Divided OPEC meets for summit(a private meeting mistakenly broadcast to journalists revealing spat)

Source: AFP

RIYADH (AFP) - OPEC heads of state converged on Riyadh for a rare summit opening Saturday with the organisation divided over the falling US dollar and attempts to give a political impetus to the oil-exporting cartel.

In a gaffe late Friday, a private meeting of ministers from the 12 members of the cartel was mistakenly broadcast to journalists, revealing a spat between Saudi Arabia and anti-US members Iran and Venezuela about the waning US currency.

Journalists witnessed Iran request that the final declaration to be issued by OPEC leaders at the end of the summit on Sunday express the concern of member states about the falling US currency and its impact on oil revenues.

Reacting to the proposal, which was backed by Venezuela, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal warned against mentioning the US currency.

"There are media people outside waiting to catch this point and they will add to it (exaggerate) and we may find that the dollar collapses," Prince Saud said.




Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071117/ts_afp/oilopecsummit_071117110906

those billions in foreign aid we hand over to the Saudi Royal family.

Perhaps this will scare awake enough sheeple that we can begin to discuss this problem and find a solution. Or will the pundits just up the volume of the "economy is great" meme?

Or, one more element of it. It's nothing to do with him being a "dictator" (for which there is no evidence, but rather overwhelming evidence to the contrary). And, anyway, what do they care about dictators? They support real dictators all over the world. They ARE dictators.

What's really got their jockey shorts in a twist is Venezuela's vote in OPEC, and it not being a kneejerk, pro-Exxon-Mobile, and pro-U.S. financial elite vote any more, but an independent vote, based on the interests of the VENEZUELAN PEOPLE.

They can't count on Latin Americans to be their pawns any more, in any forum. Much credit to the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina and Nicaragua, with leftist allies in Brazil, Uruguay and Chile (and in social movements boiling beneath the surface in Mexico, Peru and other countries, where leftists have come close to winning control). The Bolivarians have so changed the political and economic dynamics in Latin America, that Nicaragua could seriously propose creating a new OAS without the U.S. as a member (and it could merit four hours of closed discussion among leaders at a recent meeting of Latin countries), that the Bank of the South (now with five or six member countries) could be driving the World Bank/IMF out of the region, and that serous discussion of a South American "Common Market," and common currency (to get off the U.S. dollar) could be going forward.

Chavez is one of the most colorful and well-known spokespeople of this Revolution, although by no means its only leader. (Morales in Bolivia, Correa in Ecuador and Kirchner in Argentina, are equally strong on these issues, and excellent articulators of them, although not as pugnacious as Chavez). And it is largely a grass roots driven movement--it is coming from awesome grass roots organization among the poor. The Bushites and their lapdog corporate media want to personalize it, to create a phantom "strong man" that they can knock down. Anyone with any sense has known that this is about Venezuela's oil (the Bushites covet it). The more knowledgeable know that it is also about real grass roots democracy in South America, which terrifies the corporate puppetmasters of the U.S. But now we see a third important motive for anti-democratic U.S. policy in Latin America: Venezuela (and a potentially very powerful South American "Common Market") on the world stage, countering U.S.-based global corporate predator profit--in OPEC and in other forums.

We can also see, laid bare in this leak, the catastrophic failure of Bushite diplomacy--their bullying, bribing, saber-rattling and demonizing all over the globe. They revile democracy in South America--and mount disinformation campaigns (and worse) against it--at least four serious plots against the Venezuela government (and, by extension, the Venezuelan people)--and they undermine the progressive elements in Iran, by demonizing Iran and making Iranians afraid, pushing them further to the right, and into the development of nuclear weapons to defend themselves. And we see that OUR only defenders are the colossally repressive and corrupt sultans of Saudi Arabia.

What a picture! Can it be any clearer that the U.S. is on the wrong side of the table? What if we had welcomed real democracy in Venezuela, and told U.S. oil corporations to take a hike, when they whined about the crimp in their ungodly profits? What if we weren't supporting the worst, most brutal, rightwing elements in South American society, and arming them, and larding them with billions of dollars in overt and covert aid, for the purpose of destabilizing and overthrowing the Andes democracies? What if we acted like "partners," not "bosses," as Evo Morales suggested? And what if we apologized to all these countries and peoples for past crimes, and apologized to the Iranian people for our past outrages against them (toppling their democracy in 1954, and installing the horrible Shah), and suggested a new beginning?

Maybe there would be two less members of OPEC wanting to crash the U.S. dollar to stop the war criminals who are running our government from threatening them.

The Bush Junta has really, really blown it, on so many fronts. Not from their point of view. They are profiting nicely, from their grand theft of the U.S. treasury--and they no doubt have the bulk of their portfolios in foreign currency by now. No skin off their noses. But from OUR point of view--one of the peoples of the world who are now their victim--our lives are going to be gravely affected by the friends the Bushites have lost, and the enemies they have gained. As the world realigns itself to curtail the gross unlawfulness of the Bush regime, guess who is going to pay for Exxon-Mobile's, and Halliburton's, and the Carlyle Group's, and Blackwater's "successes"--for many decades to come, if not forever?