RGE - So how, exactly, is Venezuela able to outspend the US in the Western Hemisphere?
リンク: RGE - So how, exactly, is Venezuela able to outspend the US in the Western Hemisphere?.
There has been a lot hand wringing in the foreign policy community about the increase in Venezuela's influence in Latin America. Not everyone is keen on following Richard Lapper's advice. Venezuela has lots of oil -- and, even thought its oil is rather heavy and somewhat sour, it still has lots of oil revenues. And it has been willing to use its oil revenue to buy friends.
But compared to what the US has been spending on Iraq, Venezuela's oil revenues are, well, not so impressive. My colleague Rachel Ziemba prepared the following graph:
Not all of the proceeds from Venezuela's oil go directly to the budget -- most analysts think some revenues are held off budget and then allocated through various government-controlled funds to projects at home and abroad. But even so, the basic point holds: Venezuela's oil revenues are a lot smaller than what the US is spending on Iraq. And in any case, most of Venezuela's oil revenues are spent internally, not externally. Venezuela just seems to be getting a bit more political-value-for-its money in Latin America, so to speak, than the US seems to be getting in Iraq.
I also suspect Francis Fukuyama may be on to something ....
Comments
This is a good post, Brad.
I have been wondering if anyone was going to seriously tackle the developments in South America and Central America.
There is plenty to discuss, including China's military training of those from Latin America.
The U.S. is in one helluva mess south of Mexico.
I remember with some fondness my years of living in the Panama Canal Zone. We were not based there by accident.
I have been wondering if anyone was going to seriously tackle the developments in South America and Central America.
There is plenty to discuss, including China's military training of those from Latin America.
The U.S. is in one helluva mess south of Mexico.
I remember with some fondness my years of living in the Panama Canal Zone. We were not based there by accident.
Written by Movie Guy on 2007-02-07 01:37:52
"President Bush has approved a plan for the Treasury Department to aggressively block U.S. commercial bank transactions connected to the government of Sudan, including those involving oil revenues, if Khartoum continues to balk at efforts to bring peace to Sudan's troubled Darfur region... The Treasury plan is part of a secret three-tiered package of coercive steps... that the administration has repeatedly threatened to unleash if Sudan continues to sponsor a campaign of terror that has left as many as 450,000 dead and 2.5 million homeless... The delays have increased skepticism that the administration is willing to risk potential diplomatic and commercial fallout from targeting Khartoum....
Buoyed by booming oil wealth and a close relationship with China, Sudan has shrugged off repeated threats of action. ...Sudan's economy is largely dollar-based, meaning many commercial transactions flow through the United States and making it especially vulnerable to Treasury actions. Indeed, U.S. intelligence, which has stepped up reporting on Sudan in recent months to prepare for a confrontation, believes Khartoum set up a government committee to explore ways of obtaining oil revenues that did not involve dollars, such as barter deals... Sudan produces about 500,000 barrels of oil a year, which at current market rates is worth about $10 billion. As much as 200,000 barrels are kept for internal consumption, Morrison said, with about 75 percent of the rest sold to China..."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/06/AR2007020601935.html
Buoyed by booming oil wealth and a close relationship with China, Sudan has shrugged off repeated threats of action. ...Sudan's economy is largely dollar-based, meaning many commercial transactions flow through the United States and making it especially vulnerable to Treasury actions. Indeed, U.S. intelligence, which has stepped up reporting on Sudan in recent months to prepare for a confrontation, believes Khartoum set up a government committee to explore ways of obtaining oil revenues that did not involve dollars, such as barter deals... Sudan produces about 500,000 barrels of oil a year, which at current market rates is worth about $10 billion. As much as 200,000 barrels are kept for internal consumption, Morrison said, with about 75 percent of the rest sold to China..."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/06/AR2007020601935.html
Written by Guest on 2007-02-07 06:42:25
" The Pentagon expects to spend nearly $12 billion a month on the two wars next year - or about $1 billion every two-and-a-half days. By comparison, the State Department has budgeted about $1 billion for migration, refugee, and international disaster and famine assistance for all of 2008.
"When you compare the defense budget - which is our hard-power face to the world - to our development or disaster assistance budgets - which is our soft-power face to the world - it's obviously very lopsided," noted Sheila Heerling, a senior analyst at the Center for Global Development in Washington. "
- Asia Times Online
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IB08Ak05.html
Written by Guest on 2007-02-07 08:44:18
" China and India work together in Sudan, where China National Petroleum Corp. operates Sudan's Greater Nile oil field. India's Oil & Natural Gas Co. (ONGC) bought a 25% stake in the field in 2002 from China. In Sudan's Greater Nile Oil Project, China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) holds a 40% stake, while India has a share of 25%. " - Asia Times Online
Written by Guest on 2007-02-07 08:52:39
Military spending is useful for killing people and blowing things up.
There's only a certain amount of that activity that potential allies want.
Venezuela has influence because it has figured that out.
Charles of MercuryRising
www.phoenixwoman.wordpress.com
There's only a certain amount of that activity that potential allies want.
Venezuela has influence because it has figured that out.
Charles of MercuryRising
www.phoenixwoman.wordpress.com
Written by Charles on 2007-02-07 09:01:29
China develops to World's Top location for New research and development facilities
Feb 08, 2007
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/IB08Cb07.html
" BEIJING - China has become the most popular country in the world for setting up new research and development (R&D) facilities, according to the United Nations.
Sixty-one per cent of foreign enterprises establishing new R&D centers choosing to set up in China, compared to 41% in the US and 29% in India, says a report from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. By 2005, multinational corporations had established 700 R&D centers in China, the report states.
Nearly all the world's major technology giants have invested heavily in China, with some US$7.7 billion in FDI made by 2005 for the manufacture of telecommunication, computer and other electronic equipment. "
Written by Guest on 2007-02-07 09:13:20
"Sixty-one per cent of foreign enterprises establishing new R&D centers choosing to set up in China, compared to 41% in the US and 29% in India..."
Doesn't that add up to more than 100% ? Or are there some duplicates in there?
Doesn't that add up to more than 100% ? Or are there some duplicates in there?
Written by gab on 2007-02-07 10:29:25
Is it really Francis "End of History" Fukuyama who authored this WSJ article? Wonders never cease:
If the U.S. wants to support liberal democracy around the world, it needs to start thinking seriously about a well-designed social agenda that will appeal to the poor. There is both an inherent and an instrumental reason for this. In itself, the world's poor desperately need help, and have often been ill-served by the interventions of well-intentioned outsiders.
If the U.S. wants to support liberal democracy around the world, it needs to start thinking seriously about a well-designed social agenda that will appeal to the poor. There is both an inherent and an instrumental reason for this. In itself, the world's poor desperately need help, and have often been ill-served by the interventions of well-intentioned outsiders.
Written by Emmanuel on 2007-02-07 12:11:10
Finally, A Multipolar World Order
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/lamis_andoni/2007/02/chinas_investments_in_africa_c.html
China's investments in Africa cannot help but give off an air of a colonial past. This is simply because China is asserting itself as a global power.
China is slowly emerging as the counter to American unilateral hegemony. Architects of the post Cold War strategy have always been aware of that rise and many U.S. actions since 1991 have been aimed at preventing China from becoming a real rival.
The United States’ disastrous invasion of Iraq and its war on terror have curbed China’s role in oil-rich Iraq and probably the Gulf Arab states for now. But in the rest of the world, including the Arab world, China reaches out for energy. China has some of the best experts in the Arab world who speak the language fluently. They are employed as diplomats in its embassies across the region.
They have a very different approach than American diplomats. They take their time to understand local historical narratives without being dismissive or disrespectful. China is getting a far better grasp of the Arab World than America ever has.
Written by Guest on 2007-02-07 14:07:24
"" The Pentagon expects to spend nearly $12 billion a month on the two wars next year - or about $1 billion every two-and-a-half days"
ask them for a receipt this time - and remind them to make a corresponding entry in their accounts.
.
ask them for a receipt this time - and remind them to make a corresponding entry in their accounts.
.
Written by gillies on 2007-02-07 15:22:15
Regarding Fukuyama's comments, there is a big difference between
Ahmadinejad and Chavez, and I am surprised that someone as smart
as Fukuyama seems to have missed it, unless this column you linked
to is very old. Chavez has done a not-too bad job of spreading
his money around populistically and improving health care at least
somewhat, and lowering the poverty rate in Venezuela. Ahmadinejad
has not done so successfully and has failed to attack the corrupt
banyads like he promised he would.
The outcomes are unsurprising. Chavez was reelected in December
to a new six year term with 63% of the vote and a supportive
legislature. Ahmadinejad's allies got slaughtered in local
elections. He is out to lunch in terms of his own people.
BTW, the more serious issue with Chavez has been his recent move
to grab general decree powers so he can nationalize oil production
and to shut down opposition media. I am not against him nationalizing,
assuming he provides reasonable compensation, but he seems to be
moving toward at least a traditional authoritarian caudillo type
regime. This is too bad and not necessary. He can carry out
pretty much any economic policy changes he wants, given the
supportive legislature and popular backing he has.
Ahmadinejad and Chavez, and I am surprised that someone as smart
as Fukuyama seems to have missed it, unless this column you linked
to is very old. Chavez has done a not-too bad job of spreading
his money around populistically and improving health care at least
somewhat, and lowering the poverty rate in Venezuela. Ahmadinejad
has not done so successfully and has failed to attack the corrupt
banyads like he promised he would.
The outcomes are unsurprising. Chavez was reelected in December
to a new six year term with 63% of the vote and a supportive
legislature. Ahmadinejad's allies got slaughtered in local
elections. He is out to lunch in terms of his own people.
BTW, the more serious issue with Chavez has been his recent move
to grab general decree powers so he can nationalize oil production
and to shut down opposition media. I am not against him nationalizing,
assuming he provides reasonable compensation, but he seems to be
moving toward at least a traditional authoritarian caudillo type
regime. This is too bad and not necessary. He can carry out
pretty much any economic policy changes he wants, given the
supportive legislature and popular backing he has.
Written by Barkley Rosser on 2007-02-07 16:54:47
It is just a matter of accounting entries: shift all the money spent on Iraq from DOD's budget to State's. We are spending all this money to bring democracy, security and free markets to the people (yearning to be free) of a backward region ruled by despots. This is all tough love diplomacy. They will thank us in the end, even if it kills them. And us.
But I do have a question: what if we had allocated this $300+ billion (with another ~$120 billion coming up this year) to DOE's budget, instead? With a mandate like "to bring energy security and independence to the US through the development of renewable sources and sustainable growth policies?".