It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. Sanctions China State Energy Trader for Iran Sales

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 06:49 PM
link   
Zhenrong is based in China, and is the largest supplier of refined petroleum product to Iran. The United States has determined that Zhenrong brokered the delivery of over $500 million in gasoline to Iran between July 2010 and January 2011, with individual deals entered into worth significantly more than the $1 million threshold under U.S. law and the total value of the transactions well above the $5 million threshold for sanctionable activities within a 12-month period.

Source / Alternative source

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States on Thursday sanctioned China's state-run Zhuhai Zhenrong Corp, which it said was Iran's largest supplier of refined petroleum products, as it sought to impress on Beijing and Tehran its resolve to increase economic pressure over Iran's nuclear program.


Related material:

U.N. Security Council 1929

CISADA
edit on 12-1-2012 by Daedal because: Edit




posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   
Looks like things will begin to heat up with Iran and possibly China. Putting sanctions against China could pose several risks for the U.S. in it's quest to implement themselves in the Asian Century.



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   
I imagine this will not go over well with China at all!

Things are just getting crazier and crazier!

I'll be curious to hear how China responds to this sanction!



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Am I reading this right? We're mad at them about their trade in 2010 and 2011?!



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 07:03 PM
link   
To be perfectly honest, it's about time that the U.S. started sanctioning China. China is a bigger currency manipulator than the Federal Reserve is with the dollar.

But, point blank, it's not really about any of it. It's just about U.S. companies being able to go over to China, taking U.S. jobs with it, without impunity. The more sanctions against China, the more this harms them, and the happier I'll be.



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   

The United States currently maintains the following economic sanctions against China:

! limits on U.S. foreign assistance;
! U.S. “No” votes or abstention in the international banks;
! ban on Overseas Private Investment Corporation programs;
! ban on export of defense articles or defense services;
! ban on import of munitions or ammunition;
! denial of Generalized System of Preferences status;
! substantial export controls on dual-use items, particularly satellites, nuclear technology, and computers;
! export and licensing restrictions on targeted entities found to have engaged in proliferation of missiles and weapons of mass destruction (or related technology); and
! Presidential authority to restrict Chinese military companies and Chinese government-affiliated businesses from developing commercial activities inside the United States.

Human rights conditions in China and the threat of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction resulting from China’s lack of export controls or lack of cooperation with international export control standards continue to be the main foreign policy or national security issues that hold these economic restrictions in place.

The influence of Congress on U.S. policy toward China, once significant because so much hung on the annual possibility that favorable trade terms could be suspended, has more recently been diffused. Sanctions that remain in place today can all be modified, eased, or lifted altogether by the President, without congressional input (though some changes would require that the President notify Congress). Congress and the Administration each recognize the importance of China’s emerging ability to consume and to produce, and China has become an increasingly important trading partner of the United States.

At the same time, because of the unrelenting tension between the United States and the Peoples Democratic Republic of Korea over the latter’s interest in developing nuclear weapons capability, and because of China’s longstanding relation with North Korea as a primary trading partner and benefactor, the United States’ relations with China are crucial.


Do you think the US can enforce them? Unless all the countries in the world, unite, China will just find another way.



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   
Apparently, Zhuhai Zhenrong Corp, is scouting for sites in Myanmar to build a 100,000 (bpd) refinery. CNPC, parent of PetroChina, is laying oil and natural gas pipelines that connect Myanmar with China's southwestern province of Yunnan, a landlocked region that is short of energy resources.

Source

BEIJING, Jan 12 (Reuters) - China's Guangdong Zhenrong Energy Co. Ltd, an oil and commodity trader partly owned by state-run Zhuhai Zhenrong Corp, is scouting for sites in Myanmar to build a 100,000 barrels-per-day (bpd) refinery, the company's chief executive said.

The project, estimated to cost $2.5 billion, is likely to be located in the southern port city of Dawei and built by 2015, chief executive Xiong Shaohui told Reuters by telephone from the company's headquarters in southern Guangzhou.


Related material:

Japan to help fund a Southern Corridor linking Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam, & Myanmar

Iran Crude Oil Exports to China Set to Fall in January

Japan Says to Reduce Oil Dependency on Iran

Edit
edit on 12-1-2012 by Daedal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


Have any of these sanctions you referred to in your reply been directly put in place to inhibit Iran from recieving assistance from China by means of refined petrol?



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Daedal
 


By reading it you can see the answer is no. My point was at the end of my post.



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by Daedal
 


By reading it you can see the answer is no. My point was at the end of my post.


There is no reference link to the material you posted...that's why I asked.



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Daedal
 


Sorry about that. Here it is. Sorry for acting smartassy, just that kind of day.

Edit: it is an older list. I cannot find a newer one.
edit on 12-1-2012 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by Daedal
 


Sorry about that. Here it is. Sorry for acting smartassy, just that kind of day.

Edit: it is an older list. I cannot find a newer one.
edit on 12-1-2012 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)


I have them myself...no worries. Thx for the link.
edit on 12-1-2012 by Daedal because: Edit







 
3

log in

join