Iraq inks gas swap deal with Turkmenistan
Under the agreement, Iran will supply gas to Iraq and will get the same quantity from Turkmenistan, Iraqi Electricity Ministry spokesman Ahmed Mousa said.
'The Ministry has performed the swap deal with Turkmenistan, which will supply gas to areas in North Iran….. Iran in turn will supply Iraq with the same quantity of gas by pipelines,' Mousa told the official news agency.
He said Iraq's Electricity Minister Ziad Fadil finalized the swap contract with Turkmenistan during a visit to that country in May.
'The funds for the supplied gas will be transferred directly to Turkmenistan…the deal is now just awaiting approval by Prime Minister Mohammed Al-Sudani,' he said.
(Writing by Nadim Kawach; Editing by Anoop Menon)
(anoop.menon@lseg.com)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
2 minutes ago
- The National
Does the downfall of the 'Shah of Shahs' hold lessons for the regime that deposed him?
Earlier this week Iranian exiles, including some not long released from Tehran's Evin prison, made their way to Cairo's Al Rifa'i Mosque to pay respects at the tomb of the last Shah. It is an event on July 27 that commemorates the loss of the imperial order and this year represented the 45th anniversary of the death of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. It came just weeks after the Shah's former patron, the US, bombed the regime that ousted the monarchy in what US President Donald Trump has called the 12-day war. Author Scott Anderson has written a definitive account of the last days of the monarchy in King of Kings (Shahanshah) with the subtitle Unmaking of the Modern Middle East. The current predicament of the religious leaders who preside over the new Iranian system could hardly be more present. His continuing conversations with Iranian contacts both within the country and in the diaspora mean that Anderson sees sentiment as having shifted to a more nationalistic plane, something that bolsters the Islamic Republic regime. 'I feel that the events of the last month have just set any [opposition] movement way back by years,' he tells The National from his west coast of the US home. 'Now the regime can paint anybody who is in opposition as 'lackeys of the Americans who just bombed our country and killed several hundred of our innocent civilians'.' There is a contrast with the beleaguered Shah in 1979 who saw the US as his last resort when one of the periodic outbursts of unrest turned into people power-style demonstrations that eventually overwhelmed his security forces. When it came to it, the book painfully illustrates how no help was there. Look west The Shah had gone to great lengths to woo America, something the book demonstrates very well. But in the 1970s America was distracted by its economic problems, not least the inflation caused by the oil price shock. Jimmy Carter, US president at the time, unlike Donald Trump, was not willing to intervene in the affairs of his ally. Worse, Washington's Cold War considerations allowed a dithering president to place his faith in a misguided calculation on how Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini would rule. 'There started to be this idea within the Carter administration: 'Well, you know, if the ayatollahs take over, that's not the worst thing for us, because at least they'll be anti-communist'. And really, in the last few months of the revolution, you saw this growing acquiescence of the Carter administration,' said Anderson. It was an ill-fated visit to the White House in 1977, where the welcome ceremony was disrupted by tear gas and police clashing with anti-Shah protesters, that set off the fateful demonstrations in Iran. The incident on the Ellipse was broadcast on Iranian TV. As Gary Sick, a White House adviser at the time, observed, if Iranians saw a sparrow fall from the tree, it was the CIA that killed it. So too the live images of the Washington clashes sparked revolt in Iran. Self-regard What ultimately paved Khomeini's way to power lay in the Shah himself. Anderson says Reza Shah believed his own Shahanshah propaganda on the country's modernisation but failed to see how that created dangers. 'Obviously the Shah was extending prosperity,' he said. 'There was a huge number of scholarships. There was a certain lifestyle available in Tehran. The economic factor however isn't strong enough to save him. You had the streets flooded with young men, overwhelming men, coming from the countryside and from villages that really hadn't changed much of 300 years. Suddenly they are being exposed to this very westernised culture in the major Iranian cities. It would just cause a massive disjunction.' It was no coincidence that the Shah lost his vizier Asadollah Alam, who died in April 1978. During one of Alam's stints as prime minister, the state mobilised to crush massive demonstrations in 1963. It was also under Alam's firm hand that the Shah staged his grandiose and grating Persepolis celebrations of 2,500 years of the Persian empire, described as the most expensive party ever staged. 'Alam was his alter-ego for 20-odd years, and actually he was the one who crushed things in 1963 as the prime minister at the time,' said Anderson. 'He crushed the clerical revolts and oversaw Khomeini getting sent into exile. Ironically, the Americans saw that as the Shah's response. It wasn't the Shah's response, but the Shah took credit for it. The Americans finally saw the Shah as a strongman, and so that was kind of a secret that he always had with us.' Ailing monarch The Shah himself was ill with the cancer that killed Alam, during the 1978 events. Subordinates feuded and the military high command was left no clear orders. 'One cliche I heard over and over about the Shah is he would oscillate between being tough when the revolution was happening and then being an appeaser,' said Anderson. 'In fact he did both simultaneously. He declares martial law but then orders the troops not to fire on demonstrators or only as the very last resort,' Anderson said. Anderson reviews the myth of the feared Savak secret police and says that, compared to the record of today's IRGC or Basji militia, it was a something of a paper tiger. 'I think they've acted much more brutally,' he said. 'I mean the prisons in Islamic Iran are far greater than they ever were under the Shah as far as political prisoners are concerned. You have this very pervasive security system now that's loyal to the regime." Modern technology assists the system of control in a way unimaginable in the Shah's day. 'Iranians are very sophisticated when it comes to technology and things like that, so I think that they have a much broader surveillance system that is far advanced in technological terms than anything the shah's ever could have dreamt of creating.' Breaking point King of Kings recounts a scene at Tabriz airbase in October 1978 as pilots handed in their resignations. The commanding general phoned his counterpart in Shiraz where resignations were also piling up on the commander's desk. His response was to tell the men that he too supported Khomeini and told his men to return to barracks. Four months later he led his pilots in a switch to the revolution and ended up as the interim defence minister. No such fog of confusion has yet set in for the present day regime, despite assassinations by Israel at the highest level. There is also a clear-cut focus on who is the real enemy under the current supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. 'Certainly very late into the game the Shah always perceived his danger coming to the left,' says Anderson. 'He saw the [Khomeinists] as a bunch of medievalists and had nothing but disdain for the ayatollahs. So Savak was always geared to looking at the danger of the left and they're on the Shah's payroll so they gave it to him. 'I think he thought it was much more rooted in tribalism.' Turn back the clock Generations of monarchists have rallied around the US-based exiled son of the late Shah of Iran. Reza Pahlavi, who was then the 17-year old Crown Prince, is now a globe-trotting advocate for a reborn monarchy. He called on Iranians to rise against the regime during the US and Israeli attacks and has since met foreign dignitaries including former UK prime minister Boris Johnson to further his cause. Despite the loyal pilgrimages made to the Cairo mausoleum annually, Anderson does not see a new imperial order in Iran. "I think it is utter fantasy," he says. "You have got to remember 80 per cent of Iran's population has been born since the revolution. Iran is a very young country."
The National
2 minutes ago
- The National
The Khor Abdullah waterway: Navigation deal or border surrender?
A 2012 agreement between Iraq and Kuwait regulating navigation in the shared Khor Abdullah waterway has triggered intense debate inside Iraq ever since, with critics warning it blurs maritime boundaries and threatens national sovereignty. Some opponents are calling to annul the deal, while others support renegotiation to safeguard Iraq's rights. Meanwhile, Kuwait maintains that its maritime boundary with Iraq, including navigation rights in Khor Abdullah, is firmly grounded in international law. Kuwaiti officials have repeatedly stressed that any attempt to revoke this agreement unilaterally is invalid and unacceptable. The Kuwaiti Ministry of Foreign Affairs has lodged formal protests and called on Iraq to honour its commitments under binding international treaties, reaffirming Kuwait's sovereignty over its territorial waters and its right to shared navigation in Khor Abdullah. The issue of land and maritime borders between Iraq and Kuwait is highly sensitive among Iraqis with many viewing the border demarcation unfairly imposed by the US Security Council after driving Saddam Hussein 's army out of its neighbour in 1991 and say the country's weakened state at the time was exploited. It is equally sensitive from the Kuwaiti point of view due to the 1990 invasion, with concerns about Iraqi over-reach. The controversy has pitted Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia Al Sudani against the public, with critics accusing him of compromising the country's rights to Kuwait to secure regional support as he eyes a second term in office in November's national election. Some have gone as far as accusing Iraqi officials involved in the border negotiations of receiving bribes from Kuwait, without providing substantial evidence. Both Iraq and Kuwait claim exclusive ownership of the narrow canal, which curves around Kuwait's Bubiyan and Warba islands on one side and Iraq's Al Faw Peninsula on the other. Iraqis say it is named after a famous Basra fisherman, Abdullah Al Timimi, while Kuwaitis say its name derives from the second ruler of Kuwait, Abdullah bin Sabah, who ruled from 1762 to 1814. In early 2022, Iraq closed off the chapter of Kuwait compensation, paying its final war reparations, settling the $52.4 billion of claims made for damage inflicted during the 1990 invasion. What is the agreement and its purpose? Three years after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 833, which determined the land border between the two. However, the delineation of the maritime border was left to the countries themselves. In 2012, Baghdad and Kuwait signed the agreement and it was ratified in 2013 by the parliament in Baghdad. It aimed to regulate maritime traffic, environmental protection and safety within the estuary that forms Iraq's only gateway to the Arabian Gulf. The deal gives each country the right to control navigation and safety enforcement. It stipulates that the agreement 'shall remain in effect indefinitely' but can be mutually terminated with six months' notice. This also applies to amending it. Critics' arguments Critics – mainly legislators, independent politician and experts – argue that the terms of the accord implicitly draw a boundary, warning it could prejudice future maritime border negotiations and impose access controls on Iraqi ships, requiring Kuwaiti approval and fees. Amir Abdul Jabar, who served as transport minister from 2008 to 2010 and is one of the strongest opponents of the agreement, argues it is meant to delineate a maritime border rather than regulate navigation. Although the accord states that the agreement 'shall have no effect upon the boundary' between Iraq and Kuwait as demarcated pursuant to the UN Security Council Resolution 833 in 1993 at the creek, it gives Kuwait more control beyond that deep in the Gulf, Mr Abdul Jabar said. Article 2 of the agreement explains the term 'waterway' as the area from the point where the maritime channel at Khor Abdullah meets the international boundary between the points 156 and 157 heading south to the point 162 set by the Resolution 833 'thence to the beginning of the maritime channel at the entrance to Khor Abdullah'. 'So, the definition of the waterway in the agreement didn't stop at the 162 point – the one set by the UN Security General resolution,' Mr Abdul Jabar said. Article 4 stipulates that 'each party shall exercise its sovereignty over that part of the waterway which lies within its territorial water'. The essence of the objection, Mr Abdul Jabar said, is that it must not be applied on the area beyond the point 162 as Article 2 stipulates. 'How is it possible to divide the area beyond the point 162?' Mr Abdul Jabar said. 'We are not objecting to the [833] resolution even though it's unfair, but the government and parliament of 2012-2013 brought a new disaster [in signing this deal],' he added, warning that Iraq could lose future maritime entitlement to deeper Gulf waters and its natural resources known as the Exclusive Economic Zone. Mr Abdul Jabar had filed a lawsuit against Mr Al Sudani for 'blocking the court's ruling', by refusing to have copies of it deposited to the UN and the International Maritime Organisation. Ruling and controversy In September 2023, Iraq's Federal Supreme Court invalidated the law ratifying the agreement, ruling that it violated the Iraqi Constitution by lacking the required two thirds parliamentary majority for international treaties. Parliament had passed it by simple majority only. Shortly after the ruling, the GCC and US issued a joint statement in which they called on the Iraqi government to 'ensure that the agreement remains in force'. The Iraqi government has assured Kuwait that Iraq is committed to all its international agreements. Afterwards, Mr Al Sudani and President Abdul Latif Rashid have independently sought to reverse the ruling. These requests were withdrawn early this month and the agreement was sent back to parliament to approve in a two-thirds majority. It was a sigh of relief for the opponents. Many of them are now asking to annul the agreement by rejecting it inside parliament, while others are seeking to renegotiate it with an Iraqi team including experts, not only politicians. Protests across Iraq have continued, to reject the agreement in its current form. A public campaign is also set to be launched to collect signatures for a petition for the UN Security Council. Fadi Al Shammari, a political adviser to Mr Al Sudani, confirmed the Khor Abdullah agreement aims to regulate navigation and has nothing to do with border demarcation. 'Iraqi land is sacred, and there will be no leniency or compromise over any inch of it under any pretext,' Mr Al Shammari said, claiming that campaigns opposing the agreement are 'driven by political and electoral agendas'. Iraqis are divided about the agreement, although many of the Iran-backed political parties and armed groups are echoing the government stance. In an interview with a local satellite channel in May, the leader of the Asaib Ahl Al Haq group, Qais Al Khazali, blamed Saddam Hussein's banned Baath party for seeking to discredit the agreement by portraying it as 'giving up Iraq's borders with Kuwait'. 'Saddam was the one who sold it [the border] when he recognised resolution 833", a UN motion which set the land and maritime borders, he said. It is still unclear if the parliament will ratify the agreement or whether it will be left to the next parliament after national elections in November national elections. Kuwait is also in dispute with Iran over their maritime border and Al Durra offshore gasfield in the Arabian Gulf. Kuwait and Saudi Arabia say they have 'exclusive rights' to Al Durra and called on Iran to validate its claim by demarcating its maritime borders. Iran previously claimed a stake in the field and said a Kuwaiti-Saudi agreement signed last year to develop the field was illegal.
Zawya
a day ago
- Zawya
Tullow's Gabon Exit Highlights Rising Role of African Firms in Upstream Sector
Tullow Oil has finalized the sale of its non-operated interests in Gabon to Gabon Oil Company (GOC) for $307 million, marking a strategic portfolio shift for the UK-based independent and a notable development for Gabon's energy sector. The transaction transfers Tullow's remaining production interests – estimated to contribute approximately 10,000 barrels per day in 2025 – to the state-owned company and concludes over two decades of Tullow's presence in the country. The African Energy Chamber (AEC) supports this transaction, viewing it as a constructive milestone for Africa's oil and gas sector. While international companies remain essential to the development of the continent's energy resources, the AEC sees the growing operational capacity of national and regional firms as a sign of a maturing sector – one that increasingly encourages balanced partnerships between foreign and local players. 'This deal is not just about asset transfers, but about momentum,' says NJ Ayuk, Executive Chairman of the AEC. 'African companies are stepping up, taking on more responsibility, and proving their ability to manage complex upstream operations. It shows the value of partnership and long-term investment in building capacity on the continent.' Rather than a retreat from foreign participation, the deal underscores the potential for new kinds of collaboration – where African national oil companies (NOCs) are not just resource holders but active participants with operational and commercial expertise. GOC, which has steadily expanded its portfolio since its establishment in 2011, is among a growing group of African NOCs taking on greater roles in the day-to-day management of assets. Tullow, for its part, views the sale as a key step in focusing on its core operated assets in Ghana and Ivory Coast while strengthening its balance sheet. Proceeds from the transaction will go toward repaying the company's $150 million revolving credit facility, helping improve financial resilience and allowing Tullow to pursue a more streamlined investment strategy. As the energy landscape in Africa evolves, deals like this one signal increased dynamism within the sector. Indigenous and national companies are becoming more confident and capable participants, while foreign investors continue to find value in working alongside local partners who bring deep market knowledge, regional networks and a long-term commitment to development. The AEC maintains that this balanced model – where African and international firms grow together – will be key to the continent's future energy success. Distributed by APO Group on behalf of African Energy Chamber.
