Feb
7
2012
Posted by
admin
Comments

ICYMI:Save the Prosperity Infrastructure

Save the Prosperity Infrastructure
The Hill
February 7, 2012
By James K. Glassman

In declaring last month that he won’t abide by rulings of the main international forum for settling investment disputes, Venezuela President Hugo Chavez is following in the footsteps of Argentina’s leaders, whose brazen behavior is encouraging other nations to ignore the legal framework that gives investors confidence to invest trillions of dollars in faraway projects essential to global economic growth.

Chavez told a television audience on Jan. 8: “We have to get out of that ICSID, and I tell you, We will not recognize any ICSD decisions.” Venezuela has 21 cases pending before the World Bank’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, totaling $40 billion, or one-tenth of the country’s gross domestic product. The claims stem from expropriations of the assets of such U.S. energy companies Exxon Mobil, ConocoPhillips, and Chevron as well as Europe’s Repsol, ENI, and Staoil.

Chavez’s threat is only display of contempt for what can properly be called the “prosperity infrastructure.” One of the great gifts of Western civilization, this is the framework of international law and global trade rules, enforcement of the sanctity of contracts, and the power to ensure that the world’s oceans and air routes are open to commerce. While the infrastructure was developed mainly by the United States and Britain, its positive externalities extend around the globe. Everyone gains.

In their book Invisible Wealth: The Hidden Story of How Markets Work (Encounter, 2011), Arnold Kling and Nick Schulz show that today the most important sources of wealth aren’t natural resources or factories. They reside in what the authors call “the software layer,” which is “a set of expectations and rules about negotiating, financing, and post-purchase obligations” (p. 5). These are among the intangibles that comprise the prosperity infrastructure.

A World Bank study looked at the difference between the total wealth of a nation and subtracted from it natural and produced capital. The result is intangibles, and the study concluded, “The most striking aspect of the wealth estimates is the high values for intangible capital. Nearly 85 percent of the countries in our sample have an intangible capital share of total wealth greater than 50 percent.”

Click here to read more.

 
Jan
19
2012
Posted by
admin
Comments

Chávez’s Losing Battle Against Global Economics

DSC 0754 150x150 Chávez’s Losing Battle Against Global EconomicsJosé R. Cárdenas served in several foreign policy positions during the George W. Bush administration (2004-2009), including on the National Security Council staff. He is a consultant with Vision Americas in Washington, DC.

Over the last century, cross-border trade and investment have proved essential to global economic development by pulling billions of the world’s citizens out of abject poverty.  To promote and protect capital flows and foreign investments from arbitrary predations of governments, delicate international legal and economic frameworks have been set up. These bodies rest on no more authority than the commitment of member governments to play by the rules for the common good. Hugo Chávez, for his part, is committed only to kicking down that barn. He recently took to the Venezuelan airwaves on his signature show, Aló Presidente, to proclaim that he has no intention of abiding by any ruling by the World Bank’s International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) over his government’s confiscation of Exxon-Mobil’s assets in Venezuela in 2007.  Exxon is seeking some $7 billion in compensation.

“We are not going to bow before imperialism and its tentacles,” Chávez said.  “Understand that … They are trying the impossible: to get us to pay them. We are not going to pay them anything.”

Mr. Chávez acts as if Venezuela’s oil patrimony spares him from the obligation to follow accepted standards of behavior. And, like most leftist ideologues stuck in a time warp, he also believes that such investments are inherently exploitative of the host country.  In typical grandiose fashion, he is thus out to avenge decades of unspecified foreign “plundering” of Venezuela by refusing to compensate Exxon.

The problem is that it isn’t that easy. It’s not as if Chávez can pick up his bags and go home. There are repercussions for such actions and, unfortunately, it will be the Venezuelan people who feel the brunt of Chávez’s grandstanding.

For all of Chávez’s bravado, the fact remains that Venezuela has a very real, legal obligation to address the 20 or so pending disputes filed against it at ICSID (worth about $23 billion in outstanding obligations) for expropriated properties. That’s because the ICSID has very real enforcement mechanisms that give successful claimants the right to enforce against assets in third party states. In other words, companies will be able to go after Venezuelan assets in the United States, such as oil refineries.

Moreover, jilting foreign investors will wreak havoc in international financial markets for Venezuela, damaging its credibility and putting significant downward pressure on Venezuelan bonds while harming other efforts to obtain credit. And this would come at a time when Chávez, running for re-election, relies on creditors to help him continue ramping up government spending.

Finally, it will certainly hurt the Venezuelan oil industry and continue Chávez’s steady suffocation of his Golden Goose, PDVSA. Venezuela, of course, sits atop some of the largest oil reserves in the world, but that thick crude doesn’t come out of the earth by itself. It requires tens of billions of dollars in investment and ever-more sophisticated technologies to find it, pump it out, and refine it.

By all accounts, Venezuelan production is stagnating because of a lack of investment (among other problems, such as cronyism). Major international oil companies will certainly be wary about the Venezuelan market, if they see they can be victimized at any moment by arbitrary government decisions without compensation.

Chávez continues to demonstrate that the concepts of contract sanctity and respect for the rule of law and private property rights are meaningless to him. While engaging in demagoguery against “evil” multinationals may make for good television, at the end of the day, it won’t put food in Venezuelans’ stomachs or make their streets safer. Violating international economic agreements, however, will carry consequences. There is a good chance that Chávez won’t be around when the bill collector shows up at the door, which will leave the Venezuelan people to clean up the mess he leaves behind.

 
Jan
17
2012
Posted by
admin
Comments

ICYMI: Venezuela Tightens Control of Oil Industry

Venezuela tightens control of oil industry

Financial Times

By Benedict Mander in Caracas and Sylvia Pfeifer in London

Venezuela has made another push to increase control over its oil industry, announcing plans to leave the World Bank’s international arbitration body and potentially putting billions of dollars of foreign investment at risk.

Rafael Ramírez, the country’s oil minister, at the weekend confirmed plans to settle disputes with foreign companies within its own judicial system. The decision would affect more than 20 foreign companies that have unsettled disputes after private sector assets were expropriated by Venezuela’s socialist government as part of a drive to increase its control over so-called “strategic” industries that began in 2006. Analysts have estimated the outstanding compensation claims, largely by industrial groups including oil, could add up to as much as $40bn.

The decision could also undermine investor confidence in the country whose natural assets have attracted some of the world’s leading oil and gas groups, including Europe’s Repsol, ENI, and Statoil, as well as Chevron of the US. Despite tax increases and contract changes many companies have remained eager to invest in the country’s Orinoco extra heavy oil belt.

“The common sense approach would probably be one of wariness,” said an executive at one European energy group about the decision, declining to be identified.

“What is already a fairly complex process, looks like it will get even more so,” said Peter Hutton, analyst at RBC Capital Markets.

“We do not accept impositions and we are going to rescue our national sovereignty,” Mr Ramirez had said in a televised interview on Sunday, adding that Venezuela would seek to renegotiate dozens of international investment-related agreements.

The decision to withdraw from the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), based in Washington, means that disputes with foreign companies, including an unsettled disagreement with ExxonMobil, will be heard by Venezuelan judges.

The news follows the announcement on January 1 of a settlement at the Paris-based International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) which awarded Exxon a net payment of only $747m, substantially less than the $6.5-7bn it was said to be seeking, after its assets in Venezuela were expropriated in 2007.

Venezuela appears to have accepted the ruling by the ICC, where only the contract was in dispute, but has said it will not respect any decision at the ICSID, where it is the violation of a bilateral investment treaty that is being disputed, which is far broader in scope.

At stake for Venezuela is the appetite of foreign oil companies to invest in extracting the extra-heavy crude from the Orinoco Belt. Venezuela’s proved oil reserves exceed 200bn barrels but it produces fewer than 3m barrels per day. With the help of foreign investment, Venezuela hopes to double production in the coming years. Exxon declined to comment on Monday. So did Total, Repsol and ENI.

Venezuela’s allies Bolivia and Ecuador also recently withdrew from the organisation. Argentina has so far remained within it, although industry-watchers pointed out that this has not prevented the country from disagreeing with ICSID rulings.