reach 12.5 million bpd by 2010.
"They've not only invested tens of millions of dollars to increase production capacity. They've increased their actual production from 8.5 million barrels per day (mbpd) to 9.2 mbpd," said Frank Verrastro, director of the energy and national-security program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a center-right think tank.
His numbers are somewhat squishy; actual production numbers are hard to verify. Some critics believe the Saudi government has increased capacity but actually dropped output by 1 million bpd over the past two years. The Energy Information Administration, the statistical arm of the Energy Department, said that in 2006 — the last full year for which it has data — the Saudis produced 10.7 million bpd.
That's why some Democrats in Congress, including New York Sen. Charles Schumer, are threatening to hold up a $1 billion-plus arms deal for the Saudis, a crucial ally in the global war on terror, unless the kingdom puts more oil on international markets.
"We are saying to the Saudis that if you don't help us, why should we be helping you?" Schumer said this week.
The Saudis are said to be reluctant to pump much more oil since U.S. oil inventories of late have been higher than five-year averages. That suggests that oil isn't in short supply here, and that other factors, such as the weakening U.S. dollar and speculation in commodities markets, are driving up prices.
"I think the president has no intention whatsoever of having the Saudis put more oil in the market," said Fadel Gheit, an industry analyst for Oppenheimer & Co. in New York. "If the president wanted the Saudis to do that, he would not have asked them publicly."
Nevertheless, global oil prices are still rising. Why? Because global demand for oil is growing outside the United States, which alone accounts for one-quarter of world oil consumption. China and the Middle East each account for about one-third of new oil demand, and they are sopping up new production. The Paris-based International Energy Agency this month estimated global oil demand in 2008 at 86.8 million bpd, about 1.2 million bpd more than in 2007.
In addition, other important oil suppliers are falling short in production for various reasons.
Nigeria has more than 1 million bpd of production offline because of civil strife. Russia is the world's second-largest oil producer and exporter, but after nearly a decade of increasing production, it seems to have reached a plateau for easily accessible oil, and output is flat.
In Mexico, the second-most important supplier to the United States, production continues to erode faster than forecast in the giant offshore oil field called Cantarell. For political reasons — nationalism — the country has been unable to modify its foreign investment laws to allow state-owned Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) to work with major oil companies to explore for deep-water oil in the Gulf of Mexico or develop its hard-to-access oil deposits in Veracruz state.
"Mexico has a lot of potential, but its hands are tied politically," said oil historian Daniel Yergin, author of "The Prize," the definitive account of oil's rise to economic importance. "I think if the Mexican industry had access to the technology and could call upon the skill and experience of the international industry, it could turn the picture around within a few years. But it is just really constrained."
Yergin made headlines two years ago, swimming against the current by predicting a potential oil glut as more production came on line. He turned out to be half right.
Brazil's offshore oil discoveries and a bevy of projects around the world slated for development suggest there's still plenty of petroleum to be pumped. But the rising costs for everything from offshore rigs to petroleum engineers to ocean transportation have delayed completion of these projects significantly.
"There've been shortages of people, equipment, rising prices of steel and other commodities. And that has really constrained the supply" of oil, Yergin said.
President Bush seems resigned to high oil prices for now, telling CBS Radio on Monday before he left for the Middle East that the "demand for oil is so high relative to supply these days that there's just not a lot of excess capacity."
Since about 40 percent of the world's oil comes from the cartel OPEC, member countries have little incentive to reduce the price by producing more. They earn more by producing less. Asking them to produce more is effectively asking them, instead of the American consumer, to swallow a loss.
"We don't ask Microsoft to do that. We don't ask Coca-Cola to do that. But somehow we think the oil companies should do that," Verrastro said.
The United States has 5 percent of the world's population but uses one-quarter of all oil produced. It is the third-largest oil producer, sitting atop plenty of oil in Alaska and along its coastlines that for political reasons it chooses not to tap.
=====
By Kevin G. Hall
McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — In April 1986, Vice President George H.W. Bush traveled to Saudi Arabia with a stern warning. Record low oil prices of $10 a barrel threatened the U.S. oil industry and U.S. national security. If prices don't rise, he warned, perhaps a U.S. tariff on imported oil would do the job.
More than 22 years later, his son George W. Bush is on a similar mission, but with the opposite goal in mind. President Bush meets today with Saudi King Abdullah and will lobby for help in bringing down world oil prices, which have raced past $125 a barrel.
Then and now, the Saudis are the only oil power with enough unused production capacity to make a difference on price if they increase supply. But the hard fact is that the world oil market has changed, and Saudi Arabia is far from the only producer holding the fate of U.S. consumers in its hands. Even if the Saudis increase production, shortfalls elsewhere, along with rising global demand, can offset their efforts — and are.
Many Americans grumbling at the gas pump are quick to blame the Saudis for their woes — just as many might be surprised to learn that Saudi Arabia trails Canada and Mexico as the chief suppliers of foreign oil to the United States and isn't far ahead of Venezuela, Nigeria and Angola. Saudi Arabia provided 14 percent of U.S. oil imports in 2006. Still, if it boosted production significantly, added world supplies would tend to drive global oil prices down, regardless of who bought its exports.
Saudi Arabia is the world's only significant swing producer: Its oil production can be ratcheted up or down to lower or raise prices worldwide. (Iraq potentially could do the same if it achieved stability, but that's not a near-term prospect.)
So what have the Saudis done since 2005, when oil prices climbed above $70 a barrel, then $80, then $90, and this year broke the once-unthinkable threshold of $100? They have increased production capacity, meaning that in a pinch they could make up the difference between global demand and available supply. They now can produce 11 million barrels per day, or bpd, and expect that number to reach 12.5 million bpd by 2010.
"They've not only invested tens of millions of dollars to increase production capacity. They've increased their actual production from 8.5 million barrels per day (mbpd) to 9.2 mbpd," said Frank Verrastro, director of the energy and national-security program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a center-right think tank.
His numbers are somewhat squishy; actual production numbers are hard to verify. Some critics believe the Saudi government has increased capacity but actually dropped output by 1 million bpd over the past two years. The Energy Information Administration, the statistical arm of the Energy Department, said that in 2006 — the last full year for which it has data — the Saudis produced 10.7 million bpd.
That's why some Democrats in Congress, including New York Sen. Charles Schumer, are threatening to hold up a $1 billion-plus arms deal for the Saudis, a crucial ally in the global war on terror, unless the kingdom puts more oil on international markets.
"We are saying to the Saudis that if you don't help us, why should we be helping you?" Schumer said this week.
The Saudis are said to be reluctant to pump much more oil since U.S. oil inventories of late have been higher than five-year averages. That suggests that oil isn't in short supply here, and that other factors, such as the weakening U.S. dollar and speculation in commodities markets, are driving up prices.
"I think the president has no intention whatsoever of having the Saudis put more oil in the market," said Fadel Gheit, an industry analyst for Oppenheimer & Co. in New York. "If the president wanted the Saudis to do that, he would not have asked them publicly."
Nevertheless, global oil prices are still rising. Why? Because global demand for oil is growing outside the United States, which alone accounts for one-quarter of world oil consumption. China and the Middle East each account for about one-third of new oil demand, and they are sopping up new production. The Paris-based International Energy Agency this month estimated global oil demand in 2008 at 86.8 million bpd, about 1.2 million bpd more than in 2007.
In addition, other important oil suppliers are falling short in production for various reasons.
Nigeria has more than 1 million bpd of production offline because of civil strife. Russia is the world's second-largest oil producer and exporter, but after nearly a decade of increasing production, it seems to have reached a plateau for easily accessible oil, and output is flat.
In Mexico, the second-most important supplier to the United States, production continues to erode faster than forecast in the giant offshore oil field called Cantarell. For political reasons — nationalism — the country has been unable to modify its foreign investment laws to allow state-owned Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) to work with major oil companies to explore for deep-water oil in the Gulf of Mexico or develop its hard-to-access oil deposits in Veracruz state.
"Mexico has a lot of potential, but its hands are tied politically," said oil historian Daniel Yergin, author of "The Prize," the definitive account of oil's rise to economic importance. "I think if the Mexican industry had access to the technology and could call upon the skill and experience of the international industry, it could turn the picture around within a few years. But it is just really constrained."
Yergin made headlines two years ago, swimming against the current by predicting a potential oil glut as more production came on line. He turned out to be half right.
Brazil's offshore oil discoveries and a bevy of projects around the world slated for development suggest there's still plenty of petroleum to be pumped. But the rising costs for everything from offshore rigs to petroleum engineers to ocean transportation have delayed completion of these projects significantly.
"There've been shortages of people, equipment, rising prices of steel and other commodities. And that has really constrained the supply" of oil, Yergin said.
President Bush seems resigned to high oil prices for now, telling CBS Radio on Monday before he left for the Middle East that the "demand for oil is so high relative to supply these days that there's just not a lot of excess capacity."
Since about 40 percent of the world's oil comes from the cartel OPEC, member countries have little incentive to reduce the price by producing more. They earn more by producing less. Asking them to produce more is effectively asking them, instead of the American consumer, to swallow a loss.
"We don't ask Microsoft to do that. We don't ask Coca-Cola to do that. But somehow we think the oil companies should do that," Verrastro said.
The United States has 5 percent of the world's population but uses one-quarter of all oil produced. It is the third-largest oil producer, sitting atop plenty of oil in Alaska and along its coastlines that for political reasons it chooses not to tap.
Friday, May 02, 2008
Petrobras ya se puso ranchera!!!
Segun el financial times, Petrobras la empresa petrolera brasilenha ya se puso ranchera y no esta dispuesta a que Pemex NO comparta el petroleo con ella,... Aunque no dicen que esten presionando para que se lleve a cabo la privatizacion de PEMEX, o que se permitan los contratos riesgo,..
Abajo la nota,....
======
Petrobras rules out Mexican service role
By Ed Crooks in London and Adam Thomson in Mexico City
Published: April 29 2008 18:54 Last updated: April 29 2008 18:54
Petrobras would not be willing to work in Mexico as a service company, being paid a set rate rather than taking a share of oil production, according to Sergio Gabrielli, its chief executive.
Mr Gabrielli told the Financial Times that the Brazilian company had been in negotiations with Mexico. He added, however, that “I think we are not willing to go there as a service company”.
His comments are disappointing for the Mexican government, which faces a mounting crisis in its oil industry.
Oil production, for so long the pillar of Mexico’s economy and from which the government receives almost 40 per cent of its income, is falling faster than expected.
In November 2004, Mexico produced an average of 3.4m barrels per day. In November last year, by contrast, it produced just 2.9m.
Pemex, the state oil company, lacks the money and technical expertise to explore for oil in deep waters, where most analysts believe Mexico’s future lies. Petrobras is a world leader in deep-water exploration.
Mr Gabrielli refused to comment on suggestions that his company would be more acceptable in Mexico than, say, ExxonMobil of the US, saying the issue was “very sensitive”.
He also refused to comment on Mexican policy, saying “they have to decide”.
At the same time, Mexico was “trying to get drilling rigs for their own operation. They’re moving”, he said.
However, he added: “We have a multiple service agreement for gas production but – even though some of our people think differently – I think that the multiple service agreement is not enough for us to go for an actual exploration offshore.”
This month, Mexico’s conservative government led by President Felipe Calderón presented congress with an initiative that it believes will help turn things round. This would be by introducing greater flexibility into the country’s rigid rules governing private investment in oil.
If the bill passes through congress, private companies would be allowed to build and operate refineries, pipelines and transportation networks.
They could also receive bonuses for work carried out for Pemex, potentially increasing interest in one of the world’s most protected oil sectors.
Yet many analysts say the proposed reform does not go far enough. The potential changes do not envisage amending Mexico’s constitution, which prohibits Pemex from entering into joint-risk contracts with the private sector.
Pemex is replacing current production with new finds at a rate of only about 20 per cent. That is very low compared with new discoveries made by the world’s leading oil companies.
Abajo la nota,....
======
Petrobras rules out Mexican service role
By Ed Crooks in London and Adam Thomson in Mexico City
Published: April 29 2008 18:54 Last updated: April 29 2008 18:54
Petrobras would not be willing to work in Mexico as a service company, being paid a set rate rather than taking a share of oil production, according to Sergio Gabrielli, its chief executive.
Mr Gabrielli told the Financial Times that the Brazilian company had been in negotiations with Mexico. He added, however, that “I think we are not willing to go there as a service company”.
His comments are disappointing for the Mexican government, which faces a mounting crisis in its oil industry.
Oil production, for so long the pillar of Mexico’s economy and from which the government receives almost 40 per cent of its income, is falling faster than expected.
In November 2004, Mexico produced an average of 3.4m barrels per day. In November last year, by contrast, it produced just 2.9m.
Pemex, the state oil company, lacks the money and technical expertise to explore for oil in deep waters, where most analysts believe Mexico’s future lies. Petrobras is a world leader in deep-water exploration.
Mr Gabrielli refused to comment on suggestions that his company would be more acceptable in Mexico than, say, ExxonMobil of the US, saying the issue was “very sensitive”.
He also refused to comment on Mexican policy, saying “they have to decide”.
At the same time, Mexico was “trying to get drilling rigs for their own operation. They’re moving”, he said.
However, he added: “We have a multiple service agreement for gas production but – even though some of our people think differently – I think that the multiple service agreement is not enough for us to go for an actual exploration offshore.”
This month, Mexico’s conservative government led by President Felipe Calderón presented congress with an initiative that it believes will help turn things round. This would be by introducing greater flexibility into the country’s rigid rules governing private investment in oil.
If the bill passes through congress, private companies would be allowed to build and operate refineries, pipelines and transportation networks.
They could also receive bonuses for work carried out for Pemex, potentially increasing interest in one of the world’s most protected oil sectors.
Yet many analysts say the proposed reform does not go far enough. The potential changes do not envisage amending Mexico’s constitution, which prohibits Pemex from entering into joint-risk contracts with the private sector.
Pemex is replacing current production with new finds at a rate of only about 20 per cent. That is very low compared with new discoveries made by the world’s leading oil companies.
Thursday, May 01, 2008
by the way,.. business week didn't published my comment,... i wonder why
I put an extract of the comment to the businessweek's article, but it wasn't published. According to the site, the only restriction they have is the usage of rude language,.. well I didn't used any of it, and yet they didn't include my commment.
However they did include offensive comments to Mexican independece. For example, some guy 'jack' is openly calling to intervene Mexican territory and stole oil.
that position is not far from what Calderon is doing, but cheaper in that US won't spend in sending his mercenaries down to Mexican territory.
here is the comment I made, it was a shorter version of the one I uploaded here in the previous post,..
I would only point out that those in pemex who desperately argue for privatisation are the ones who have been accused of benefiting from Pemex’s corruption. Labastida Ochoa is one of them, and the nearly 2,000 millions that came round to pay for his presidential campaign. Camilo Mouriño and his empire of gasoline in southern Mexico is another. He has been accused of abusing office, and he started in the ministry of energy where he did good contracts benefiting his family enterprises.
Overall I think that the urgency for privatise has little to do with Mexican’s interest and more to do with the big companies, corrupt politicians in Mexico, and some ‘free market fundamentalists’. The question is why should Mexicans sell off the enterprise that has given them the resources to accomplish whatever little development they have?
As you can see there is no offensive language there, only my sincere opinion about the topic. Would this mean that businessweek only allows comments that 'fit' their own editorial view?
here are comments already on the site,...
Mexico's Oil Dilemma
All Reader Comments
page 1 of 1
Jack
Apr 29, 2008 3:36 AM GMT
The U.S. should seize mexico oil fields as payment for the gazillions we spend on 986 billion illegal aliens! We could easily overpower the mexicans and claim the oil fields by right of conquest!
Link to this comment
Clifford J. Wirth
Apr 29, 2008 2:39 AM GMT
A variety of independent sources conclude that Mexico's oil production peaked in 2004 and that it production will continue to decline despite more exploration and drilling. These sources include, the Association for the Study of Peak Oil, Energy Watch Group, EnergyFiles, and Peak Oil Associates International
Link to this comment
common sense
Apr 29, 2008 1:44 AM GMT
after reading the article who in their right mind would want to nationalize their oil reserves.
Link to this comment
common sense
Apr 29, 2008 1:43 AM GMT
after reading the article who in their right mind would want to nationalize their oil reserves.
Link to this comment
Sam Siphandone
Apr 28, 2008 11:27 PM GMT
US should nationalize its oil reserves. The Govt should should sell gas like selling postage stamp... Otherwise Exxon Mobil, Chevron and other oil companies reap profits of more than $60 billions per year while we Americans paid $4 or more per gallon....
Link to this comment
Devin Serpa
Apr 28, 2008 6:17 PM GMT
"Unless something is done quickly to allow Pemex to operate more as a real oil company..." You mean rape and pillage the planet?
Link to this comment
Elaine Morton
Apr 28, 2008 4:46 PM GMT
How do I reach Carlos Morales Gil,
Link to this comment
elaine morton
Apr 28, 2008 4:16 PM GMT
I need to desperately reach this gentlemen. I have acquired this Patent/Tool. This test was on Pemex Stationary, signed off by 8 PemexEngineers, and there are 300 Hydraulics in the ground that are applicable for Oi Enhancement. Proved over 40% Increase PEMEX Poza Rico Camp Oilfield Hydroimpact Technology Pilot Testing Results 1. PEMEX Poza Rico Camp Oilfield tested the hydroimpact tool of Wave Energy Resource for a period of 90 days and there was no any damage for the well or the formation; 2.. Please reply 602-263-8046
Link to this comment
However they did include offensive comments to Mexican independece. For example, some guy 'jack' is openly calling to intervene Mexican territory and stole oil.
that position is not far from what Calderon is doing, but cheaper in that US won't spend in sending his mercenaries down to Mexican territory.
here is the comment I made, it was a shorter version of the one I uploaded here in the previous post,..
I would only point out that those in pemex who desperately argue for privatisation are the ones who have been accused of benefiting from Pemex’s corruption. Labastida Ochoa is one of them, and the nearly 2,000 millions that came round to pay for his presidential campaign. Camilo Mouriño and his empire of gasoline in southern Mexico is another. He has been accused of abusing office, and he started in the ministry of energy where he did good contracts benefiting his family enterprises.
Overall I think that the urgency for privatise has little to do with Mexican’s interest and more to do with the big companies, corrupt politicians in Mexico, and some ‘free market fundamentalists’. The question is why should Mexicans sell off the enterprise that has given them the resources to accomplish whatever little development they have?
As you can see there is no offensive language there, only my sincere opinion about the topic. Would this mean that businessweek only allows comments that 'fit' their own editorial view?
here are comments already on the site,...
Mexico's Oil Dilemma
All Reader Comments
page 1 of 1
Jack
Apr 29, 2008 3:36 AM GMT
The U.S. should seize mexico oil fields as payment for the gazillions we spend on 986 billion illegal aliens! We could easily overpower the mexicans and claim the oil fields by right of conquest!
Link to this comment
Clifford J. Wirth
Apr 29, 2008 2:39 AM GMT
A variety of independent sources conclude that Mexico's oil production peaked in 2004 and that it production will continue to decline despite more exploration and drilling. These sources include, the Association for the Study of Peak Oil, Energy Watch Group, EnergyFiles, and Peak Oil Associates International
Link to this comment
common sense
Apr 29, 2008 1:44 AM GMT
after reading the article who in their right mind would want to nationalize their oil reserves.
Link to this comment
common sense
Apr 29, 2008 1:43 AM GMT
after reading the article who in their right mind would want to nationalize their oil reserves.
Link to this comment
Sam Siphandone
Apr 28, 2008 11:27 PM GMT
US should nationalize its oil reserves. The Govt should should sell gas like selling postage stamp... Otherwise Exxon Mobil, Chevron and other oil companies reap profits of more than $60 billions per year while we Americans paid $4 or more per gallon....
Link to this comment
Devin Serpa
Apr 28, 2008 6:17 PM GMT
"Unless something is done quickly to allow Pemex to operate more as a real oil company..." You mean rape and pillage the planet?
Link to this comment
Elaine Morton
Apr 28, 2008 4:46 PM GMT
How do I reach Carlos Morales Gil,
Link to this comment
elaine morton
Apr 28, 2008 4:16 PM GMT
I need to desperately reach this gentlemen. I have acquired this Patent/Tool. This test was on Pemex Stationary, signed off by 8 PemexEngineers, and there are 300 Hydraulics in the ground that are applicable for Oi Enhancement. Proved over 40% Increase PEMEX Poza Rico Camp Oilfield Hydroimpact Technology Pilot Testing Results 1. PEMEX Poza Rico Camp Oilfield tested the hydroimpact tool of Wave Energy Resource for a period of 90 days and there was no any damage for the well or the formation; 2.. Please reply 602-263-8046
Link to this comment
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
More pressure on Pemex privatisation, now is an article from businessweek
Mexico's Oil Dilemma
As production declines, state-run Pemex struggles to find new reserves under daunting restrictions on foreign involvement
by Geri Smith
Carlos Morales Gil, head of exploration and production for Petróleos Mexicanos, or Pemex, Mexico's state oil company, is sunburned. But it's not because of his frequent visits to offshore oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico; that out-in-the-sun-too-long look is from a weekend spent in a dusty ring, waving a red cape in front of raging 550-pound bulls.
Morales' passion for amateur bullfighting may come in handy in his day job, where he commands thousands of engineers and roughnecks attempting to coax oil from Mexico's complex onshore fields and from thousands of feet below the ocean floor. Like his bosses at Pemex, the world's sixth-largest oil producer, Morales needs grit and fancy footwork to keep the oil flowing in spite of the many restrictions placed on the company by nationalist politicians determined to keep foreign oil companies from partnering with Pemex.
As Mexico's Congress prepares to debate an ambitious energy reform (BusinessWeek, 4/24/08) aimed at modernizing Pemex so that it can stem a precipitous drop in the country's oil production, engineers such as Morales are racing to drill as many wells as possible to discover new reserves. Last year, Pemex drilled 700 wells; this year, around 900 will be completed. "Not many oil companies in the world do that," says the 54-year-old Pemex veteran.
The Days of Easy Oil Are Over
For decades, Mexico has been the world's leading producer of oil from shallow waters, thanks to its Cantarell field in the Gulf of Mexico. Cantarell is the world's second-largest "super-giant" field. Since it was discovered in the mid 1970s, after a local fisherman complained to authorities about oil slicks ruining his nets, Cantarell has provided two-thirds of Mexico's oil production. While a well drilled onshore might typically yield a few hundred barrels per day, some Cantarell wells in the past would serve up gushers of as much as 50,000 barrels a day. That's one reason it costs just $4.20 a barrel to "lift," or pump, a barrel of oil in Mexico.
Today, though, the days of super-cheap, super-easy oil are over. Cantarell is near the end of its useful life, its production dropping 15% per year over the past few years. Today, a typical Cantarell well might produce around 8,000 barrels a day, Morales says, and the reservoir provides just 45% of Mexico's oil. The country's crude oil production peaked at 3.38 million barrels per day in 2004, but by March of this year had fallen to just 2.8 million. Mexico, which in 1999 had 25 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, neglected its exploration duties when oil was easy. Much of the country's drilling equipment became obsolete during years of low investment, Morales says. As a result, the country has just 14.7 billion proven barrels today.
Stepping Up Exploration
At current rates of consumption, that oil will last only 9.2 years, which means Mexico could stop exporting oil within a decade. "Unless something is done quickly to allow Pemex to operate more as a real oil company, and not as a bureaucratic state-run firm, it will become a marginal exporter in the very short run," says David Shields, a Mexico City-based energy analyst and author of two books on Pemex.
That would be a national disaster. The country's treasury relies on Pemex for nearly 40% of overall tax revenues, and oil exports, which in 2007 were worth $44.4 billion, account for around 10% of the country's export revenue. The government has known for years that Cantarell would start declining around now, but Finance Ministry officials ignored the entreaties of Pemex engineers to reduce the oil giant's tax burden so that it would have more funds for investment in exploration. Finally, in 2003, the message was heard.
So now, Morales is stepping up exploration efforts: Four years ago, Pemex spent just $200 million annually on exploration, and this year, it will spend 11 times that much. But Pemex needs more than money: It needs to tap foreign companies to find enough oil to reverse the downward slide.
Potential Reserves in the Gulf of Mexico
Already, oil-service companies such as Houston's Schlumberger (SLB) and Halliburton (HAL) and Irving (Tex.)-based Fluor (FLR) are heavily involved in the efforts (BusinessWeek, 1/3/08). They, along with other smaller service companies, drill two-thirds of Pemex's wells and conduct nearly all of the seismic work needed to locate oil reservoirs.
But Mexico's largest potential reserves are believed to be located in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, as much as 10,000 feet below the surface. Pemex does not have the technology or the expertise to go after that deepwater oil. Over the past five years, it has drilled six test wells in waters about 3,000 feet deep, finding some gas, but it needs the help of international oil companies, such as Brazil's Petrobras (PBR) or Norway's StatoilHydro (STO), to mount a concerted deepwater campaign.
However, Mexico's constitution, which declares that all oil belongs to the state, bars Pemex from signing conventional "risk" contracts with international oil majors that would compensate them in oil or cash for the amount of oil found. Representatives of oil companies in Mexico say it makes little sense for them to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in a joint venture with Pemex and lend their expertise if they would be unable to register proven reserves on their books, as they normally do.
Nationalized Oil a Sacred Cow
Even if the foreign companies were willing to join forces with Pemex under simple service contracts just to get their foot in Mexico's door, nationalist politicians would likely mount a legal challenge to their presence. Over the years, successive governments have interpreted the constitution very narrowly as barring all participation by private companies in exploration and production activities of any sort.
When Cárdenas nationalized the oil industry in 1938, kicking out American and British companies, thousands of Mexicans applauded, donating family jewelry and their hard-saved pesos to the government to help pay for the expropriation. Sixty years later, Pemex remains a sacred cow for most Mexicans, who view with suspicion any effort to expand the activities in which foreign oil companies are allowed to engage.
So Morales does what he can. "We just want to be able to work with them [the international oil companies] to do more of the work that we're already doing—to find and pump more oil," he says. Pemex has technical cooperation agreements with a handful of foreign oil companies, which has allowed Morales' team to learn more about directional drilling (i.e., drilling at angles and sideways through rocky formations, instead of drilling straight down, to aim directly at oil reservoirs) and deepwater formations.
Yearning for Joint Ventures
What do foreign oil companies get from the deal, apart from garnering goodwill and getting a rare inside glimpse into the way Pemex is run? Morales says they learn from Pemex about producing the heavy crude that Mexico is known for, and about working with oil flows under high pressure, at high temperature, and within the fractured rock formations typical of Mexico's geology.
Others are more skeptical that the technical cooperation is that significant. David Victor, who heads Stanford University's Program on Energy & Sustainable Development and is coordinating exhaustive studies of the world's leading state-run oil companies, including Pemex, believes the technology-sharing agreements are less about technology than they are about strategic posturing for the day when Mexico may be ready to work more readily with foreign oil majors. "The foreign oil companies don't know what the future is going to look like, so they're jostling for a place in line, to get some information and connections that might be useful in the future."
What Pemex would really like to do is form joint ventures with foreign oil companies to explore for deepwater oil so that its own engineers can learn the ropes. Last year, Brazil's Petrobras approached Pemex about forming a joint venture to drill for oil on the U.S. side of the Gulf of Mexico, and five other foreign companies have made similar offers, Morales says. Forming such partnerships overseas would allow Pemex to gain deepwater experience it could later apply at home. (Such offshore deals aren't unprecedented: In the 1990s, Pemex joined with the private sector in a successful oil exploration and production venture in Argentina, which it later sold. And, with Shell Oil, it jointly owns an oil refinery in Texas where much of the gasoline that Mexico imports is refined.) Morales says Pemex is currently studying the offers to see whether they make strategic sense. "We haven't made a decision yet; we're still evaluating those projects to see if they are better than projects we have here in Mexico," he says. Pemex is only barred from forming such joint ventures at home, where Mexican oil reserves are in play, he says.
Chicontepec Contracts
That may change if the energy reform now under consideration by Mexico's Senate is approved. For now, Morales' team is limited to working with the oilfield service contractors. Since last year, Schlumberger, Halliburton, and Fluor have won contracts (BusinessWeek.com, 4/15/08) to drill hundreds of onshore wells in southern Mexico, including a promising area called Chicontepec. Chicontepec is a complicated field, with dense rock structures that will make it necessary to drill some 15,000 wells, each of which may produce just a few hundred barrels of oil a day.
Pemex is relying on the oilfield service companies to do much of the work because they can deliver a well 20% faster than Pemex employees can, and with fewer operators, Morales says. "The faster we can start pumping the oil, the more quickly the revenues start flowing." That is key to maintaining Mexico's status as one of the world's top oil producers—and exporters.
+++++++++++
my comment on that,...
Despite agreeing in some points with Geri Smith, I would say that the problems Pemex has, have little to do with it being state owned. It is suggested in the article that in order to modernize Pemex ought to go private, or at least partner with private firms. Further, it is also implied that those firms ought to be foreign.
Perhaps our sense of history is rather short or rather fuzzy and we need to revisit again and again. To begin with, prior to Oil industry nationalisation those foreign firms used to run the show, and it was a bad one. We have to remember that working conditions nearly reach slavery point. This would not be a surprise for a third world country as Mexico, but it certainly would for a leading industry regardless of localization.
Next, in more recent years, Mexico privatised thousands of firms, and yet it is not clear whether that action was of any benefit for the country. The most notorious example is Telmex. That used to be an unproductive state monopoly, now a days is an unproductive private monopoly and to make matters worse, a very expensive one as well.
It is also urged Pemex to increase production. The big question is why should it do so? Is it a matter of oil shortage for Mexicans or for the developed world? I strongly believe that those facing supply problems are not Mexicans but those foreign firms. In UK for example shortage of petrol has started to threat to overheat the economy. Canada and the US are not so different stories. We just need to look at how barrel prices grow responding to less resource.
Economic theory says that market forces would move prices up when supply goes down, and in this case it fully applies. Then it all comes to the problem of where you stand. If you are on the demand side, of course you need to urge producers to get productive, no matter what. If you stand on the supply side, wouldn’t it be better to take advantage of peaking prices?
However I agree in that Pemex operates inefficiently and with high levels of corruption. But, tackling inefficiency is a matter of reorganising management and not of whether it is a private or state firm. Norwegian state oil company is a good example of professional management.
As for corruption, I would only point out that those in pemex who desperately argue for privatisation are the ones who have been accused of benefiting from Pemex’s corruption. Labastida Ochoa is one of them, and the nearly 2,000 millions that came round to pay for his presidential campaign. Camilo Mouriño and his empire of gasoline in southern Mexico is another. He has been accused of abusing office, and he started in the ministry of energy where he did good contracts benefiting his family enterprises.
Overall I think that the urgency for privatise has little to do with Mexican’s interest and more to do with the big companies, corrupt politicians in Mexico, and some ‘free market fundamentalists’. The question is why should Mexicans sell off the enterprise that has given them the resources to accomplish whatever little development they have?
fortunately for Mexicans there is a HUGE social movement in defence of Mexican oil. Next photo is the first page of 'la jornada' who reported about the demonstration against privatisation of Pemex,...this sunday 27.
As production declines, state-run Pemex struggles to find new reserves under daunting restrictions on foreign involvement
by Geri Smith
Carlos Morales Gil, head of exploration and production for Petróleos Mexicanos, or Pemex, Mexico's state oil company, is sunburned. But it's not because of his frequent visits to offshore oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico; that out-in-the-sun-too-long look is from a weekend spent in a dusty ring, waving a red cape in front of raging 550-pound bulls.
Morales' passion for amateur bullfighting may come in handy in his day job, where he commands thousands of engineers and roughnecks attempting to coax oil from Mexico's complex onshore fields and from thousands of feet below the ocean floor. Like his bosses at Pemex, the world's sixth-largest oil producer, Morales needs grit and fancy footwork to keep the oil flowing in spite of the many restrictions placed on the company by nationalist politicians determined to keep foreign oil companies from partnering with Pemex.
As Mexico's Congress prepares to debate an ambitious energy reform (BusinessWeek, 4/24/08) aimed at modernizing Pemex so that it can stem a precipitous drop in the country's oil production, engineers such as Morales are racing to drill as many wells as possible to discover new reserves. Last year, Pemex drilled 700 wells; this year, around 900 will be completed. "Not many oil companies in the world do that," says the 54-year-old Pemex veteran.
The Days of Easy Oil Are Over
For decades, Mexico has been the world's leading producer of oil from shallow waters, thanks to its Cantarell field in the Gulf of Mexico. Cantarell is the world's second-largest "super-giant" field. Since it was discovered in the mid 1970s, after a local fisherman complained to authorities about oil slicks ruining his nets, Cantarell has provided two-thirds of Mexico's oil production. While a well drilled onshore might typically yield a few hundred barrels per day, some Cantarell wells in the past would serve up gushers of as much as 50,000 barrels a day. That's one reason it costs just $4.20 a barrel to "lift," or pump, a barrel of oil in Mexico.
Today, though, the days of super-cheap, super-easy oil are over. Cantarell is near the end of its useful life, its production dropping 15% per year over the past few years. Today, a typical Cantarell well might produce around 8,000 barrels a day, Morales says, and the reservoir provides just 45% of Mexico's oil. The country's crude oil production peaked at 3.38 million barrels per day in 2004, but by March of this year had fallen to just 2.8 million. Mexico, which in 1999 had 25 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, neglected its exploration duties when oil was easy. Much of the country's drilling equipment became obsolete during years of low investment, Morales says. As a result, the country has just 14.7 billion proven barrels today.
Stepping Up Exploration
At current rates of consumption, that oil will last only 9.2 years, which means Mexico could stop exporting oil within a decade. "Unless something is done quickly to allow Pemex to operate more as a real oil company, and not as a bureaucratic state-run firm, it will become a marginal exporter in the very short run," says David Shields, a Mexico City-based energy analyst and author of two books on Pemex.
That would be a national disaster. The country's treasury relies on Pemex for nearly 40% of overall tax revenues, and oil exports, which in 2007 were worth $44.4 billion, account for around 10% of the country's export revenue. The government has known for years that Cantarell would start declining around now, but Finance Ministry officials ignored the entreaties of Pemex engineers to reduce the oil giant's tax burden so that it would have more funds for investment in exploration. Finally, in 2003, the message was heard.
So now, Morales is stepping up exploration efforts: Four years ago, Pemex spent just $200 million annually on exploration, and this year, it will spend 11 times that much. But Pemex needs more than money: It needs to tap foreign companies to find enough oil to reverse the downward slide.
Potential Reserves in the Gulf of Mexico
Already, oil-service companies such as Houston's Schlumberger (SLB) and Halliburton (HAL) and Irving (Tex.)-based Fluor (FLR) are heavily involved in the efforts (BusinessWeek, 1/3/08). They, along with other smaller service companies, drill two-thirds of Pemex's wells and conduct nearly all of the seismic work needed to locate oil reservoirs.
But Mexico's largest potential reserves are believed to be located in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, as much as 10,000 feet below the surface. Pemex does not have the technology or the expertise to go after that deepwater oil. Over the past five years, it has drilled six test wells in waters about 3,000 feet deep, finding some gas, but it needs the help of international oil companies, such as Brazil's Petrobras (PBR) or Norway's StatoilHydro (STO), to mount a concerted deepwater campaign.
However, Mexico's constitution, which declares that all oil belongs to the state, bars Pemex from signing conventional "risk" contracts with international oil majors that would compensate them in oil or cash for the amount of oil found. Representatives of oil companies in Mexico say it makes little sense for them to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in a joint venture with Pemex and lend their expertise if they would be unable to register proven reserves on their books, as they normally do.
Nationalized Oil a Sacred Cow
Even if the foreign companies were willing to join forces with Pemex under simple service contracts just to get their foot in Mexico's door, nationalist politicians would likely mount a legal challenge to their presence. Over the years, successive governments have interpreted the constitution very narrowly as barring all participation by private companies in exploration and production activities of any sort.
When Cárdenas nationalized the oil industry in 1938, kicking out American and British companies, thousands of Mexicans applauded, donating family jewelry and their hard-saved pesos to the government to help pay for the expropriation. Sixty years later, Pemex remains a sacred cow for most Mexicans, who view with suspicion any effort to expand the activities in which foreign oil companies are allowed to engage.
So Morales does what he can. "We just want to be able to work with them [the international oil companies] to do more of the work that we're already doing—to find and pump more oil," he says. Pemex has technical cooperation agreements with a handful of foreign oil companies, which has allowed Morales' team to learn more about directional drilling (i.e., drilling at angles and sideways through rocky formations, instead of drilling straight down, to aim directly at oil reservoirs) and deepwater formations.
Yearning for Joint Ventures
What do foreign oil companies get from the deal, apart from garnering goodwill and getting a rare inside glimpse into the way Pemex is run? Morales says they learn from Pemex about producing the heavy crude that Mexico is known for, and about working with oil flows under high pressure, at high temperature, and within the fractured rock formations typical of Mexico's geology.
Others are more skeptical that the technical cooperation is that significant. David Victor, who heads Stanford University's Program on Energy & Sustainable Development and is coordinating exhaustive studies of the world's leading state-run oil companies, including Pemex, believes the technology-sharing agreements are less about technology than they are about strategic posturing for the day when Mexico may be ready to work more readily with foreign oil majors. "The foreign oil companies don't know what the future is going to look like, so they're jostling for a place in line, to get some information and connections that might be useful in the future."
What Pemex would really like to do is form joint ventures with foreign oil companies to explore for deepwater oil so that its own engineers can learn the ropes. Last year, Brazil's Petrobras approached Pemex about forming a joint venture to drill for oil on the U.S. side of the Gulf of Mexico, and five other foreign companies have made similar offers, Morales says. Forming such partnerships overseas would allow Pemex to gain deepwater experience it could later apply at home. (Such offshore deals aren't unprecedented: In the 1990s, Pemex joined with the private sector in a successful oil exploration and production venture in Argentina, which it later sold. And, with Shell Oil, it jointly owns an oil refinery in Texas where much of the gasoline that Mexico imports is refined.) Morales says Pemex is currently studying the offers to see whether they make strategic sense. "We haven't made a decision yet; we're still evaluating those projects to see if they are better than projects we have here in Mexico," he says. Pemex is only barred from forming such joint ventures at home, where Mexican oil reserves are in play, he says.
Chicontepec Contracts
That may change if the energy reform now under consideration by Mexico's Senate is approved. For now, Morales' team is limited to working with the oilfield service contractors. Since last year, Schlumberger, Halliburton, and Fluor have won contracts (BusinessWeek.com, 4/15/08) to drill hundreds of onshore wells in southern Mexico, including a promising area called Chicontepec. Chicontepec is a complicated field, with dense rock structures that will make it necessary to drill some 15,000 wells, each of which may produce just a few hundred barrels of oil a day.
Pemex is relying on the oilfield service companies to do much of the work because they can deliver a well 20% faster than Pemex employees can, and with fewer operators, Morales says. "The faster we can start pumping the oil, the more quickly the revenues start flowing." That is key to maintaining Mexico's status as one of the world's top oil producers—and exporters.
+++++++++++
my comment on that,...
Despite agreeing in some points with Geri Smith, I would say that the problems Pemex has, have little to do with it being state owned. It is suggested in the article that in order to modernize Pemex ought to go private, or at least partner with private firms. Further, it is also implied that those firms ought to be foreign.
Perhaps our sense of history is rather short or rather fuzzy and we need to revisit again and again. To begin with, prior to Oil industry nationalisation those foreign firms used to run the show, and it was a bad one. We have to remember that working conditions nearly reach slavery point. This would not be a surprise for a third world country as Mexico, but it certainly would for a leading industry regardless of localization.
Next, in more recent years, Mexico privatised thousands of firms, and yet it is not clear whether that action was of any benefit for the country. The most notorious example is Telmex. That used to be an unproductive state monopoly, now a days is an unproductive private monopoly and to make matters worse, a very expensive one as well.
It is also urged Pemex to increase production. The big question is why should it do so? Is it a matter of oil shortage for Mexicans or for the developed world? I strongly believe that those facing supply problems are not Mexicans but those foreign firms. In UK for example shortage of petrol has started to threat to overheat the economy. Canada and the US are not so different stories. We just need to look at how barrel prices grow responding to less resource.
Economic theory says that market forces would move prices up when supply goes down, and in this case it fully applies. Then it all comes to the problem of where you stand. If you are on the demand side, of course you need to urge producers to get productive, no matter what. If you stand on the supply side, wouldn’t it be better to take advantage of peaking prices?
However I agree in that Pemex operates inefficiently and with high levels of corruption. But, tackling inefficiency is a matter of reorganising management and not of whether it is a private or state firm. Norwegian state oil company is a good example of professional management.
As for corruption, I would only point out that those in pemex who desperately argue for privatisation are the ones who have been accused of benefiting from Pemex’s corruption. Labastida Ochoa is one of them, and the nearly 2,000 millions that came round to pay for his presidential campaign. Camilo Mouriño and his empire of gasoline in southern Mexico is another. He has been accused of abusing office, and he started in the ministry of energy where he did good contracts benefiting his family enterprises.
Overall I think that the urgency for privatise has little to do with Mexican’s interest and more to do with the big companies, corrupt politicians in Mexico, and some ‘free market fundamentalists’. The question is why should Mexicans sell off the enterprise that has given them the resources to accomplish whatever little development they have?
fortunately for Mexicans there is a HUGE social movement in defence of Mexican oil. Next photo is the first page of 'la jornada' who reported about the demonstration against privatisation of Pemex,...this sunday 27.
Once in the demonstration people expressed their feelings about Felipe Calderon, who is proposing to sell off Pemex,... well he is identified as a traitor to Mexican interests. In the picture below he is hanged by the "beep ".......
Saturday, April 26, 2008
Las adelitas,... frontline women defending Mexican petroleum
Next is a report from the financial times about 'las adelitas' who are groups of women preventing a piece of legislation going through and by doing this they defend Mexican Petroleum Company from being privatised.
In fact, the thousands of people actively demonstrating and blocking access to the senate were divided by gender,… so women equal to ‘Adelitas’ and men to ‘Juanes’. The name Adelita is very popular in Mexico and during the revolution of 1910 a story developed between a high ranking military and a ‘soldadera’ whose name was Adela, or ‘Adelita’ (little Adela) by custom.
There is actually a popular song that lasted to these days. It depicts the story of Adela. The jealousy of the military who by just thinking about the possibility of her running away with somebody else makes up stories as to how he would chase her up (or rather follow her up).
That figure is serving as symbol for women following the struggle to stop the selling off Mexicans energy firms such as PEMEX (oil) and CFE (electricity). It brings a sort of unity and romanticism.
Comment by wet_ahuizote
******
Mexico’s women thrust on to frontline
By Adam Thomson in Mexico City
Published: April 23 2008 03:47 Last updated: April 23 2008 03:47
Angeles Sánchez, a grandmother with peroxide-blonde hair, has two bullet belts slung across her chest, the stock of a wooden rifle resting against her shoulder and, like hundreds of other women gathered with her, she is dressed all in white.
“For our sons and daughters,” she shouts from a busy street corner of Mexico City’s historic centre in protest at the government’s plans to reform the country’s ailing oil industry. “For our country,” she cries still louder. “They are not going to take our oil.”
In normal times, the police standing just a few yards away would be made up of men. Today, though, the authorities have deployed about 100 policewomen, most with heavy make-up and hair pulled tight into a bun. Some are even wearing riot gear in case trouble breaks out.
In the few days since the conservative administration of Felipe Calderón presented Congress with a bill to allow greater private-sector participation in the country’s nationalised oil industry, women have assumed an increasingly visible role in one of the most divisive issues in Mexican politics.
Virginia Jaramillo, a housewife and one of the organisers of the women’s protest, believes such a high female profile is a clear sign of how much things have changed in a country often more associated with moustaches and a macho, tequila-drinking culture than with women’s liberation.
“We have come a long way in the last generation or two,” she says.
In many ways, she is right. For a start, women are far more involved in politics than they used to be. Of the 500 seats in the lower house of Congress, 117 are held by women. Twenty years ago, women held just six.
Women are also gaining ground economically – albeit more slowly. In 2004, the most recent year for which official statistics are available, there were 54 women in the labour force for every 100 men. In 1995, there were only 48.
There are other signs. Mexico City’s government last year passed legislation allowing women to seek abortions. This month, it proposed drastically simplifying divorce proceedings and, before long, the city’s private and public universities will have to provide students with free condoms.
Even Bonifacio Florín, a Mariachi (musician) wearing a tight black suit, white cravat and a large silver buckle with a horse’s head and a lasso, believes things have progressed.
“My parents gave us boys far more opportunities to go to school than my sisters ever got,” says the rugged-looking violinist. “Nowadays, girls get pretty much the same treatment.”
But Adriana Ortiz Ortega, an academic at the College of Mexico in the capital, argues that while Mexican women have more economic and political power than before, it would be a mistake to see the anti-energy reform movement as evidence of their further political and social empowerment.
One reason is that today’s protest movement is simply another example in a long tradition of women organising social movements in Mexico. Angeles Sánchez and her fellow female protesters have even dubbed themselves the Adelitas after the legendary white-robed female fighters of the 1910 Mexican Revolution. Perhaps more important, says Ms Ortiz Ortega, is the fact that men, particularly Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the leftwing runner-up in the 2006 presidential election, are masterminding the movement in spite of the growing presence of women protesters in the streets – about 20,000, according to the organisers.
“Women are incorporating themselves into the public sphere but they are also bowing to the male agenda,” says Ms Ortiz Ortega. “López Obrador is playing with the gender image to get the idea across that the government’s proposed reform risks affecting the most vulnerable within our society.”
In Mexico City’s historic centre, one of the policewomen agrees. Reluctant to give her name, the officer says the use of women to head the street campaign is a ruse. “It’s a political strategy to make the protesters look more peaceful,” she says. Then, after a moment’s thought, she adds: “But at least it gets us noticed.”
In fact, the thousands of people actively demonstrating and blocking access to the senate were divided by gender,… so women equal to ‘Adelitas’ and men to ‘Juanes’. The name Adelita is very popular in Mexico and during the revolution of 1910 a story developed between a high ranking military and a ‘soldadera’ whose name was Adela, or ‘Adelita’ (little Adela) by custom.
There is actually a popular song that lasted to these days. It depicts the story of Adela. The jealousy of the military who by just thinking about the possibility of her running away with somebody else makes up stories as to how he would chase her up (or rather follow her up).
That figure is serving as symbol for women following the struggle to stop the selling off Mexicans energy firms such as PEMEX (oil) and CFE (electricity). It brings a sort of unity and romanticism.
Comment by wet_ahuizote
******
Mexico’s women thrust on to frontline
By Adam Thomson in Mexico City
Published: April 23 2008 03:47 Last updated: April 23 2008 03:47
Angeles Sánchez, a grandmother with peroxide-blonde hair, has two bullet belts slung across her chest, the stock of a wooden rifle resting against her shoulder and, like hundreds of other women gathered with her, she is dressed all in white.
“For our sons and daughters,” she shouts from a busy street corner of Mexico City’s historic centre in protest at the government’s plans to reform the country’s ailing oil industry. “For our country,” she cries still louder. “They are not going to take our oil.”
In normal times, the police standing just a few yards away would be made up of men. Today, though, the authorities have deployed about 100 policewomen, most with heavy make-up and hair pulled tight into a bun. Some are even wearing riot gear in case trouble breaks out.
In the few days since the conservative administration of Felipe Calderón presented Congress with a bill to allow greater private-sector participation in the country’s nationalised oil industry, women have assumed an increasingly visible role in one of the most divisive issues in Mexican politics.
Virginia Jaramillo, a housewife and one of the organisers of the women’s protest, believes such a high female profile is a clear sign of how much things have changed in a country often more associated with moustaches and a macho, tequila-drinking culture than with women’s liberation.
“We have come a long way in the last generation or two,” she says.
In many ways, she is right. For a start, women are far more involved in politics than they used to be. Of the 500 seats in the lower house of Congress, 117 are held by women. Twenty years ago, women held just six.
Women are also gaining ground economically – albeit more slowly. In 2004, the most recent year for which official statistics are available, there were 54 women in the labour force for every 100 men. In 1995, there were only 48.
There are other signs. Mexico City’s government last year passed legislation allowing women to seek abortions. This month, it proposed drastically simplifying divorce proceedings and, before long, the city’s private and public universities will have to provide students with free condoms.
Even Bonifacio Florín, a Mariachi (musician) wearing a tight black suit, white cravat and a large silver buckle with a horse’s head and a lasso, believes things have progressed.
“My parents gave us boys far more opportunities to go to school than my sisters ever got,” says the rugged-looking violinist. “Nowadays, girls get pretty much the same treatment.”
But Adriana Ortiz Ortega, an academic at the College of Mexico in the capital, argues that while Mexican women have more economic and political power than before, it would be a mistake to see the anti-energy reform movement as evidence of their further political and social empowerment.
One reason is that today’s protest movement is simply another example in a long tradition of women organising social movements in Mexico. Angeles Sánchez and her fellow female protesters have even dubbed themselves the Adelitas after the legendary white-robed female fighters of the 1910 Mexican Revolution. Perhaps more important, says Ms Ortiz Ortega, is the fact that men, particularly Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the leftwing runner-up in the 2006 presidential election, are masterminding the movement in spite of the growing presence of women protesters in the streets – about 20,000, according to the organisers.
“Women are incorporating themselves into the public sphere but they are also bowing to the male agenda,” says Ms Ortiz Ortega. “López Obrador is playing with the gender image to get the idea across that the government’s proposed reform risks affecting the most vulnerable within our society.”
In Mexico City’s historic centre, one of the policewomen agrees. Reluctant to give her name, the officer says the use of women to head the street campaign is a ruse. “It’s a political strategy to make the protesters look more peaceful,” she says. Then, after a moment’s thought, she adds: “But at least it gets us noticed.”
Friday, April 25, 2008
Oil shortage,... it has started!!!, El petroleo se acaba y puede causar crisis economica,... para quien?
Hoy me econtre con la noticia de que EFECTIVAMENTE el petroleo se esta acabando y TAMBIEN que eso va a tener varios efectos en el corto plazo en la economia: primero, la obligada alza a los precios de la gasolina, gas, y casi todos los precios en la economia,... segundo, y quizas el mas importante es que se impacta en el bienestar de los hogares. Entendiendo como bienestar a la capacidad de gasto que les permite su nivel de ingreso y que al tener que gastar mas en gasolina, gas y demas necesariamente tendran menores recursos para comprar comida. Como siempre, los mas pobres son los mas afectados.
Efectivamente, el petroleo se acaba y ya hay algunas estaciones de gasolina que se han quedado sin liquido. El problema es que esto sucede en Inglaterra, y no en Mexico. Desde luego que para los ingleses y otros paises industrializados el problema ya llego.
A diferencia de Mexico, las companias petroleras son todas privadas. Todas tiene cadenas de distribucion a lo largo y ancho del pais y en teoria podrian competir sin ningun impedimiento. Esto en teoria economica seria una condicion suficiente para presionar los precios a la baja. En tanto que mas competencia hay, menores precios habria.
Sin embargo esto no sucede, parte porque el petroleo es un recurso finito, y parte porque las estructuras de costos son muy elevadas. El petroleo es un recurso no renovable, pero,.. que recurso es renovable? el aire, el agua. NO, cada vez es mas claro que ningun recurso es completamente renovable, el agua que hace anhos se creia un bien libre resulta ser un bien muy escaso en estos dias. Tal vez, el agua no es facilmente apropiable, de ahi que sea tan dificil privatizarla.
Sera que Felipe Calderon con su iniciativa de reforma esta solo obedeciendo ordenes? sera que esas ordenes son que deje entrar a las companhias privadas, aumentar la produccion y con ello evitar una crisis mayor en los paises desarrollados? o sera que nadie le da ordenes y el entregismo le sale de manera natural?
seria interesante saber, ... no?
Bueno ahi va la nota con la historia de la tragedia que ya enfrentan los paises desarrollados por la falta de petroleo. Creo, sin ser estratega, que un los paises en vias de desarrollo tendrian ahi una inmensa oportunidad para reposicionarse en el contexto politico internacional usando el petroleo. Putin ya lo hizo usando el gas.
Lo unico que nos falta, por lo menos a los mexicanos, son politicos con un poco de sentido comun y si acaso fuera posible un poco de interes por que sus propios paises se desarrollen.
Comment by Wet_ahuizote
***********
From Times OnlineApril 25, 2008
Petrol stations run dry ahead of Grangemouth refinery strike
Robin Pagnamenta and Angela Jameson
Petrol stations in Scotland have already started to run dry despite Government appeals for motorists not to panic-buy ahead of an imminent strike at Grangemouth, the country's biggest oil refinery stationed near Edinburgh.
Several filling stations in Edinburgh had just two or three pumps open, with queues two or three cars deep, as customers reportedly stockpiled fuel by filling up jerry cans before paying.
At least one, the Canonmills service station, was closed, with the forecourt taped off while a Shell garage on Ferry Road, was only selling LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) with no petrol or diesel. An Esso petrol station on Willowbrae Road and a Shell garage on Glasgow Road were both out of diesel.
Malcolm Wicks, the Energy Minister, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme this morning that petrol supplies across the UK should not be a problem, but he acknowledged that some motorists could be hit by shortages at certain forecourts.
“I cannot guarantee that every garage forecourt will have petrol at that precise moment," he said.
"I hope the vast majority of people are sensible about this. They might have to be patient. People will have to be sensible and rational."
The 48-hour strike at Grangemouth, which is owned by Ineos, the UK chemicals group, is expected to go-ahead on Sunday as 1,200 workers prepare to walk out in a dispute over pensions.
However, the Forties pipeline system, which pumps crude oil from the North Sea, is set to shut down tonight.
A spokesman for BP, which operates the pipeline, said that it expected the pipeline to close before power from Grangemouth was switched off late on Saturday, ahead of the strike.
Up to 50 North Sea oilfields may have to cease production when the main Forties system closes down tonight.
The pipeline supplies 700,000 barrels of oil a day, equivalent to 20 per cent of North Sea oil production, and the shutdown will cost the UK's economy about £50 million a day, including about £25 million a day in revenues to the Exchequer.
Oil prices have fallen this morning despite continuing supply concerns in the face of the planned strike at the 200,000 barrel per day refinery.
London Brent crude for June delivery was down $1.71 at $112.63.
Ed Meir, an MF Global analyst, said that the strike was potentially very serious for the industry. “We believe that there will be tremendous pressure on the two sides to settle," he said.
John Hutton, Business Secretary, told MPs yesterday that fuel stocks and imports should be sufficient to maintain supplies during the strike.
Steam and electricity from the Grangemouth refinery are essential to operations at the nearby Kinneil processing plant, where crude oil from the Forties pipeline is stabilised by removing sulphur and extracting gas.
Unless Ineos can supply basic utilities to Kinneil to keep it running, oil and gas production from the Forties sector of the North Sea is likely to halt within 24 hours.
Tony Woodley, the general secretary of the Unite union, which represents Grangemouth workers, has indicated that the strike could escalate.
Mr Woodley will address a mass meeting of workers at Grangemouth today.
He has said that after the two-day strike there will be a pause, but he said that if the company remained intransigent then an escalation of the dispute was inevitable.
Unite has indicated that it will begin a work-to-rule after the dispute, which could cause long-term problems for the 24 hour a day, seven day a week operation run by Ineos.
“We understand the seriousness of the situation," Mr Woodley said. "It is extremely serious — that is why Unite has been behaving responsibly.
"We have made sure the plant and equipment is in a state to start up extremely quickly and we have made sure there is emergency cover for the emergency services.”
He has accused Ineos of “going through the motions” during the two days of peace talks this week at Acas.
Efectivamente, el petroleo se acaba y ya hay algunas estaciones de gasolina que se han quedado sin liquido. El problema es que esto sucede en Inglaterra, y no en Mexico. Desde luego que para los ingleses y otros paises industrializados el problema ya llego.
A diferencia de Mexico, las companias petroleras son todas privadas. Todas tiene cadenas de distribucion a lo largo y ancho del pais y en teoria podrian competir sin ningun impedimiento. Esto en teoria economica seria una condicion suficiente para presionar los precios a la baja. En tanto que mas competencia hay, menores precios habria.
Sin embargo esto no sucede, parte porque el petroleo es un recurso finito, y parte porque las estructuras de costos son muy elevadas. El petroleo es un recurso no renovable, pero,.. que recurso es renovable? el aire, el agua. NO, cada vez es mas claro que ningun recurso es completamente renovable, el agua que hace anhos se creia un bien libre resulta ser un bien muy escaso en estos dias. Tal vez, el agua no es facilmente apropiable, de ahi que sea tan dificil privatizarla.
Sera que Felipe Calderon con su iniciativa de reforma esta solo obedeciendo ordenes? sera que esas ordenes son que deje entrar a las companhias privadas, aumentar la produccion y con ello evitar una crisis mayor en los paises desarrollados? o sera que nadie le da ordenes y el entregismo le sale de manera natural?
seria interesante saber, ... no?
Bueno ahi va la nota con la historia de la tragedia que ya enfrentan los paises desarrollados por la falta de petroleo. Creo, sin ser estratega, que un los paises en vias de desarrollo tendrian ahi una inmensa oportunidad para reposicionarse en el contexto politico internacional usando el petroleo. Putin ya lo hizo usando el gas.
Lo unico que nos falta, por lo menos a los mexicanos, son politicos con un poco de sentido comun y si acaso fuera posible un poco de interes por que sus propios paises se desarrollen.
Comment by Wet_ahuizote
***********
From Times OnlineApril 25, 2008
Petrol stations run dry ahead of Grangemouth refinery strike
Robin Pagnamenta and Angela Jameson
Petrol stations in Scotland have already started to run dry despite Government appeals for motorists not to panic-buy ahead of an imminent strike at Grangemouth, the country's biggest oil refinery stationed near Edinburgh.
Several filling stations in Edinburgh had just two or three pumps open, with queues two or three cars deep, as customers reportedly stockpiled fuel by filling up jerry cans before paying.
At least one, the Canonmills service station, was closed, with the forecourt taped off while a Shell garage on Ferry Road, was only selling LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) with no petrol or diesel. An Esso petrol station on Willowbrae Road and a Shell garage on Glasgow Road were both out of diesel.
Malcolm Wicks, the Energy Minister, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme this morning that petrol supplies across the UK should not be a problem, but he acknowledged that some motorists could be hit by shortages at certain forecourts.
“I cannot guarantee that every garage forecourt will have petrol at that precise moment," he said.
"I hope the vast majority of people are sensible about this. They might have to be patient. People will have to be sensible and rational."
The 48-hour strike at Grangemouth, which is owned by Ineos, the UK chemicals group, is expected to go-ahead on Sunday as 1,200 workers prepare to walk out in a dispute over pensions.
However, the Forties pipeline system, which pumps crude oil from the North Sea, is set to shut down tonight.
A spokesman for BP, which operates the pipeline, said that it expected the pipeline to close before power from Grangemouth was switched off late on Saturday, ahead of the strike.
Up to 50 North Sea oilfields may have to cease production when the main Forties system closes down tonight.
The pipeline supplies 700,000 barrels of oil a day, equivalent to 20 per cent of North Sea oil production, and the shutdown will cost the UK's economy about £50 million a day, including about £25 million a day in revenues to the Exchequer.
Oil prices have fallen this morning despite continuing supply concerns in the face of the planned strike at the 200,000 barrel per day refinery.
London Brent crude for June delivery was down $1.71 at $112.63.
Ed Meir, an MF Global analyst, said that the strike was potentially very serious for the industry. “We believe that there will be tremendous pressure on the two sides to settle," he said.
John Hutton, Business Secretary, told MPs yesterday that fuel stocks and imports should be sufficient to maintain supplies during the strike.
Steam and electricity from the Grangemouth refinery are essential to operations at the nearby Kinneil processing plant, where crude oil from the Forties pipeline is stabilised by removing sulphur and extracting gas.
Unless Ineos can supply basic utilities to Kinneil to keep it running, oil and gas production from the Forties sector of the North Sea is likely to halt within 24 hours.
Tony Woodley, the general secretary of the Unite union, which represents Grangemouth workers, has indicated that the strike could escalate.
Mr Woodley will address a mass meeting of workers at Grangemouth today.
He has said that after the two-day strike there will be a pause, but he said that if the company remained intransigent then an escalation of the dispute was inevitable.
Unite has indicated that it will begin a work-to-rule after the dispute, which could cause long-term problems for the 24 hour a day, seven day a week operation run by Ineos.
“We understand the seriousness of the situation," Mr Woodley said. "It is extremely serious — that is why Unite has been behaving responsibly.
"We have made sure the plant and equipment is in a state to start up extremely quickly and we have made sure there is emergency cover for the emergency services.”
He has accused Ineos of “going through the motions” during the two days of peace talks this week at Acas.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Flavio Sosa is free,... and is back on the struggle
Again next post is from my friend Frida, who has been covering Oaxaca situation right from the beggining.
The post is about the liberation o Flavio Sosa, who spent good 16 months in prison and in the end it was judged that 'there was no legal reason to keep him in',...
It shows how Mexican 'justice' works,.. always in favour of the powerful. Some could argue that,.. well after all he is free now,.. but the thing is why such a punishment not only to Flavio, but to his entire family, and but entire I mean extended. Both his brothers were also arrested and jailed his grandfather was harassed and even relatives and frends. In fact, anything related to him, or to APPO, was and still is prosecuted for no legal reasons.
But I am glad he is free now, and more importantly, I am happy he has the energy and courage to continue fighting Ulises and his gang of corrupts assassins.
---
FLAVIO primera y segunda parte
domingo 20 de abril de 2008
FLAVIO
La llegada de nuestro entonces medio fue con radioamlo, después de estar informándonos por medio de radio universidad de lo que sucedía en Oaxaca después de la fuerte represión del 14 de junio del 2006, tras escuchar durante varios meses lo que pasaba, después de hablar en varias ocasiones con diferentes actores dentro de "Vayamos a radio universidad" decía nuestro compañero Octavio, quien había sido nuestro corresponsal en el estado, y" entrevistamos a la Dra. Escopeta", en medio de la sorpresa, el dolor de ver partida a Oaxaca, pero sobre todo el orgullo de ser mexicana por ver la valentía con la que esta gente defendía su lugar de origen nos trasladamos a la Universidad, en medio de toda esa dignidad representada en cada una de las personas que veía….
Y entonces se dio finalmente vimos al tan nombrado Flavio Sosa, entre gritos de "SÍ, SE PUDO" y sobre todo organización tuvimos de frente el triunfo de Oaxaca y su gente maravillosa.El primer contacto con Flavio fue ese, en aquella tan nombrada barricada de cinco señores, sin realmente tenerlo cerca solo lo vimos, festejando aquel histórico "viernes de la victoria de todos los santos".
Horas mas tarde y después de un pequeño desmayo por los gases y una atención rápida por parte de los paramédicos que apoyaban a esta lucha lo encontramos de casualidad en Santo Domingo,-Hola Flavio- ¿nos regalas una entrevista? Fueron las palabras de mi compañero Octavio hacía este enorme hombre junto al cual me sentía chiquitita, físicamente, mis 49 kilos y mi 1.60 de estatura no se comparaban con la anatomía de este hombre.
Mis compañeros realizaron la entrevista Javier y Octavio, Gerardo grababa y yo solo observaba, tratando de ver más allá de todo lo que decía Flavio más allá del personaje.Fuera de todo lo que se pueda decir de este hombre, que si apoyo a "Fox", que si es poder lo que buscaba…Encontré una persona que realmente quería ir mas allá del simple poder
…
Después de dos días mis compañeros tuvieron que regresar a su vida cotidiana.. Difícil de entender eso significaba qué yo no tenía vida ¿? No más bien que tenía la oportunidad maravillosa de quedarme en Oaxaca y ver muy de cerca lo que pasaba, después de la noche en la cual Oaxaca ardió en aquel 25 de noviembre de 2006, el 29 de noviembre salen de Oaxaca todos aquellos miembros visibles de la APPO y radio universidad, aquellos que en "radiociudadana" fueron tachados de peligro para Oaxaca e incitaban en esta radio ¿? a la sociedad Oaxaqueña a que fueran a sus casas y las quemaran, o que donde los vieran los lastimaran. Entre ellos Flavio Sosa, quien fuera detenido y exhibido el 4 de diciembre de 2006 como si se tratase de un criminal de alta peligrosidad, ¿qué es lo peligroso? ¿La conciencia?, fue la última vez que lo vi por la televisión un Flavio sorprendido pero a la vez consciente de lo que estaba pasando, primera parte
SEGUNDA PARTE DE FLAVIO....
Hace un par de semanas después de muchas ganas de ir a visitarlo, al penal de Cuicatlan después de haber estado preso en el penal de máxima seguridad del Altiplano, antes La Palma, en Almoloya de Juárez, estado de México, a petición del gobernador del Oaxaca, Ulises Ruiz, quien lo consideraba "delincuente de alta peligrosidad". Lugar en el estuvo por espacio de ocho meses sometido a eso a vivir como un "delincuente", para su familia y amigos era doloroso ir a verlo, primeramente por la situación deplorable en el que mantenían a Flavio en ese lugar bajo condiciones de lamentables, la revisión como un día e comentaba una de las tantas personas que le visitaron en ese lugar "era humillante, desvestirte para revisarte", "muchas veces me hacían esperar minutos que se hacían insoportables sin ropa", "no podía pasarle nada que ellos no revisaban minuciosamente"
Después de esos meses es trasladado Flavio al penal de Cuicatlan, bajo todo un operativo igual de escoltado que aquel en el que lo exhibieron como el más alto delincuente que había en el país.
Finalmente el 5 de abril hace tres semanas pude llegar a verlo, mi primera impresión al ver que no me dejaban entrar al interior del penal fue de sorpresa, -¿No traía su credencial de elector? ¿Dónde vive? ¿Dónde trabaja? ¿Qué es de usted? "deme una credencial para saber quién es usted", "déjeme ver si la puedo dejar pasar" , una hora, para que se me dijera "mmmm solo la dejo para que no se vaya sin saludarlo" "ehh la próxima vez si no traía su credencial no pasa" "y solo diez minutos," "salga sola sin que tenga que ir por usted" , cuando finalmente me dicen estas palabras me indican anotarme en una libreta exclusiva para Flavio, después en otra y minutos después me pasan a revisión, no sufrí el que me desvistieran, lo que si es que se aseguraron de que no trajera ni una pluma en mi ropa, después de la sorpresa pase al enojo de ver que en efecto Flavio era tratado como un "delincuente de alta peligrosidad".
En conclusión esos días terminaron para su familia sus muchos amigos y compañeros que le visitaban, con su salida el día de ayer, la cual lamento no haber estado cerca no para cubrir la nota, si no para poder verlo fuera de esa prisión, para reiterar que la mirada que vi cuando estaba adentro no había cambiado, la mirada de tranquilidad y seguridad de estar fuera y seguir su lucha por crear una conciencia en una sociedad que necesita ser sanada, la prisión seguro dejo en Flavio un aprendizaje importante y sobre todo interpersonal para reforzar la convicción que usó durante el conflicto de 2006.
Me da gusto haber cambiado el final de mi incipiente columna, sobre ese hombre que conocí el 2 de noviembre en la "batalla de todos los santos"
--
Verónica Villalvazo
http://fridaguerrera.blogspot.com
solo cuento con mis ojos y mi mente son las herramientas que uso para trabajar
The post is about the liberation o Flavio Sosa, who spent good 16 months in prison and in the end it was judged that 'there was no legal reason to keep him in',...
It shows how Mexican 'justice' works,.. always in favour of the powerful. Some could argue that,.. well after all he is free now,.. but the thing is why such a punishment not only to Flavio, but to his entire family, and but entire I mean extended. Both his brothers were also arrested and jailed his grandfather was harassed and even relatives and frends. In fact, anything related to him, or to APPO, was and still is prosecuted for no legal reasons.
But I am glad he is free now, and more importantly, I am happy he has the energy and courage to continue fighting Ulises and his gang of corrupts assassins.
---
FLAVIO primera y segunda parte
domingo 20 de abril de 2008
FLAVIO
La llegada de nuestro entonces medio fue con radioamlo, después de estar informándonos por medio de radio universidad de lo que sucedía en Oaxaca después de la fuerte represión del 14 de junio del 2006, tras escuchar durante varios meses lo que pasaba, después de hablar en varias ocasiones con diferentes actores dentro de "Vayamos a radio universidad" decía nuestro compañero Octavio, quien había sido nuestro corresponsal en el estado, y" entrevistamos a la Dra. Escopeta", en medio de la sorpresa, el dolor de ver partida a Oaxaca, pero sobre todo el orgullo de ser mexicana por ver la valentía con la que esta gente defendía su lugar de origen nos trasladamos a la Universidad, en medio de toda esa dignidad representada en cada una de las personas que veía….
Y entonces se dio finalmente vimos al tan nombrado Flavio Sosa, entre gritos de "SÍ, SE PUDO" y sobre todo organización tuvimos de frente el triunfo de Oaxaca y su gente maravillosa.El primer contacto con Flavio fue ese, en aquella tan nombrada barricada de cinco señores, sin realmente tenerlo cerca solo lo vimos, festejando aquel histórico "viernes de la victoria de todos los santos".
Horas mas tarde y después de un pequeño desmayo por los gases y una atención rápida por parte de los paramédicos que apoyaban a esta lucha lo encontramos de casualidad en Santo Domingo,-Hola Flavio- ¿nos regalas una entrevista? Fueron las palabras de mi compañero Octavio hacía este enorme hombre junto al cual me sentía chiquitita, físicamente, mis 49 kilos y mi 1.60 de estatura no se comparaban con la anatomía de este hombre.
Mis compañeros realizaron la entrevista Javier y Octavio, Gerardo grababa y yo solo observaba, tratando de ver más allá de todo lo que decía Flavio más allá del personaje.Fuera de todo lo que se pueda decir de este hombre, que si apoyo a "Fox", que si es poder lo que buscaba…Encontré una persona que realmente quería ir mas allá del simple poder
…
Después de dos días mis compañeros tuvieron que regresar a su vida cotidiana.. Difícil de entender eso significaba qué yo no tenía vida ¿? No más bien que tenía la oportunidad maravillosa de quedarme en Oaxaca y ver muy de cerca lo que pasaba, después de la noche en la cual Oaxaca ardió en aquel 25 de noviembre de 2006, el 29 de noviembre salen de Oaxaca todos aquellos miembros visibles de la APPO y radio universidad, aquellos que en "radiociudadana" fueron tachados de peligro para Oaxaca e incitaban en esta radio ¿? a la sociedad Oaxaqueña a que fueran a sus casas y las quemaran, o que donde los vieran los lastimaran. Entre ellos Flavio Sosa, quien fuera detenido y exhibido el 4 de diciembre de 2006 como si se tratase de un criminal de alta peligrosidad, ¿qué es lo peligroso? ¿La conciencia?, fue la última vez que lo vi por la televisión un Flavio sorprendido pero a la vez consciente de lo que estaba pasando, primera parte
SEGUNDA PARTE DE FLAVIO....
Hace un par de semanas después de muchas ganas de ir a visitarlo, al penal de Cuicatlan después de haber estado preso en el penal de máxima seguridad del Altiplano, antes La Palma, en Almoloya de Juárez, estado de México, a petición del gobernador del Oaxaca, Ulises Ruiz, quien lo consideraba "delincuente de alta peligrosidad". Lugar en el estuvo por espacio de ocho meses sometido a eso a vivir como un "delincuente", para su familia y amigos era doloroso ir a verlo, primeramente por la situación deplorable en el que mantenían a Flavio en ese lugar bajo condiciones de lamentables, la revisión como un día e comentaba una de las tantas personas que le visitaron en ese lugar "era humillante, desvestirte para revisarte", "muchas veces me hacían esperar minutos que se hacían insoportables sin ropa", "no podía pasarle nada que ellos no revisaban minuciosamente"
Después de esos meses es trasladado Flavio al penal de Cuicatlan, bajo todo un operativo igual de escoltado que aquel en el que lo exhibieron como el más alto delincuente que había en el país.
Finalmente el 5 de abril hace tres semanas pude llegar a verlo, mi primera impresión al ver que no me dejaban entrar al interior del penal fue de sorpresa, -¿No traía su credencial de elector? ¿Dónde vive? ¿Dónde trabaja? ¿Qué es de usted? "deme una credencial para saber quién es usted", "déjeme ver si la puedo dejar pasar" , una hora, para que se me dijera "mmmm solo la dejo para que no se vaya sin saludarlo" "ehh la próxima vez si no traía su credencial no pasa" "y solo diez minutos," "salga sola sin que tenga que ir por usted" , cuando finalmente me dicen estas palabras me indican anotarme en una libreta exclusiva para Flavio, después en otra y minutos después me pasan a revisión, no sufrí el que me desvistieran, lo que si es que se aseguraron de que no trajera ni una pluma en mi ropa, después de la sorpresa pase al enojo de ver que en efecto Flavio era tratado como un "delincuente de alta peligrosidad".
En conclusión esos días terminaron para su familia sus muchos amigos y compañeros que le visitaban, con su salida el día de ayer, la cual lamento no haber estado cerca no para cubrir la nota, si no para poder verlo fuera de esa prisión, para reiterar que la mirada que vi cuando estaba adentro no había cambiado, la mirada de tranquilidad y seguridad de estar fuera y seguir su lucha por crear una conciencia en una sociedad que necesita ser sanada, la prisión seguro dejo en Flavio un aprendizaje importante y sobre todo interpersonal para reforzar la convicción que usó durante el conflicto de 2006.
Me da gusto haber cambiado el final de mi incipiente columna, sobre ese hombre que conocí el 2 de noviembre en la "batalla de todos los santos"
--
Verónica Villalvazo
http://fridaguerrera.blogspot.com
solo cuento con mis ojos y mi mente son las herramientas que uso para trabajar
Friday, April 18, 2008
De mi amiga Frida,...
Las triquis solo las mujeres triquis
Por Verónica Villalvazo (Fridaguerrera)
http://fridaguerrera.blogspot.com/
Desde agosto de 2007 que conocí a unas mujeres que estaban denunciando la desaparición de dos de sus hermanas triquis, viendo el dolor en sus ojos, sintiendo la necesidad de ser escuchadas, la imperiosa solicitud de dignificar a la mujer en esa zona comencé a interesarme en Las Triquis, sabía algo de ellas tal vez y tontamente solo lo que probablemente muchos vemos en ellas sus maravillosos vestidos rojos, tan emblemáticos y llamativos para los turistas que visitan Oaxaca.
No había alcanzado a descifrar realmente ese mensaje que implica esta vestimenta roja, este vestido, sufrir humillación, dolor, asesinato y esta es la situación en la que tristemente aun viven muchas mujeres en nuestro mundo, sin embargo hoy mi tema son estas mujeres convertidas desde hace algunos años en "botines de guerra", el primer caso como ya mencione que atrajo mi atención fue el de las dos desaparecidas Daniela y Virginia Ortiz Ramírez desaparecidas el 5 de julio de 2007 y las cuales hasta la fecha no han sido ni encontradas ni buscadas, por las autoridades pretextando que no se puede exponer a la policía en esta región por lo peligroso que resulta, en ese caso se estaba acusando a personas del grupo del Movimiento Unificador por la Lucha Triqui Independiente, asegurando las familiares de estas dos jóvenes de 14 y 20 años que MULTI y Unidad de Bienestar Social de la Región Triqui (UBISORT) eran los responsables. Durante casi un año que llevamos siguiendo este caso junto a otros compañeros de la prensa local ha habido en la región diferentes muertes, violaciones tumultuarias a las mujeres y niños asesinados, cabe destacar que fue asesinado Raúl Marcial Pérez, ex asesor de Unidad de Bienestar Social de la Región Triqui (Ubisort) cuando salía de sus oficinas .
Desde el pasado 7 de abril hasta la fecha los ojos de la comunidad Internacional voltearon a ver la zona por la muerte dos jóvenes locutoras, con todo el respeto que nos merecen los periodistas que se solidarizaron con el caso, pero lamentablemente hubo otros muchos que se molestaron al ser señaladas estás dos compañeras locutoras como periodistas, sería bueno nuevamente hablar de quien es o no es periodistas, pero en este caso la situación va mucho más a la profundidad de esto.
Las mujeres triquis son golpeadas, humilladas, sometidas, desparecidas, asesinadas, y a alguien de nosotros realmente nos importa ¿?, mmmm la respuesta es, así viven, eso es ancestral pa que te preocupas si siempre se matan ahí, pa que te preocupas si ahí la mujer no existe, son los usos y costumbres y no los puedes violar…..
La situación aquí no es si el dirigente de una u otra organización dice algo o mueve alguna negociación con el gobierno, el punto final en este "conflicto" como lo llama todo el mundo (yo le llamo violación a los derechos de estas mujeres) es que las mujeres son los premios, los botines de guerra de estos cacicazgos, las que están en medio son ellas y los pequeños niños, y niñas que hay en la zona ya sea de MULT, UBISORT O MULTI, o de los gobiernos estatales y federal las mujeres son las que finalmente están pagando. Primero por la incompetencia del gobierno, segundo por la incapacidad que como sociedades tenemos con ellas, y tercero y más doloroso por el solo simple hecho de ser mujeres triquis.
Primera parte del video a la zona
http://fridaguerrera.blogspot.com/2008/04/las-triquis-solo-las-mujeres-triquis.html
Van los primeros audios de entrevistas a familiares de Felicitas Martínez y Teresa Bautista, testimoniales de gente de la comunidad y comentarios de los locutores de radio "voz que rompe el silencio".
http://portal.radiobemba.org/index.php/archivos/doc/locutores_de_la_voz_que_rompe_el_silencio_hablan_sobre_el_futuro_de_la_radi/
http://portal.radiobemba.org/index.php/archivos/doc/testimonios_de_familiares_de_felicitas_y_teresa_de_la_voz_que_rompe_el_sile/
Radiobemba FM-Comunicadores del desierto AC
(662) 215 9015 / 215 90 05
Calle: Tamaulipas # 123 y cinco de mayo
Hermosillo, Sonora, México
http://www.radiobemba.org/
Por Verónica Villalvazo (Fridaguerrera)
http://fridaguerrera.blogspot.com/
Desde agosto de 2007 que conocí a unas mujeres que estaban denunciando la desaparición de dos de sus hermanas triquis, viendo el dolor en sus ojos, sintiendo la necesidad de ser escuchadas, la imperiosa solicitud de dignificar a la mujer en esa zona comencé a interesarme en Las Triquis, sabía algo de ellas tal vez y tontamente solo lo que probablemente muchos vemos en ellas sus maravillosos vestidos rojos, tan emblemáticos y llamativos para los turistas que visitan Oaxaca.
No había alcanzado a descifrar realmente ese mensaje que implica esta vestimenta roja, este vestido, sufrir humillación, dolor, asesinato y esta es la situación en la que tristemente aun viven muchas mujeres en nuestro mundo, sin embargo hoy mi tema son estas mujeres convertidas desde hace algunos años en "botines de guerra", el primer caso como ya mencione que atrajo mi atención fue el de las dos desaparecidas Daniela y Virginia Ortiz Ramírez desaparecidas el 5 de julio de 2007 y las cuales hasta la fecha no han sido ni encontradas ni buscadas, por las autoridades pretextando que no se puede exponer a la policía en esta región por lo peligroso que resulta, en ese caso se estaba acusando a personas del grupo del Movimiento Unificador por la Lucha Triqui Independiente, asegurando las familiares de estas dos jóvenes de 14 y 20 años que MULTI y Unidad de Bienestar Social de la Región Triqui (UBISORT) eran los responsables. Durante casi un año que llevamos siguiendo este caso junto a otros compañeros de la prensa local ha habido en la región diferentes muertes, violaciones tumultuarias a las mujeres y niños asesinados, cabe destacar que fue asesinado Raúl Marcial Pérez, ex asesor de Unidad de Bienestar Social de la Región Triqui (Ubisort) cuando salía de sus oficinas .
Desde el pasado 7 de abril hasta la fecha los ojos de la comunidad Internacional voltearon a ver la zona por la muerte dos jóvenes locutoras, con todo el respeto que nos merecen los periodistas que se solidarizaron con el caso, pero lamentablemente hubo otros muchos que se molestaron al ser señaladas estás dos compañeras locutoras como periodistas, sería bueno nuevamente hablar de quien es o no es periodistas, pero en este caso la situación va mucho más a la profundidad de esto.
Las mujeres triquis son golpeadas, humilladas, sometidas, desparecidas, asesinadas, y a alguien de nosotros realmente nos importa ¿?, mmmm la respuesta es, así viven, eso es ancestral pa que te preocupas si siempre se matan ahí, pa que te preocupas si ahí la mujer no existe, son los usos y costumbres y no los puedes violar…..
La situación aquí no es si el dirigente de una u otra organización dice algo o mueve alguna negociación con el gobierno, el punto final en este "conflicto" como lo llama todo el mundo (yo le llamo violación a los derechos de estas mujeres) es que las mujeres son los premios, los botines de guerra de estos cacicazgos, las que están en medio son ellas y los pequeños niños, y niñas que hay en la zona ya sea de MULT, UBISORT O MULTI, o de los gobiernos estatales y federal las mujeres son las que finalmente están pagando. Primero por la incompetencia del gobierno, segundo por la incapacidad que como sociedades tenemos con ellas, y tercero y más doloroso por el solo simple hecho de ser mujeres triquis.
Primera parte del video a la zona
http://fridaguerrera.blogspot.com/2008/04/las-triquis-solo-las-mujeres-triquis.html
Van los primeros audios de entrevistas a familiares de Felicitas Martínez y Teresa Bautista, testimoniales de gente de la comunidad y comentarios de los locutores de radio "voz que rompe el silencio".
http://portal.radiobemba.org/index.php/archivos/doc/locutores_de_la_voz_que_rompe_el_silencio_hablan_sobre_el_futuro_de_la_radi/
http://portal.radiobemba.org/index.php/archivos/doc/testimonios_de_familiares_de_felicitas_y_teresa_de_la_voz_que_rompe_el_sile/
Radiobemba FM-Comunicadores del desierto AC
(662) 215 9015 / 215 90 05
Calle: Tamaulipas # 123 y cinco de mayo
Hermosillo, Sonora, México
http://www.radiobemba.org/
And here, a small explanation of triqui people's culture
This article is small enough to be read in a couple of minutes, yet it gives a good panoramic explanation of the triqui people's way of thinking and living.
here is the link
here is the link
Two reportes shot dead in Oaxaca
While the rest of the country keeps very busy debating (or rejecting) the so-called energy reform, in Oaxaca Ulises' boys attack again. This time two young women were shot dead at black point.
They worked as reporters for an independent communitarian radio station. The main goal of this media is to promote cultural customs of triqui people. The problem is that triquis are among the most harassed in Oaxaca, and all of Mexico.
Their struggle started long before Oaxaca uprising of the past years, perhaps from the mid 50s of last century. They were, and still are people with strong links to their culture and way of politically organising.
Being reluctant to embrace modern life and also being situated in one of Oaxaca's richest sites in natural resources posed a problem for governors. Either, they had to respect their autonomy and move on, or they allowed the utilisation of their resources and make use of alternative methods to 'convince' the indigenous not to 'interfere' with progress.
Sadly, most of the governors opted for the second choice. So it is not a surprise to find paramilitary groups in the area, along and supported by the federal army and the state police.
They worked as reporters for an independent communitarian radio station. The main goal of this media is to promote cultural customs of triqui people. The problem is that triquis are among the most harassed in Oaxaca, and all of Mexico.
Their struggle started long before Oaxaca uprising of the past years, perhaps from the mid 50s of last century. They were, and still are people with strong links to their culture and way of politically organising.
Being reluctant to embrace modern life and also being situated in one of Oaxaca's richest sites in natural resources posed a problem for governors. Either, they had to respect their autonomy and move on, or they allowed the utilisation of their resources and make use of alternative methods to 'convince' the indigenous not to 'interfere' with progress.
Sadly, most of the governors opted for the second choice. So it is not a surprise to find paramilitary groups in the area, along and supported by the federal army and the state police.
In that sense the assassination of indigenous political leaders, communicators working for the community and trying to reinforce triqui's culture and traditions present a risk of having an organised movement at some point in time. So the killing has to continue while resources and big firms' interest in them last.
This report is from propaganda press! link
here (comment by wet_ahuizote)This report is from propaganda press! link
In Mexico, two women journalists have been killed in the southern state of Oaxaca. Teresa Bautista Flores and Felicitas Martínez were returning from a reporting assignment when they were ambushed by attackers. The victims both worked the indigenous community station called The Voice that Breaks the Silence. The Trique indigenous community in Oaxaca’s San Juan Copala launched the station earlier this year.
Mexico 9 April 2008 Reporters without Borders
Reporters Without Borders is deeply shocked by the fatal shooting on 7 April in Putla de Guerrero, in the southern state of Oaxaca, of Teresa Bautista Flores, 24, and Felicitas Martínez, 20, two women journalists working for La Voz que Rompe el Silencio (“The Voice that Breaks the Silence”), a community radio station serving the Trique indigenous community.
“Although there is so far no evidence that these two women were killed because of their work as journalists, their murders will be traumatic for all of Latin America’s many community radio stations, which are too often ignored or despised by the rest of the media and by governments,” Reporters Without Borders said.
“We are conscious of the risks run by the press in Oaxaca state, where the political climate continues to be tense, where two journalists were killed in 2006 at the height of a period of social unrest, and where other community media have been attacked,” the press freedom organisation continued. “We hope the investigators quickly establish the circumstances and motives for this double murder and catch those responsible. And we join their community in paying tribute to the two victims.”
La Voz que Rompe el Silencio was launched by the Trique indigenous community in San Juan Copala (in the west of Oaxaca state) on 20 January, a year after the locality was granted administrative autonomy. The community appointed Bautista Flores and Martínez to manage and present the radio station, which is dedicated to promoting indigenous culture.
The two young women were returning from doing a report in the municipality of Llano Juárez in the early afternoon when they were ambushed and, after being threatened with abduction, were finally shot with 7.62 calibre bullets of the kind used in AK-47 assault rifles, Reporters Without Borders was told by CACTUS, an organisation that supports indigenous communities. Investigators found 20 bullet casings at the scene. Three other people were wounded in the shooting - Jaciel Vázquez, aged 3, and his parents.
“We are convinced the Oaxaca government was behind all this, with the intention of dismantling municipal autonomy,” a community spokesman told CACTUS, which has called on the federal authorities to intervene.
The Mexican branch of the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) said there have been acts of violence against other small radio stations belonging to indigenous groups in Oaxaca, such as Radio Nandia in 2006 and Radio Calenda in 2007.
Two journalists were murdered in Oaxaca during a major wave of protests against state governor Ulíses Ruiz Ortíz in 2006. They were independent Indymedia cameraman Bradley Will, shot on 27 October 2006, and Raúl Marcial Pérez, a indigenous community leader and columnist for the regional daily El Gráfico, who was shot on 8 December 2006.
No one was brought to justice for either of these murders, in which the authorities curiously ruled out any possibility of their being linked to the victims’ work as journalists.
Community Radio Activists Murdered in Oaxaca
from Micro Radio Network
April 7th, 2008. Oaxaca, Mexico.Two indigenous triqui women who worked at the community radio station La Voz que Rompe el Silencio (The Voice that Breaks the Silence), in the autonomous municipality of San Juan Copala (Mixteca region), were shot and murdered while on their way to Oaxaca city to participate in the State Forum for the Defense of the Rights of the Peoples of Oaxaca. Three other people were injured.
According to the State Attorney General, the victims are Teresa Bautista Merino (24 years old) and Felícitas Martínez Sánchez (20 years old).
Francisco Vásquez Martínez (30 years old), his wife Cristina Martínez Flores (22 years old), and their son Jaciel Vásquez Martínez (three years old) were also injured in the attack.
According to prelimary reports, the women had left the station, which is part of the Network of Indigenous Community Radio Stations of the Southeast (Red de Radios Comunitarias Indígenas del Sureste), around 1:00 PM. They were travelling in a truck on their way to Oaxaca city, but were ambushed on the outskirts of the community Llano Juarez.
The two community radio activists were supposed to coordinate the working group for Community and Alternative Communication: Community Radio, Video, Press, and Internet, at the State Forum for the Defense of the Rights of the People of Oaxaca, which was to begin the today (Wednesday) in the auditorium of Seccion 22 of the teachers union in Oaxaca.
The Center for Community Support Working Together (CACTUS as the spanish acronym) released a communique denouncing the murders and demanding that the state authorities investigate and punish those responsible for the crime.
The state attorney general said that 20 bullet shells, caliber 7.62, were found at the site of the murders, along with other arms including an AK-47.
People are encouraged to contact their local embassies and consulates (or to organize demonstrations at their local embassies and consulates) to express their condemnation of this paramilitary repression of indigenous women and community media projects.
from narco news,.. a report of triqui movement towards autonomy, which I strongly believe has all to do with the assassinations,... and perhaps the comming violence
By Nancy DaviesCommentary from Oaxaca
January 28, 2007
January 28, 2007
The Triqui indigenous community of Oaxaca declared its autonomy on January 21, 2007 after the election of its municipal authorities. The election process required two months to complete. The new municipal president is José Ramírez Flores with vice-president Leonardo Merino, constitutional mayor Severo Sánchez and secretary Macario Merino. Six others were named to the new Council of Elders (Concejo de Ancianos).
The chosen new government will employ the traditional indigenous practice of usos y costumbres used among the Triqui, with a council of elders and decisions made openly in assemblies. The authorities will meet with the leaders of the 20 communities which form San Juan Copala, as well as with the Council of Elders, so that decisions can be made
The autonomous government has formed despite death threats against Ramirez and other leaders of the Triqui community who formed the autonomous municipality. In a January 21 interview with the daily La Jornada, Ramirez specifically cited the deception and oppression practiced by local political bosses (known as caciques) in the nearby towns of Santiago Juxtlahuaca, Putla de Guerrero and Constancia del Rosario, which have stayed outside the new autonomous municipality. One day before the new authorities assumed office, paramilitary groups burst into town and shot up the place. Worse, they ambushed Roberto García Flores, assassinating him on route to San Juan to participate in the new municipality.
Many consider the grip of the caciques as the greatest obstacle to peaceful development in Oaxaca. The United Popular Party, (PUP, in its Spanish initials) and the leaders of the Unified Independent Movement for the Triqui Liberation (MULT, in its Spanish initials) control the greater part of the local treasury in the area. Ramírez claims that more than half of received government funds go into their pockets and that MULT and its chief leader Heriberto Pazos are mentioned as stealing resources which should have gone into the relief of poverty for the Triquis.
Therefore, many people support the autonomous community as an act of rebellion against the caciques and their hired gun, identified as the deputy Rufino Maximino Zaragoza, who is accused by representative Edilberto Hernandez Cárdenas, of the Unified Independent Movement for the Triqui Liberation Independiente (MULTI, in its Spanish initials), of being responsible for the killing of more than ten people since March of 2006, the majority of them children between the ages of six and fifteen. Shootings among indigenous and campesino populations have been ignored by state authorities who declare virtually all deaths to be internal, or land boundary, disputes.
Autonomy is a complicated matter anywhere; it’s even more complicated given that the Triqui peoples split off a smaller group, a division fought against by the ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI, in its Spanish initials), which believed itself in complete control of Triqui areas. The PRI has been repressing the autonomists ever since.
The autonomous group MULTI dominates five of the municipa