|
|
High oil prices fill Saudi coffers, but deficit, AFP, December 6, 1997 ABU DHABI, Dec 6 (AFP) - High oil prices have filled Saudi Arabia's coffers with surplus funds for the second year running, but not enough to wipe out its budget deficit, bankers said here Saturday. The price of Saudi Arabian crude, mostly Arabian light, has averaged around 18 dollars this year, nearly a dollar higher than official projections. With exports of around 6.5 million barrels per day (bpd), the dominant global oil power is forecast to earn between 40 billion and 43 billion dollars in 1997. The figure does not include petrochemicals and other non-oil exports, which are forecast to range from four billion to six billion dollars. "This means the total income of Saudi Arabia could exceed 45 billion dollars compared with projected revenues of 43.7 billion dollars. This will leave billions in surplus," a Riyadh-based banker said. But the extra funds will unlikely eliminate a forecast budget deficit of nearly 4.5 billion dollars, since part of the funds have been used to replenlish the country's international reserves. Those reserves have eroded over the past decade because of the Gulf war costs and weak crude prices. Some of the extra funds have also been allocated to repay arrears to local contractors and farmers although the sum is far lower this year than last year's payments of 22 billion Saudi riyals (5.86 billion dollars). Weak crude prices over the past decade had created a persistent deficit in Riyadh's budget and balance of payments and sharply slowed down its economy. It received another severe blow after paying more than 50 billion dollars for the liberation of Kuwait from Iraqi invasion forces in 1991. A Saudi banker said that the government is determined not to let the arrears, which surged after the Gulf War, continue to accumulate. It has paid the last instalment of a foreign debt of around 4.5 billion dollars borrowed to meet the cash crunch after the 1990-1991 Gulf crisis. A surge in oil prices in 1996 due to strong seasonal demand and the absence of sanctions-hit Iraq from the market boosted Saudi Arabia's income by 22.3 percent to 179.1 billion riyals (47.7 billion dollars) from around 146.5 billion riyals (39 billion dollars) in 1995, official figures showed. Despite overshooting projected expenditure, the budget shortfall was trimmed to 3.7 percent of the gross domestic product in 1996 from 5.8 percent in 1995. It exceeded 30 percent in 1991 because of the war payments. Bankers said Riyadh was set to enjoy another good financial year in 1998 after it secured 760,000 bpd in extra quota from the 11-nation Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries during its meeting in Jakarta last week. "Even if oil prices dipped by one to two dollars next year because of higher production, the Kingdom's revenues will still be high," a banker said. "This will help it keep growth high by keeping spending high as was the case in the past two years. At the same time, a healthy financial situation will enable the government to plan better in its current reform programme. Riyadh forecasts 4.8-billion-dollar budget deficit, AFP, December 29, 1997
Freedom of Religions, The Washington Post, September 11, 1997
Reports of this harsh persecution have provided the impetus for a bill now gathering steam in the House. The Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1997, sponsored by Virginia's Rep. Frank Wolf and Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, would create a new Office of Religious Persecution Monitoring in the White House. The director, subordinate only to the president, would be charged with reporting on abuses against religious minorities. Serious abuses would trigger automatic economic sanctions. The bill would have the director examine first and foremost the treatment of Christians, Tibetan Buddhists and Bahais, but then the office could move on to other faiths. Those fleeing religious persecution would get special treatment from U.S. asylum officers. The bill, opposed by the Clinton administration for, among other things, restricting its flexibility in foreign-policy matters, has attracted support from a wide spectrum, ranging from liberal Democrats to conservative Republicans. Some welcome it primarily as a vehicle to express displeasure with China, others as a means to force more attention to human-rights matters in general, and still others primarily as a defense of the Christian groups that provided the initial inspiration for it. Some longtime advocates of religious freedom around the world raise objections to aspects of the bill while supporting its goals and intentions. There is concern, well-founded in precedent, that a separate White House office removed from State Department and National Security Council policymakers could end up marginalizing the issue rather than elevating it. Naming some persecuted groups while neglecting others could send a message that Congress values Bahais in Iran, say, more than Sunni Muslims there. More broadly, singling out the freedom to worship risks sending a message that some human rights are more cherished than others. Proponents believe they are simply righting past imbalances, but it is important that China understand that a brave political dissident such as Wei Jingsheng is no more, nor less, important to Americans than equally courageous Catholic bishops or Tibetan Buddhists now suffering in labor camps. This potential hierarchy is particularly troubling in the area of granting asylum, which should be made more accessible for all who are persecuted. |
|