ALMATY, Aug 25
(THE GLOBE)
What will happen to �KazakhOil�?
It is difficult to have serious contacts with a company, which has an indefinite property. It is impossible to work with a company, which at any moment may lose the best part of its property.
In other words, according to the prognosis of an authorised expert, the sale of a part of the Kazakhstan�s share in the Tengiz project will result in the most serious consequences for the national operator.
If before the sale of �Kazakhstan Caspian Shelf� would not have strike much KazakhOil�s authority, as KCS was a separate juridical person, at the present time the situation is different.
Any company requires investments to develop. It is absolutely obvious that credits are being allotted either under state guarantees or under a company�s property. KazakhOil concluded an agreement for modernisation of the Atyrau OPP with the Japanese company �Marubeni�, and negotiations with World Bank regarding working out of technical-economic feasibility for Alibekmola deposit were successful.
The decision regarding the sale of the best property, which was governed by the NOC �KazakhOil�, may lead to the most destructive results. Nurlan Kaparov, who understood this perfectly well and was against of the sale, was dismissed.
Who needs the dismissal?
According to some experts, the dismissal of Kaparov was also connected with a private fight between competing financial-industrial groups. The sources emphasise that, from the point of view of these influential groups Nurlan Kaparov was a neutral figure. At the same time, we may say that now a group which is tightly connected with �Kazcommertsbank� (KCB) is getting more influential and at the present time it is not satisfied with the neutrality of the president of KazakhOil.
According to Reuters agency, one of the reasons of the dismissal of the head of the national oil company was that he was a rigid opponent of the merge of Hurricane and Shymkentnefteorgsyntez. This merge will actually allow the KCB group to monopolise the oil sector in the south of the country, while this is the main market, including Almaty in Kazakhstan. Some sources consider Kaparov�s dismissal will significantly increase influence of Timur Kulibaev, the President of �Kaztransoil� company. Our sources have different opinion about closeness of Mr. Kulibaev to the KCB group.
�Khabar� and Kaparov�s dismissal
From the point of view of opposition of inter-groups interests, we should pay attention to the fact that �Khabar� TV channel, which usually does not pay any serious attention to dismissals, spent to Nurlan Kaparov�s one more than five minutes of the evening�s news.
Rakhat Aliev, who is supported by the TV channel, is not interested in strengthening either of Timur Kulibaev or the KCB group.
In this regard the link between the dismissal and situation around Hurricane and Shymkentnefteorgsyntez, mentioned in the channel�s news, proves this. It is also noteworthy that after the program devoted to Kaparov�s dismissal, there was a review on Shymkentnefteorgsyntez.
On the other hand, it was emphasised in the review that the President of KazakhOil had been dismissed according to the order of the Prime Minister Nurlan Balgimbaev, i.e. Nursultan Nazarbaev was not mentioned at all. It seems that he pretends to be above all these events.
We should mention one more important moment. The sale of 10% of the JV �Tengizchevroil� can also be considered as an object of groups� interests. In New York Times it is said that 20 companies have been invited to the auction for the Kazakhstan�s share. According to a recognised specialist, there are maximum 15 serious companies interested in Kazakhstan. Then there is a question: what are the rest five companies? They may be false companies belonging to definite groups.
by WILLY WO-LAP LAM
Aug 26
(South China Morning Post)
President Jiang Zemin has gone some way towards seizing the diplomatic initiative in the wake of what Beijing perceives to be the �neo-imperialist expansionism� of a Washington-led Nato.
The joint statement by the leaders of China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan can be interpreted as a warning to the United States and Nato.
The statement said a �multi-polar world� meshed with the trend of history would be �beneficial to the long-term stability of the international situation�.
The five countries expressed opposition to the use of force on the global scene unless it was sanctioned by the United Nations Security Council.
Diplomatic analysts said Mr Jiang wanted to boost his stature as an international statesman who had played a big role in thwarting the Nato juggernaut.
In his separate summit with Russian President Boris Yeltsin, both leaders reiterated their determination to build a new world order that was not dominated by the West, meaning the US.
They vowed to cement a �constructive strategic relationship�.
The analysts said while Beijing was still in theory committed to building a strategic partnership with the US, Mr Jiang was telling Washington much more solid progress on bilateral ties had been reached with the Russians.
A Beijing source said the Chinese President also wanted to protect himself from criticism by conservatives at home that he had been espousing an unrealistic �pro-US policy�.
While hobnobbing with leaders from the four countries, Mr Jiang was given the platform to play up his long-standing opposition to the theory that �humanitarianism overrides national sovereignty�.
The Chinese leader�s trip to Kyrgyzstan is also part of Beijing�s diplomacy of good neighbourliness, which has been actively pursued since the Nato air strikes against Kosovo.
The leadership has been anxious to ensure that �hostile foreign forces� cannot use China�s neighbours as a base for subversion against it.
The joint statement pledged to counter �national separatism and religious extremism�.
Aug 25 (Stratfor)
The August 25 signing of the Bishkek Declaration - an agreement among Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Russia and China - addressed first a commitment to stifle all cross-border crime, separatism and extremism, while secondly also advocating respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-interference in domestic affairs. These issues are extremely important to China, as they address two of that government�s biggest fears.
Interestingly, the meeting about the declaration took place at the same time that gunmen from Tajikistan were fighting government forces in southern Kyrgyzstan. A section of the document dealing with border control was particularly topical, stating all sides would �express determination to prevent the use of their territories from engineering activities detrimental to [the] sovereignty, [and] security � of any of the five states.�
Beijing is extremely concerned about separatist movements in the western province of Xinjiang, where the native Uighur people are more ethnically and culturally similar to their Islamic neighbors in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan than to the rest of China. The government has been able to suppress the movement for the moment, and doesn�t want a lightly guarded border to become a highway for outside support.
The agreements on sovereignty and non-interference reflect the continued Chinese concern over outside attempts to destabilize the country. This comes from a long tradition of Chinese concern stretching from the Opium Wars and the Boxer Rebellion to U.S. support for rebel groups like the Nicaraguan Contras and the Afghani Mujahedeen. Today, the Chinese government regards western support for Tibetan independence and the Dalai Lama as more than idle grassroots activism. Rather, China regards it as a premeditated and provocative foreign policy decision.
One of the specific points of the declaration was that it opposed any use of force unsanctioned by the UN Security Council (where both China and Russia have vetoes). This is a direct reference to U.S.-NATO actions in the Kosovo crisis, which took place without UN backing.
Neither of these thoughts is new, but the declaration reinforces our view of Chinese self-perception, which is that of a country under siege. The government fears national destabilization due to both internal and external threats. Thus, it should not be surprising that Beijing may make mountains out of what westerners consider policy molehills. When you�re walking a tightrope, no breeze is welcome.
B. ZHUMASHEV,
an engineer-constructor
Almaty, Aug 25
(Specially for THE GLOBE)
Now, when our commotion after the news from the natural calamity in Turkey has somehow calmed down, and we may get rid of emotions, it is high time to think about lessons given by the happened event. The first that strikes is the scale of the damage. The point is not just the force of the earthquake � 7.4 by Richter�s scale (as the Great Sophia Cathedral has withstood, it was erected many centuries ago by obviously non-Turkish companies), but the matter is the inadmissible low quality of the construction. Turkish constructional companies knew the seismic danger in this region (only in this century since 1903 there were several tens of strong earthquakes, due to which about 35 thousand persons died). However, this did not prevent constructional companies from erecting cheap multi-store buildings folded like houses of cards, which were deadly traps for peacefully sleeping population. This proved once again that any constructors, including �skilful�, should be strictly controlled. What about the control in our state, where one-third of the population live in the seismic zone?
Before we shift to this subject, I would like to return to Turkish constructional companies, but working in Kazakhstan. It seems that their glory is overestimated a little. For example, let�s take the famous complex of Hoja Akhmed Yassaui in Turkestan, which is being reconstructed by Turkish constructional workers. Mildly speaking, the quality of the repair and restoration works was so low, that it was required to redo everything immediately. Works were fulfilled by workers of a low qualification. The constructional company did not have the state license to fulfil the respective repair and constructional works. Turkish constructors are unequal to the occasion not only in ancient mosques. In the same Turkestan while constructing a hostel for the Kazakh-Turkish University, the quality of works was low, that resulted in cracks, and uneven building shrinkage.
We should especially mention that in most cases they take all possible measures to pass round our laws and rules regarding expertise of projects, architectural-constructional control for quality of assembling works. By the way, life has proved that our constructors build objects more qualitatively and steadily.
Meanwhile, there is the State Architectural Constructional Inspection in Kazakhstan, which is to control the quality of erected objects. Till 1990-s, this inspection was properly fulfilling its obligations and its personnel proudly state that they did their best and now they are confident in standard quality of their objects. Consequences of such earthquakes as the Turkish one, would just insignificantly damage buildings and erections constructed in Almaty in 1970-80-s. Nevertheless, �save us, god� from a catastrophic earthquake. The State Architectural Constructional Inspection controlled the quality of constructional and assembling works at different constructional stages and, if necessary, took rigid measures (stopped constructional-assembling works, forced to dismantle constructions assembled with defects, to dismantle brick works done with infringements of constructional standards, etc.).
However, since 1994 the reorganisation period started. In the result at the present time the Republican State Enterprise �State Architectural Constructional Inspection� has practically lost its controlling functions, despite the necessity to protect rights and interests of customers of constructional products and guarantee safety during construction and exploitation of buildings and erections, by the state. Besides, this solution contradicts to Articles 1 and 15 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
It is widely known that the main wealth of the state is fixed assets in the form of housing, cultural and industrial objects constructed in its territory, which are to be exploited within a standard term (not less than 100 years). The Inspection is confident that due to this situation, the volumes of uncontrolled construction will significantly grow. Consequences of this growth will become obvious in 10 to 15 years, as the present controlling service which has been existing for more than 50 years, will be liquidated. Of course, if fact, there is no money in the budget, but, maybe, there is another way out. We suppose, we should have applied to the practice accepted in the developed countries, where constructors are to pay to the insurance fund 5 to 8% of a building�s value in case of any deformation or damages within a standard exploitation period, which depends on the quality of works fulfilled by a contractor. The insurance company is to conduct a thorough control for quality of works and the latter determined the rate of insurance value. That is why, constructional companies are interested in the highest quality of their works and the entire object. That is where we require the inspection with its experienced specialists. Then we would not have required financing by the budget. To achieve this, we should just change the legislation: we should not permit to erect buildings, if constructional companies� activity is not insured.
In short, no state should afford to accumulate fixed assets with a doubtful quality and without guaranteed normal exploitation period within a standard term.
All Over the Globe is published by IPA House.
© 1998 IPA House. All Rights Reserved.