Pirates Kidnap U.S. Off-Ship Personnel in Nigeria

Armed pirates stormed a U.S. flagged ship off the coast of Nigeria early Wednesday morning, kidnapping the American Captain and Chief Engineer, U.S. officials confirmed to ABC News.

Pirates have stormed an oil supply vessel off southern Nigeria and kidnapped the ship’s captain and chief engineer.

The men are now on land, according to a Defense Department official, and the FBI in New York, which deals with Africa cases, is handling the investigation. A U.S. government official briefed on the situation said the American government is treating the case as a potential kidnapping-for-ransom and not a politically-motivated act.

The Americans were taken off the U.S.-flagged C-Retriever, a 222-foot vessel owned by U.S. marine transport group Edison Chouest Offshore that is an oil supply vessel.

The kidnapping was first reported by gCaptain.com, a maritime industry news website.

While globally piracy was down last year to its lowest levels in seven years, cases in Nigeria are on the rise. According to the International Maritime Bureau, pirate attacks off Nigeria’s coast have jumped by a third this year — allegedly perpetrated by criminal gangs who are looking for cargo ships with commodities, and seeking ransom for hostages.

Kidnapping for ransom has been a growing issue in Nigeria for several years. In 2006 ABC News interviewed an American, Texas Richards, who had been kidnapped by Nigerians and freed.

Via:abc

U.S. Cuts Aid to Syrian Rebels

The United States has cut off northern Syrian moderate rebel groups from non-lethal aid, with an al-Qaeda advance in northern Syria physically blocking the aid’s dispersal, as the Obama administration continues to ‘disengage’ itself from Syria.

A picture taken on October 18, 2013, shows a rebel fighter standing behind a broken television in the Salaheddin district of the northern Syrian city of Aleppo. TOPSHOTS/AFP PHOTO

Daily Hürriyet’s Washington representative, Tolga Tanış, reported that the Obama administration commenced its ‘disengagement’ from Syria on Oct. 2, laying out three conditions to the moderate rebels, should they wish for the resumption of aid.

A joint U.S.-Russia plan on the chemical disarmament of Syria and clashes between the Western-Arab-backed Free Syrian Army (FSA) and al-Qaeda-linked rebels known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) factored into the halting of aid to the rebels. Turkey closed its Öncüpınar border gate on Sept. 18 amid an al-Qaeda advance and the U.S. stopped a batch of non-lethal aid to moderate rebels.

At the same time a group of Syria’s most powerful rebel brigades have rejected the Western-Arab-backed opposition group, Syrian National Coalition (SNC), which announced the creation of an interim government in exile. The 13 rebel groups, led by the al-Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front, called on supporters of the Syrian opposition to embrace Sharia law.

On Oct. 2, U.S. State Department officials conferred and decided on sending three messages to the moderate rebels. Citing an unnamed source who attended meetings, Tanış said the first one was that the U.S. would not repeat the same mistake in Afghanistan where supported groups were radicalized; instead, Washington would wait for moderate groups to distance themselves from radicals. The second one was that the U.S. would not resume its provision of aid until Turkey reopens its border gate and the moderate rebels took control of the northern Syrian town of Azaz. The third and final one was that the U.S. would not allow for any further developments until positive indications were observed from the rebels.

High-ranking CIA official resigns

The opposition tried to solve the deadlock and even pushed al-Nusra Front out of the Saudi Arabian-backed Islamic Army, but could not convince Washington to ‘disengage’ from Syria at the time.

A U.S. official advised yesterday that the aid to rebels had officially ceased. “ISIS has blocked the dispersal of part of the aid. The border gate is closed and we cannot distribute necessary supplies,” he said. Another source familiar with the matter commented on the new U.S. policy, saying it has caused quite the stir within the CIA, including the resignation of a high-ranking official in September.

Via: hurriyetdailynews

Middle East Oil Fuels Fresh China-U.S. Tensions

Beijing Depends on U.S. Military to Secure Middle East Imports

China is overtaking the U.S. as a buyer of Middle East oil, adding fuel to diplomatic tension between the nations over security in the region.

China surpassed the U.S. as importer of Persian Gulf crude several years ago, by some measures. Now it is on track to overtake the U.S. this year as the world’s No. 1 buyer of oil from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, the largely Middle Eastern energy-exporting bloc.

China is on track to become the world’s top buyer of oil from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. Deborah Kan talks to Wood Mackenzie’s President of Global Markets William Durbin about China’s growing demand for Middle East oil and its commercial and geopolitical consequences.

The turnabout has added to tensions because it leaves the U.S. military securing China’s growing oil shipments in the region at a time Beijing resists U.S. pressure on it to back American foreign policy in the Middle East.

U.S. Navy

The U.S. dominates military security of Mideast-oil exports. U.S. warships plied the Persian Gulf in March 2012.

For years, China and other oil-consuming nations have benefited as Washington spent billions of dollars a year to police chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz and other volatile parts of the Middle East to ensure oil flowed around the globe.

But the rise of North America’s shale oil and gas industry has put the U.S. on track to pass Russia this year as the world’s largest combined producer of oil and gas, if it hasn’t done so already, according to a recent analysis of global data by The Wall Street Journal.

That rise, combined with flat U.S. oil consumption, is making America far less dependent on imported oil, including from the Middle East, even as China’s reliance on the region’s oil grows.

China’s OPEC-crude imports during this year’s first half averaged 3.7 million barrels a day, versus 3.5 million for the U.S., according to Wood Mackenzie, a consulting firm. At that rate, its OPEC imports will surpass America’s on an annual basis for the first time this year, Wood Mackenzie said. India ranked No. 3, at about 3.4 million barrels a day.

In 2004, the U.S. imported about 5 million barrels a day from OPEC, and China imported about 1.1 million, Wood Mackenzie said. An OPEC official declined to say whether China is now the bloc’s top customer.

China’s imports have surged in recent years from OPEC nations such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq and the United Arab Emirates, according to Chinese customs data.

China is trading places with the U.S. by some other measures as well. The U.S. is still No. 1 in crude imports from all the world. But new data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration show China has slightly overtaken the U.S. in net oil imports, defined as total liquid-fuels consumption minus domestic production.

China’s net imports were 6.30 million barrels a day in September, versus U.S. net imports of 6.24 million, the EIA data show; the U.S. energy-production boom has helped push down its net-import figure.

And China will soon import more from the Persian Gulf than the U.S. did at its 2001 peak, according to EIA and Chinese customs data. It surpassed the U.S. as a buyer of Persian Gulf crude in 2009, according to the data.

China’s rise as a dominant buyer of Middle East oil presents a conundrum for it and the U.S. For China, it means its economy depends in part on oil from a region dominated by the U.S. military. When tankers depart Persian Gulf terminals for China, they rely in significant part on the U.S. Fifth Fleet policing the area.

For Washington, China’s oil thirst means justifying military spending that benefits a country many Americans see as a strategic rival and that frequently doesn’t side with the U.S. on foreign policy.

Signs of tension are surfacing. Beijing has asked for assurances that Washington will maintain security in the Persian Gulf region, as China doesn’t have the military power to do the job itself, according to people familiar with recent discussions between the countries.

In meetings since at least last year, Chinese officials have sought to ensure U.S. commitment to the region isn’t wavering, particularly as the Obama administration has pledged to rebalance some of its strategic focus toward East Asia, said people familiar with those discussions.

In return, U.S. officials have pressed China for greater support on issues such as its foreign policy regarding Syria and Iran. U.S. officials in private discussions have pressed China to lower its crude imports from Iran, for example, according to a person with knowledge of the discussions.

Meanwhile, China faces criticism from senior U.S. leaders who complain that Beijing has obstructed tough action against the Syrian regime at the United Nations. Current and former U.S. officials have told the Chinese that stable energy flows from the Middle East will need greater cooperation from Beijing going forward, said the people familiar with the discussions.

China’s Foreign Ministry, in a statement responding to questions for this article, said China’s oil trade with the Middle East was "mutually beneficial and in accordance with international business norms," adding that China wanted political inclusiveness, economic prosperity, and peace and stability for the region.

At an April Brookings Institution conference in Washington, D.C., when the former head of China’s National Energy Administration, Zhang Guobao, was asked whether China could assume a greater role in protecting the region’s shipping lanes, he responded: "Why don’t the Americans do the job for now."

"The U.S. has invested time, energy and resources into creating a global system," said Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East program at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. "China is becoming a global power and does not seem at all invested in the idea of creating a global system."

The U.S. has other interests in keeping a big presence in the region, including protecting Israel and shoring up shipping lanes for allies such as Japan and South Korea. And it isn’t clear whether the U.S. would soon welcome greater Chinese military involvement in the Mideast, which could challenge America’s role in the region.

The U.S. has dominated Gulf security since the 1970s, after Britain pulled its resident military from the region. It has more recently used weapons sales to bolster regional partners, such as Saudi Arabia, to share security responsibility.

Allies have added military bases in the region: Japan’s Self-Defense Forces in 2011 opened a base in Djibouti to help police shipping lanes, and France in 2009 opened a base in the United Arab Emirates.

China’s ability to project power in the region is constrained. It doesn’t have the military firepower or expertise to actively police conflict zones or shipping lanes. Its biggest military deployment in the region has come during modest antipiracy operations off the coast of Somalia.

A picture of China’s strategy in the region can be seen in Iraq, a growing source of its crude imports. Chinese imports from Iraq have more than doubled since 2009, according to Chinese customs data.

In the southeast region of Maysan, China National Petroleum Corp. is building a fortified desert oasis for its workers in a region blighted and pocked by the U.S.-led war.

At the CNPC-operated Halfaya oil field, workers’ villas line a newly-built artificial lake, which the company has outfitted with sailboats for employees.

A pair of stone lion statues—believed by the Chinese to ward off bad spirits—stands guard at the company’s oil-field command center. Nearby, CNPC recently finished renovations on an airstrip, which will be used to ferry in Chinese oil workers.

China’s political footprints in Iraq are small. In Baghdad, its presence is a modest embassy with about 10 Chinese staff not far from the sprawling American embassy, where thousands of diplomats and others remain tied up trying to win Iraq’s stability.

CNPC declined to make officials available for an interview and didn’t respond to a request for comment.

"Commercial is commercial and politics is politics," said Du Ming, a political attaché at the Chinese embassy in Baghdad. "We’re not going to try to influence Iraqi politics just because our oil companies need to stay here."

This isn’t the first time an Asian nation has faced Washington pressure over the Persian Gulf sea lanes. Japan took U.S. criticism around the first Gulf War—sparked by Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait—for what some viewed as Tokyo’s reluctance to contribute to the American-led military effort, even though much of Japan’s oil originated in the Persian Gulf.

More recently, Japan has escaped such criticism as it has more closely hewed its foreign policy to Washington’s. Tokyo has been a major financial contributor to U.S. strategic initiatives, such as rebuilding Iraq.

To mitigate growing tensions over energy security and other matters, Washington and Beijing last year set up an annual meeting of senior U.S. and Chinese diplomats called U.S.-China Middle East Dialogue.

U.S. officials hoped that Washington’s and Beijing’s shared desire for stable energy flow from the Middle East would help them find common ground and persuade Beijing to more closely cooperate with the U.S. on issues such as Syria and Iran, said a person familiar with the meetings.

But the closed-door gatherings have produced limited results, this person said. A State Department news release from the second of the annual meetings, in June, said the U.S. welcomed China’s playing "a more active and positive role in the Middle East region."

President Obama at the United Nations in September said the U.S. remained committed to the region’s energy flow. "Although America is steadily reducing our own dependence on imported oil, the world still depends on the region’s energy supply, and a severe disruption could destabilize the entire global economy," he said.

Write to Brian Spegele at brian.spegele and Matt Bradley at matt.bradley

U.S. SOCOM Ran 2 Hit and Run Operations Last Night

VİDEOYU BURADAN İZLEYEBİLİRSİNİZ.

In two operations nearly 3,000 miles apart, U.S. military forces went after two high-value targets over the weekend. And while officials have yet to say whether the operations were coordinated or directly related, they show Washington’s reach, capability and willingness to pursue alleged terrorists.

Navy Seals Conducting Beach Landing

One operation took place Saturday in the Libyan capital of Tripoli, when U.S. forces captured Abu Anas al Libi, an al Qaeda leader wanted for his role in the deadly 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.

As al Libi was leaving his house for morning prayers, a group of 10 masked men surprised him, a source close to Libyan intelligence said. Citing al Libi’s wife, the source said the al Qaeda leader tried to reach into his car to grab his gun — but the U.S. forces quickly snatched him.

In the second raid, a team of U.S. Navy SEALs in southern Somalia targeted the top leader of Al-Shabaab, which was behind last month’s mall attack in Kenya. The SEALs came under fire and had to withdraw before they could confirm whether they killed their target, a senior U.S. official said.

“One could have gone without the other,” said retired Lt. Col. Rick Francona, CNN’s military analyst. “But the fact that they did them both, I think, is a real signal that the United States — no matter how long it takes — will go after these targets.”

The operations were carried out even as polls show Americans are skittish about U.S. military involvement in overseas conflicts. This means, Francona said, that others who might be in the U.S. government’s cross hairs could have more reason to worry.

Speaking to reporters at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Bali, Indonesia, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said the raids ought to make clear that the United States “will never stop in its effort to hold those accountable who conduct acts of terror.”

“Those members of al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations literally can run,” he said, “but they can’t hide.”

Al Libi tied to U.S. embassy bombings

Al Libi, 49, has been high on the radar for years. He was on the FBI’s “Most Wanted Terrorists” list, with a $5 million reward for information leading to his arrest or conviction.

He is alleged to have played a key role in the August 7, 1998, bombings of American embassies in Nairobi, Kenya; and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. More than 200 people were killed and another 5,000 wounded in the Kenya attack; 11 died in the Tanzania incident.

Al Libi has been indicted on charges of conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals, murder, destruction of American buildings and government property, and destruction of national defense utilities of the United States.

As early as December 2010, Libyan authorities told a United Nations committee that al Libi was living there, even providing a Tripoli address for him.

U.S. officials wanted al Libi to face trial in an American court.

But, counterterrorism analysts told CNN, he may not have been apprehended because of the delicate security situation in much of Libya. There, ex-jihadists — especially those who once belonged to the Libyan Islamic Fighters Group — held considerable sway since the ouster of longtime leader Moammar Gadhafi.

The Saturday operation was conducted with the knowledge of the Libyan government, said one U.S. official. The Pentagon said the U.S. military was holding him in a “secure location” outside Libya.

“It’s a huge deal to get him,” said CNN’s Nic Robertson, who has long been covering al Qaeda. “He’s a big player in al Qaeda (and) he is in one of the key target areas, the north of Africa.”

Beyond any psychological impact on the terrorist group, al Libi’s capture could potentially yield a wealth of information about al Qaeda’s plans and capabilities. The terrorist network has shown particular strength of late in Africa.

“Clearly, he may have useful information about the strength of al Qaeda and the Islamists in Libya,” Robertson said. “He is somebody who is senior within al Qaeda. He was well respected, a good operative.”

Al-Shabaab blamed for Kenya mall attack

Al-Shabaab long has been a target of Washington as well: It was designated a foreign terrorist organization in 2008. The group is seeking to turn Somalia into a fundamentalist Islamic state, though it has carried out attacks in other African countries as well.

The attack on Nairobi’s Westgate Mall on September 21 thrust Al-Shabaab into the spotlight once again. Washington vowed to support Kenya’s government after the bloody raid, which killed at least 67 people.

The Al-Shabaab raid took place before dawn Saturday (late Friday night ET) in the southern Somalian port city of Barawe.

The Pentagon would only say the operation was against a “known Al-Shabaab terrorist.” But town residents told CNN the “foreign forces” came via speed boat and stormed a house believed to be a hideout for several top militant commanders, including the group’s top leader Ahmed abdi Godane, also known as Moktar Ali Zubeyr.

A senior U.S. official said the Navy SEALs inflicted some Al-Shabaab casualties, and came under fire.

They made the “prudent decision” to withdraw, and couldn’t confirm whether they killed their target, the official said.

Abdiaziz Abu Musab, an Al-Shabaab spokesman, said at least one Al-Shabaab fighter was killed in the gunfight. But no U.S. personnel were injured or killed, a U.S. official said.

In recent months, Al-Shabaab’s haven in south-central Somalia has been been increasingly squeezed as Kenyan forces fight the group from the south and African Union forces come down from Mogadishu.

At the same time, Al-Shabaab has become even more closely aligned with al Qaeda. The two groups effectively merged last year, said CNN National Security Analyst Peter Bergen.

“This is a group that has adopted al Qaeda’s ideology wholesale,” Bergen said. “The reason they attacked the mall was notonly because it was Kenyan, but also because it attracted a fair number of Western businessmen and others living in Nairobi.”

Via:cnn

Norway Asked by U.S., Russia to Destroy Syrian Chemical Weapons

The U.S. and Russia made ​​a specific request to obtain chemical weapons out of Syria and destroy them in Norway.

OPCW inspectors arrived at a hotel in Damascus Tuesday of this week. PHOTO: KHALED AL-Hariri

The request came on the sidelines of the UN summit in New York last week and will also be repeated on multiple levels. Norwegian authorities should already be in the process of evaluating and analyzing how Norway can contribute.

The reason that Norway will be asked to accept the assignment shall be that Norway is considered politically stable country and we have great water resources, which is crucial in the effort to destroy the weapons.

Russia and the U.S. have previously agreed to a deal that says that Syria’s chemical weapons come under international control and destroyed.

Verbal requests

A week ago, the UN Security Council agreed that the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPWC) to help Syria to get rid of its chemical weapons by mid-2014.

– We are in a constant dialogue with other countries about how Norway can help to implement the decision, said the Head of the Foreign Ministry, Ragnhild Imerslund, told Aftenposten.

– We confirm, as we have done previously, that Norway will look at how we can help to ensure that the decision of the OPCW and the resolution of the Security Council are implemented.

– What such a contribution from Norway concrete may mean it’s too early to tell. We will consider several options and have a thorough process of this before something is finally decided, she said.

– We are in dialogue with the other members of the senate of OPCW and other UN member states on how the decisions of the United Nations can best be implemented. The Security Council has urged all member states to consider how best to help. This can be done in a variety of ways – technical expertise, financial contributions, equipment, information and other assistance.

Søreide: – The security key

Ine Marie Eriksen Søreide from the Conservatives told Aftenposten that she has been informed that there has been a discussion about how Norway can contribute when it comes to destroy chemical weapons in Syria. Søreide was head of the Foreign and Defense Committee in Parliament in the previous period and is cited as one of several possible names new Foreign Minister Solberg Government

– Before the new government will take we do not have insight into how far the discussions have progressed, and can not say anything about the totality of the case. But these are dangerous weapon and one must identify the risks of this and make sure it can be done safely, she said.

Today the country new weapons inspectors Syria.They will do everything they can to destroy the nation’s chemical weapons.

OPCW inspectors arrived in Damascus on Tuesday. The group of inspectors will begin to inspect Syria’s arsenal of chemical weapons to see that it is consistent with the information given Syria.They will then concentrate on the country’s ability to produce chemical weapons.

OPCW has sent out a general request to member states on how they can contribute. The Americans and the Russians have spoken come with concrete want to Norway, according to Norwegian.

Assad: Will destroy weapons

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said in an interview with Italian television that he will follow the UN resolution on the destruction of its chemical weapons.

– Much of the content of the UN resolution is in line with what we wanted.Actually, it’s not the resolution itself, but for our own purposes, he says, pointing out that the UN Security Council in 2003 proposed to eliminate all chemical weapons in the Middle East.

– It is clear that we must respect the terms of the resolution, not least from our own history. We must abide by all agreements we signed.

Via:aftenposten

U.S. and Japan Agree to Broaden Military Alliance

Koji Sasahara/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, left, Secretary of State John Kerry and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, center, on Thursday in Tokyo.

TOKYO — The United States and Japan agreed on Thursday to broaden their security alliance, expanding Japan’s role while trying to show American determination to remain a dominant presence in the region.

The agreement, which will position surveillance drones in Japan for the first time, underscored the two countries’ efforts to respond to growing challenges from China and North Korea at a time of budget constraints. It also included some of the clearest signals yet that the United States backs Japan’s increasing though still limited moves to strengthen its military, and its military ties in Asia, as a counterbalance to China’s own buildup.

Those provisions are sure to rankle China and come at a time of already heightened tensions between the two Asian powers, which are locked in a standoff over islands in the East China Sea. The drones, as well as Navy reconnaissance planes never before stationed outside the United States, are expected to patrol waters in the region, including those around the disputed island chain.

The agreement was signed during a visit here by the secretaries of state and defense, John Kerry and Chuck Hagel, who were meeting with their Japanese counterparts. With two cabinet members present, the signing appeared to be another effort by the administration to fight a growing anxiety in Asia that the United States is too preoccupied with internal political struggles and troubles in the Middle East to carry through with its much-vaunted “pivot” to Asia.

“Our bilateral defense cooperation, including America’s commitment to the security of Japan, is a critical component of our overall relationship,” Mr. Hagel told reporters, “and to the Obama administration’s rebalance to Asia-Pacific.”

For its part, Japan committed to bolster its security capabilities by creating a new American-style National Security Council, and said it would expand assistance to Southeast Asian countries to help them resist Chinese territorial claims. Japan also pledged to increase military spending over all, despite the country’s need to pare down its huge national debt, and said it might change its current interpretation of its pacifist Constitution to allow its military to come to the aid of American forces under attack.

Because the wording of the agreement was worked out jointly, those provisions suggested American support for the changes, some of which remain controversial in Japan where many fear they are leading the country ever further from its postwar pacifism. The United States has long suggested it would welcome Japan’s moving toward what some here call a “more normal” military rather than limiting itself to Self-Defense Forces, but the agreement was quite specific.

Japan has slowly been pushing the bounds of the constitutional constraints on its military for years, partly in a reaction to China’s increasing power and assertiveness in the region. Japanese warships have not only conducted joint exercises with a growing number of military forces in the Pacific and Asia, but they have also begun making regular port visits to countries that had once been fearful of a resurgence of Japan’s military.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, a conservative nationalist, has already increased military spending for the first time in 11 years, though by only 0.8 percent. He would like to go further, proposing a rewriting of the Constitution that would scrap restrictions on the military and that has so far won little popular backing. As a first step, he has proposed expanding the interpretation of the Constitution to allow the military to come to the aid of United States forces if needed.

A key issue during the talks was how to respond to China, which has been sending ships to contest Japan’s control of the group of uninhabited islands in the East China Sea known as the Senkaku in Japan and the Diaoyu in China. The agreement announced on Thursday says the United States and Japan should be ready to deal with “coercive and destabilizing behaviors.” While the United States has refused to take sides in the dispute, Mr. Hagel repeated American assurances that the islands are covered by the security treaty, which obligates the United States to help Japan defend itself if attacked.

Mr. Kerry sought to allay Chinese fears about a closer United States-Japan military alliance, saying the United States desires a cooperative relationship with China on the issue of North Korea and other areas of common ground.

Still, he appeared to put China on notice that the United States had some limits. The United States has been “very clear about our interests and those things that we think represent lines that we think should not be crossed,” including on the matter of the islands dispute with Japan. While the United States is not weighing in on that matter, he said “we do recognize Japan’s administration of those islands.”

Chinese officials were unavailable for comment on Thursday, a national holiday in China.

Scott Seaman, a senior analyst who monitors China and Japan at the Eurasia Group, a political risk consulting firm in Washington, said the agreement should not have come as a surprise to China. At the same time, he said, “it’s not going to be something seen in a very positive light in China.”

The security guidelines included an agreement to work on specific cybersecurity projects. It also finalized plans to place a new X-band radar system in Kyogamisaki, near Kyoto, to better protect both countries against military threats from North Korea. The powerful new radar will also save the Pentagon money by freeing up American Aegis radar ships that now patrol the waters near North Korea for use elsewhere in the world.

Despite the benefits for the United States, the efforts by Japan to enhance its military capabilities present the Obama administration with a conundrum. While American officials have welcomed Japan’s willingness to shoulder a larger share of the region’s security burden, those moves have been watched warily in South Korea, another key American defense partner. In particular, past denials by Japanese leaders, including Mr. Abe, that Korean women were forced into sexual servitude by the Japanese military during World War II have angered many Koreans.

As a result, the United States has struggled to get its two closest Asian allies to conduct even low-level military cooperation. The agreement on Thursday called specifically for trilateral cooperation between the United States, South Korea and Japan to face common threats, like North Korea’s nuclear program.

U.S. Is Overtaking Russia as Largest Oil-and-Gas Producer

The U.S. is overtaking Russia as the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas, a shift that is reshaping markets and eroding the clout of traditional energy-rich nations. Russell Gold reports. Photo: Getty Images.

The U.S. is overtaking Russia as the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas, a startling shift that is reshaping markets and eroding the clout of traditional energy-rich nations.

U.S. energy output has been surging in recent years, a comeback fueled by shale-rock formations of oil and natural gas that was unimaginable a decade ago. A Wall Street Journal analysis of global data shows that the U.S. is on track to pass Russia as the world’s largest producer of oil and gas combined this year—if it hasn’t already.

The U.S. ascendance comes as Russia has struggled to maintain its energy output and has yet to embrace technologies such as hydraulic fracturing that have boosted American reserves.

"This is a remarkable turn of events," said Adam Sieminski, head of the U.S. Energy Information Administration. "This is a new era of thinking about market conditions, and opportunities created by these conditions, that you wouldn’t in a million years have dreamed about."

The U.S. produced the equivalent of about 22 million barrels a day of oil, natural gas and related fuels in July, according to figures from the EIA and the International Energy Agency. Neither agency has data for Russia’s gas output this year, but Moscow’s forecast for 2013 oil-and-gas production works out to about 21.8 million barrels a day.

U.S. imports of natural gas and crude oil have fallen 32% and 15%, respectively, in the past five years, narrowing the U.S. trade deficit. And since the U.S. is such a big consumer of energy, the shift to producing more of its own oil and gas has left substantial fuel supplies available for other buyers. Nations that rely on peddling petroleum for their economic strength and political clout face dwindling market power as a result. Oil prices so far remain high, however, closing Wednesday at $104.10 a barrel, up 18% from a year ago.

Fuel Champion

See countries’ average daily output of oil and gas since 1984.

View Graphics

Many analyses of energy markets look only at crude oil. But Russia and the U.S. also are major players in natural-gas markets, where they far outproduce countries such as Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil producer.

The U.S. last year tapped more natural gas than Russia for the first time since 1982, according to data from the International Energy Agency. Russia’s exports have been crimped by rising competition and the economic slump in Europe. Russia forecasts that its gas production will increase slightly in coming years, but its forecast for this year is below current U.S. production.

Ripple Effects

The U.S. energy boom has wide-ranging consequences around the globe.

• Energy giants are proposing half a trillion dollars in projects to export vast new finds of North American natural gas .
• Shell’s experience in China, where it is charging ahead faster than competitors, shows how replicating the U.S. shale boom won’t be easy .
• The U.S. energy boom is being heralded in Washington and beyond as bolstering U.S. energy security and creating jobs. But outside the country, it’s roiling the some of the world’s biggest foreign suppliers of American crude. No more so than in Canada, where crude prices have been on a roller coaster ride because of a glut of North American crude.
• Big foreign producers are being laid low in unexpected ways. Exhibit A is Gazprom, the company at the heart of Russian Prime Minister Putin’s energy politics . Cheap gas in the U.S. has lowered the price of coal exports. European utilities, once beholden to Gazprom and Russian gas, are now buying cheap U.S. coal and forcing Gazprom into playing defense.
• Amid the U.S. boom, OPEC is dividing along new lines: those that are getting slammed because of the glut of U.S. crude and those that are surviving.
• U.S. crude-oil output grew by the largest margin in U.S. history in 2012 , the latest sign of how the U.S. energy boom is remaking the global oil market.
• Growing North American oil supplies promise to bolster U.S. energy security, but they are already helping deliver a more global benefit: stable oil prices . Among the beneficiaries, in turn, are policy makers in Washington.
• The fatal crash of an oil-carrying train raises scrutiny on the soaring shipment of crude on North America’s railroads , as the continent’s energy boom redraws how energy is transported.

The U.S. is also catching up in the race to pump crude. Russia produced an average of 10.8 million barrels of oil and related fuel a day in the first half of this year. That was about 900,000 barrels a day more than the U.S.—but down from a gap of three million barrels a day a few years ago, according to the IEA.

The amount of crude from two of the hottest plays in the U.S.—the Bakken oil field in North Dakota and the Eagle Ford shale formation in South Texas—continues to rise rapidly, while Russian output has increased modestly over the past three years. The Russian government predicts oil output will remain flat through 2016, while natural gas ticks up 3%. The shift has raised concerns in Moscow that U.S. crude supplies will crowd out Russia’s oil exports.

"Russia looks like the main loser in the global market," said Tatiana Mitrova, of the Russian Academy of Sciences’ Energy Research Institute. More than 40% of Russia’s budget comes from oil-and-gas related duties and taxes, she said.

The institute has forecast that Russian oil exports could fall 25% to 30% after 2015, reducing gross domestic product more than $100 billion.

To be sure, Russia is believed to have one of the world’s largest, untapped oil-bearing shale formations, creating the potential for a surge in production.

And not everyone in Russia sees a threat from the U.S. The head of one the country’s largest energy companies, OAO Gazprom, OGZPY +2.15% has called expanding U.S. shale output "a bubble that will soon burst."

A similar view was expressed Tuesday by Abdallah Salem el-Badri, the head of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, who said in an interview that the U.S. oil boom from shale will run out of steam by decade’s end.

A drilling rig near Waynesburg, Pa.

Saudi Arabia remains the world’s largest supplier of crude oil and related liquids. As of July, Saudi Arabia was pumping 11.7 million barrels a day, according to the IEA. Russia was second, at 10.8 million barrels, while the U.S. was third, at 10.3 million. Each of the three pumps more than twice the daily output of such major producers as Canada, Venezuela and Nigeria.

Even optimists in the U.S. concede that the shale boom’s longevity could hinge on commodity prices, government regulations and public support, the last of which could be problematic. A poll last month by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found that opposition to increased use of fracking rose to 49% from 38% in the previous six months.

Other risk factors: a global economic contraction would depress oil and gas prices, leading companies to slow production. And drilling in shale is expensive and more complex than conventional exploration, leading to concerns that a market downturn could take a large bite out of U.S. output.

So far, most companies aren’t dialing back, even though they need access to enormous amounts of capital to pay for the deep wells required to tap dense rock formations.

Much of the growth in fossil-fuel production comes from companies that need to sell shares, take on debt or sell assets to plug a gap between spending and their revenue. According to an estimate by Barclays PLC, 50 major U.S. oil and gas explorers needed to raise $50.3 billion last year to close that gap.

Plenty of private-equity funding and overseas investment remains available, industry experts say, and debt remains relatively cheap.

"The dollars needed have never been larger," said Maynard Holt, co-president of Houston-based investment bank Tudor, Pickering Holt & Co. "But the money is truly out there. The global energy capital river is flowing our way."

U.S. energy producers also are drilling more efficiently and cutting costs in other ways. Some companies have said that the amount of oil and gas produced by shale wells isn’t dropping as fast as predicted.

Ken Hersh, chief executive of NGP Energy Capital Management LLC, a private-equity fund with $13 billion under management, said the immense amounts of oil and gas uncovered in recent years indicate that the U.S. energy boom could last a long time.

"It is not a supply question anymore," he said. "It is about demand and the cost of production. Those are the two drivers."

TOP SECRET : U.S. Joint Forces Command Handbook for Persistent Surveillance

U.S. Joint Forces Command Handbook for Persistent Surveillance.pdf

TOP SECRET : Restricted Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction : Reducing Risk of Nuclear War Between U.S. and Russia

Restricted Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction Reducing Risk of Nuclear War Between U.S. and Russia.pdf

TOP SECRET : U.S. Chemical Weapons Stockpile and Destruction Sites Map and Photos

The following map and photos depict the locations of what remains of the U.S. chemical weapons stockpile and the facilities being constructed to complete the destruction of remaining chemical agents. According to a press release from the Department of Defense’s Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives program office, the U.S. had destroyed “nearly 90 percent of the chemical weapons stockpile” in advance of the extended Chemical Weapons Convention deadline of April 29, 2012. Though chemical weapons were originally stored at eight continental U.S. Army military installations, only two facilities remain active. One site is located at the Blue Grass Army Depot in Richmond, Kentucky and the other is at the Pueblo Chemical Depot just north of Avondale, Colorado. The current stockpile includes projectiles, cartridges, and rockets. All of the agents are at least 40 years old and some are more than 50 years old. Each site will eventually house a Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant to safely destroy the remaining chemical weapons. As of August 2013, both facilities are still under construction, though the Pueblo Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant appears to be significantly closer to completion. Original Locations and Compositions of Continental U.S. Chemical Stockpile Sites Chemical Activity/Depot Chemical Agents Munition Configurations Disposal Technology Percentage of Original Stockpile Edgewood Chemical Activity, MD HD Ton containers Neutralization 5.2 Anniston Chemical Activity, AL HD, HT, GB, VX Artillery cartridges Artillery projectiles Ton containers Rockets Mines Incineration 7.2 Blue Grass Chemical Activity, KY H, GB, VX Artillery projectiles Rockets Neutralization/ Supercritical Water Oxidation 1.7 Newport Chemical Depot, IN VX Ton containers Neutralization 4.0 Pine Bluff Chemical Activity, AR HD, HT, GB, VX Ton containers Rockets Mines Incineration 12.2 Pueblo Chemical Depot, CO HD, HT Artillery cartridges Artillery projectiles Neutralization/ Biotreatment 8.3 Deseret Chemical Depot, UT H, HD, HT, Lewisite, GA, GB, VX Artillery cartridges Artillery projectiles Aerial bombs Ton containers Rockets Mines Spray tanks Incineration 43.2 Umatilla Chemical Depot, OR HD, GB, VX Artillery projectiles Aerial bombs Ton containers Rockets Mines Spray tanks Incineration 11.8 Pueblo Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant (PCAPP) Aerial view of the Pueblo Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant site at Pueblo Chemical Depot in Pueblo County, Colorado. Overview of Pueblo Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant detailing the various buildings involved in each phase of chemical weapon destruction. Blue Grass Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant (BGCAPP) Aerial view of Blue Grass Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant location at the Blue Grass Army Depot in Richmond, Kentucky. A photo of the Blue Grass Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant site as of January 2013.