The missing 368,628 tonnes oil South Africa imported from Iran

There were some raised eyebrows recently when customs figures revealed that South Africa was still importing oil (417,000 during February) from Iran in spite of sanctions against that country.

Sasol took responsibility for some 12,000 barrels per day during January. Engen South Africa, which is owned by Petronas Malaysia, did not.

Reuters reported that Engen South Africa claimed that the company had halted oil imports from Iran. When exactly this happened, is unclear. They did not want to comment. Petronas indicated that their Engen unit stopped imports in March of last year. Engen, while not contradicting the statement, also did not confirm it. The messages are mixed.

I have to say this: the numbers don’t tally up. Either somebody is telling half-truths or somebody (and I suspect it could be more than a single somebody) is not owning up! Let’s calculate:

Of the 417,000 tonnes of oil imported from Iran, how much

Other than Sasol, nobody is owning up for the large amount of oil imported by South Africa from Iran.

did Sasol buy?

Sasol said they imported only 12,000 barrels per day, right? A barrel weighs 139kg, or 0.139 tonnes. February had 29 days and I assume that their ‘per day’ includes weekends, high days and holidays. So the sum would be:

Number of barrels x tonnes x days = total monthly import.

12,000 x 0.139 x 29 = 48,372 tonnes.

So WHO imported the remaining 368,628 tonnes?

That is a whole lot of oil, and it sure as heck got delivered somewhere!

• Petronas said it was not them. Engen does not say anything. I am not sure I believe them. My suspicion is that they are looking at stopping imports, but haven’t made a final decision .
• Sasol could be importing more than they claim but, even if they did, it would not be anywhere near the missing 368,628 tonnes!
• Chevron I believe is innocent. They are US-owned and won’t violate US sanctions. The repercussions would be too severe.
• There seems to be confirmation that BP is not the culprit either.
• Shell..well now, Shell is a bit of a dark horse. They have not breathed a word. In fact, they refuse to comment. No answer is an answer too.

A lack of political will

I believe there is a lack of political will to support the US and EU sanctions against Iran. South Africa is notoriously bad at taking a stand. They usually end up dancing around issues. Think of Zimbabwe, Lybia etc. There really is no political pressure from our government on Engen, Shell, Sasol and whoeverelse. Things might change during May this year when Energy Minister Dipuo Peters is set to finally respond to the US in terms of implementing sanctions against Iran. There is a good chance she won’t. As I explained in my previous blog , South Africa and Iran are bedfellows in at least two joint ventures and have been supplying arms to Teheran in spite of the embargo on weapons – an embargo South Africa had agreed to.

In the mean time, this blogger is waiting for the March customs figures to be released. Hopefully the amount of oil imported by South Africa from Iran, will be a round zero.

Also read:

http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/Content.aspx?id=168894

UPDATE 1-Petronas S.Africa unit Engen ends Iran crude imports | Reuters.

Related articles

• Iran and South Africa – Guns, Oil and Embargoes (thewordwright.wordpress.com)
• S.africa Assesses Scenario of Iran Oil Import Cuts (maboulette.wordpress.com)
• South Africa Next To Cut Oil Imports From Iran (blogs.the-american-interest.com)

Iran and South Africa – Guns, Oil and Embargoes

In spite of UN Sanctions, South Africa supplies arms to Iran. South African Deputy President's partner involved.

It was repulsive enough to find out that (yet again) South Africa is acting as a corridor for weapons to a country who really should not have any. Back then it was Zimbabwe. Now it is Iran. And goodness knows what went on in between Then and Now.

I truly hope that this was a once-off, but in my heart I know it is not. The entire operation is much too slick, and completely unlike the time the Chinese and South African governments conspired to smuggle heavy artillery into Zimbabwe in support of its genocidal Mugabe regime.

Guns and other military equipment shipped from South Africa to Iran

On this occasion US weapons were purchased by a Canadian Company, who exported the equipment to South Africa. Selling military grade weapons with South Africa as the end user on the certificate, is completely legal. It is once the weapons hit South African soil that – suddenly – everything starts resembling a marsh: smelly and murky, with several large alligators lurking below the surface.

Here, front-companies re-register the weapons. It seems that the partner of South African Deputy President  Motlanthe, had some

South Africa supplies weapons to Iran. This child could be the next victim.

involvement in terms of paying bribes. I am still trying to figure out WHO the companies are and to whom bribes were paid. The re-registered weapons are shipped to Iran on Russian Cargo Carriers.

It is not the first time of late that family members / spouses of the highest-of-high Brass in South Africa are caught with a smoking gun in the hand. One has to wonder at the coincidence…

I find it highly disturbing that the coverage of the blatant South African violation of sanctions against Iran is receiving so very little attention from the media and that – for some reason – they are not trying to unearth exactly who all the role players are. Guns kill. I have to wonder how many innocents will be killed by Iran with the guns South Africa supplied to them, before the world sits up and really takes notice.

The South African government’s reaction is that they will investigate. This is lip service. In my opinion, South Africa  earned their stripes as Merchants of Death.

South Africa is still buying oil from Iran

The UN has been exerting pressure on South Africa for a while now to stop importing oil from Iran. Late March 2012, it seemed as though the South African government finally paid heed.

To quote Deputy Foreign Minister Ebrahim Ebrahim at a news conference:

“To my knowledge, no Iranian oil is flowing into our country. If there is any, it is very little.”

Yeah, right.

Less than an hour ago, Reuters reported that South Africa imported $364 million in oil from Iran during February. Engen and Sasol are the two biggest buyers of crude originating in Iran.

Frankly, I did not expect the flow of oil from Iran to South Africa to miraculously disappear. These two countries are bedfellows in several joint ventures, such as the $900 million Polymer JV (Arya Sasol Polymer Company) with Pars Petrochemicals.

UN! Impose an Arms Embargo on South Africa

The government of South Africa cannot be trusted. They don’t respect their own signature on UN resolutions they voted in favour of. They don’t respect the rule of law (i.e. Pres. Zuma never stood trial for arms deal corruption charges). They don’t respect the population to whom they have a duty of care (i.e. look at the shocking state of health care and education in the country). They only respect their own pockets and serve their own greed.

I wish to see an arms embargo placed on South Africa until the trade of weapons with Iran is investigated and the culprits are tried.

If you have any information that could be helpful in my research, please contact me.

Related articles

• South Africa’s Close Ties To Iran Under Scrutiny | Fox News (foxnews.com)
• South Africa’s close ties to Iran under scrutiny (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• South Africa’s close ties to Iran under scrutiny (mysanantonio.com)

Shock. Limited Animal Sacrifices took place at 2010 World Cup Stadium sod turning ceremonies

HUH?  LIMITED? When I caught sight of an IOL article (http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=vn20091028124741514C399059) this morning that was originally released by the Cape Argus on October 28, that was my first though…confusion growing with each subsequent paragraph I read.

The article reported on South Africa’s 2010 Soccer World Cup Animal Slaughter Plan and the sacrifices that were already performed (between 2005 and 2007, I assume) during various sod turning ceremonies. Ostensibly the sacrifices were made to bless (or is that Bless in Blood) the construction of the sites where new stadiums for the 2010 Soccer World Cup were to be erected.

Naturally those that approved these sod turning ceremony slaughters are quick to defend their decisions. For instance: Pieter Cronje, who is spokesman for the City of Cape Town, (one of the cities where the 2010 Soccer World Cup will be played) told the Cape Argus that:

“There was a blessing and limited sacrifice ceremony on the stadium site before the start of construction. This was done under the appropriate supervision of law enforcement and city health officials. There was also an inter-denominational blessing at the sod-turning ceremony for the stadium by the premier and mayor at the time”

What a load of RUBBISH. Here is my take ….

ONE

Considering that they approved BLESS in BLOOD once before, there is no reason for them not to approve the proposed 2010 Soccer World Cup animal slaughter. In fact, they created a precedent!

TWO

LIMITED sacrifice? I am sorry, but I do not understand that term.  Does LIMITED  mean play-play sacrifice? Nope, not likely. Or does it mean that only a half a cow was sacrificed? Nope, not doable. Or does it mean that a smaller animal – some poor hapless goat, or lamb or chicken – was gleefully sent into the hereafter in order to BLESS in BLOOD a 2010 Soccer World Cup venue and a sport where blood really has no role to play? Or does limited mean that the animal is kinda dead or kinda alive after having been LIMITED sacrificed? I have no idea. Do you?

THREE

They try to make it sound all controlled and harmless by being quick to point out that the Bless in Blood sacrifices at the construction sites of the 2010 Soccer World Cup sod turning ceremonies were done “under the appropriate supervision of law enforcement and city health officials“. This includes South Africa’s N SPCA by the way.

Oh, that is just great. Sarcasm intended.

So, the SPCA supervises the killing of innocent, healthy animals instead of preventing this cruelty. (When last I checked, the role of an animal cruelty prevention agency was Preventing Cruelty. That is what the P and C in SPCA are meant to stand for. ) But then, in South Africa SPCA may be the abbreviation for Society for the Perpetuation of Cultural Animal killings. Anything is possible. If you don’t believe me, have a look at their media statement in which they make it abundantly clear that they WILL be supporting the proposed BLESS in BLOOD sacrifices to inaugurate each of the 10 FIFA Soccer World Cup Stadiums.

“The N SPCA position is respectful and supportive towards cultural and traditional practices,” said the statement. “Welfare standards are paramount and these include issues such as transportation of animals, holding facilities, the manner of handling, plus the method of slaughter. The N SPCA wishes to give input on this issue to all relevant parties, including to the traditional leaders who made the announcement on this issue.”

Their words, not mine. All I can say is SHAME on you N SPCA. My monthly contributions will now be made to Wet Nose instead!

FOUR

Naturally Cronje was also quick to add that there was also an inter-denominational blessing at the City of Capetown sod-turning ceremony (presided over by both the premier and the mayor, just by the way). Oh, how nice…..!

Double HUH? Am I missing something?

Why were the cultural killers not included under INTERDENOMINATIONAL blanket? Is that not what interdemoninational implies? Or are we dealing with yet another populist move on the part of the powers that be, pandering to a massive portion (80%) of the South African population considered to be above everything – even above interdenominational? (Bear in mind that these animal slaughtering people are mostly practicing Christians, so it is not a case of them belonging to some strange ancient religion. This makes what they are doing an insult to Christians all over the world.)

Bet you those who fell within the ambit of interdenominational did not kill to bless the 2010 Soccer World Cup stadiums though. And perhaps that is why these so-called ‘traditional’ African Style guys and gals needed and wanted to be in a class of their own. And they ARE. A real killer crowd.

LET US STOP THIS

Please sign the petition! And ask as many people as you possibly can to sign and spread the word.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/Stop-2010-World-Cup-Animal-Sacrifice

The petition IS doing well. 1,313 signatures within four-and-a-half days. We need many, many more though! The petition will be handed to the FIFA Executive Committee and the South African 2010 World Cup Organising Committee at the end of November. Your contribution is and would be HIGHLY appreciated! Thank you 🙂

Campaign Progress: Stop South Africa’s planned 2010 Soccer World Cup Animal Sacrifice

“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” —Ghandi

If you have not been following the story, and stumbled across this blog entry, please have a look at:

https://thewordwright.wordpress.com/2009/10/25/2010-soccer-world-cup-animal-sacrifice-planned/

The campaign to stop South Africa from proceeding with the sacrifice of animals in ‘blessing’ the 2010 Soccer World Cup is doing well!

Update on Stop South Africa from sacrificing animals at 2010 Soccer World Cup Petition

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/Stop-2010-World-Cup-Animal-Sacrifice

The initial dripping support has grown into a steady trickle and the petition now sports, at the time of this writing, 655 signatures. Considering that the petition was only started at 9pm (GMT+2) on October 23rd, this is a very encouraging result! Thank you to all who have been of help.

FIFA Executive Committee

I contacted FIFA directly, provided the information as reported upon by Reuters and informed them that a petition is running in opposition to the application filed by traditional leaders in South Africa. I went on to tell them that I am not of the belief that any one of the committee members could possibly be in favour of sullying the image of the 2010 World Cup by allowing the blood of animals to be spillt in this way. I asked them for their support against the application and am awaiting their feedback.

Animal Rights Organisations

To ensure that organised support is lent to the “Stop South Africa from sacrificing animals at 2010 Soccer World Cup” campaign, I contacted PETA and Animal Rights Africa on Sunday night. Thus far I have not received any response from either. Naturally I will be approaching many more over the next few days.

Blogs

Many concerned blog owners have included a link to the petition in their blogs. Naturally the response from blog commenters were varied, some airing their concern, others airing their disbelief and others still their opinion that we are all a bunch of animal rights wackos. So be it. If you stick your hand up, the odd bite at it is to be expected.

Media

Thus far, I have only been commenting on articles covering the proposed sacrifice of animals in blessing of the 2010 Soccer World Cup. As soon as the petition reaches 1,000 signatories, I will be contacting newspapers and news channels directly. Hopefully this will catapult the campaign to higher levels.

What you can do to help the cause?

No activism is necessary. Simply send the petition link and, if you wish, a link to the original blog entry, to people you know. Here are the links again:

Blog entry

https://thewordwright.wordpress.com/2009/10/25/2010-soccer-world-cup-animal-sacrifice-planned/

Petition

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/Stop-2010-World-Cup-Animal-Sacrifice

Who will the ‘Stop South Africa from sacrificing animals at 2010 Soccer World Cup’ petition be submitted to?

It was not an easy decision, but I eventually decided that the FIFA Executive Committee and the South African FIFA 2010 Soccer World Cup Organising Committee are the most appropriate recipients. To ensure that both these bodies can act in a timely manner, the targeted date for submission is the end of November 2009.

Once again: A heartfelt thanks for your wonderful support 🙂

The SPCA, South African Law, the 2010 World Cup and the Planned Sacrifice of Animals

http://iluvsa.blogspot.com/2009/06/25-cows-to-die-for-zuma.html

When President Jacob Zuma won the South African Presidential elections, he too was

Blessed

…

in

BLOOD

Just in case you have not heard the story, yet:

South African ‘traditional leaders’ intend performing ritual animal slaughters in order to bless the Soccer Football Stadiums to be used during the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup. Zolani Mkiva, chairman of the Makhonya Royal Trust, said the tournament has to to be blessed in true “African style” and that they are going to slaughter cows in sacrifice at each of the 10 stadiums to be used for the event.

Any reasonable person will immediately think: Surely this can be prevented. After all, South Africa does have Animal Protection Laws and an N SPCA. You are right if that is your response – on the latter part of your thought anyway. BUT, as I am about to explain, NOT  on the former part. Here is why.

 

The SPCA

When Reuters broke the news, the N SPCA of South Africa made it clear that they will not prevent or oppose the animal slaughter / sacrifice planned in honour of the 2010 Soccer World Cup. In a very politically correct media statement, they indicated that they are

“respectful and supportive towards cultural and traditional practices”

and that

“the N SPCA stresses that its role will not be to preach or dictate but to act in a welfare liaison capacity”

A cop-out if ever I heard one!

The N SPCA has a history of allowing these kinds of things to go ahead. For instance, when Jacob Zuma became president of South Africa earlier this year, they endorsed (YES, endorsed) the slaughter / sacrifice of 25 Cows to bless Jacob Zuma’s newly acquired President-ship. (See http://iluvsa.blogspot.com/2009/06/25-cows-to-die-for-zuma.html and http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/africa/news/article_1480885.php/Zuma_party_rolls_on_25_cows_face_the_chop_for_village_feast) Bear in mind that these slaughters will have been done in the TRUE AFRICAN way….

Don’t expect any support against the 2010 Soccer World Cup animal slaughter / sacrifice from the N SPCA

 

South African Law

Sure! South Africa DOES have laws governing the treatment of animals – about 40 of them – and that does not include the many bylaws passed governing our behaviour and conduct towards animals. We also have a Consitution. A Consitution that allows religious freedom INCLUDING, in this instance, slaughtering animals for religious purposes and, by the looks of it, to BLESS the 2010 Soccer World Cup.

The law is extremely vague as the humane-ness of such killings, saying that it should be done in – and I quote:

” in a humane way as is reasonable within the particular religious or cultural values of the person effecting the slaughter and subject to the requirements of the SPCA.”

Killing tethered – their legs are bound together and they are flipped on their sides – bulls with bare hands (see yesterday’s blog: https://thewordwright.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/2010-soccer-world-cup-animal-slaughter-just-the-tip-of-the-iceberg/) and slitting (although HACKING would be a better description) fully conscious cows’ throats, leaving them to slowly bleed to death (see https://thewordwright.wordpress.com/2009/10/25/2010-soccer-world-cup-animal-sacrifice-planned/) are perfectly REASONABLE and ACCEPTABLE religious and cultural values and not contrary to the social standards of the bulk of the population in South Africa.

Don’t expect any  protection against the 2010 Soccer World Cup animal slaughter / sacrifice under South African Law

 

What now?

 

Stopping the proposed, torturous deaths of the animals intended for sacrifice in honour of the 2010 Soccer World Cup is going to be NO easy matter! I started a petition two days ago to try and rally as much support as I can from people across the world. Please sign this petition if you disagree with animal sacrifice: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/Stop-2010-World-Cup-Animal-Sacrifice.

So far we have 327 signatures. The target is 50,000. Your support in terms of creating awareness among friends, colleagues etc will go a long way towards achieving the targeted number! The petition will be submitted to the FIFA Executive Committee and 2010 Soccer World Cup Organising Committee of South Africa. I am also busy rallying support from Animal Rights Organisations across the world and approaching the media to solicit additional support. I am of the conviction that if sufficient pressure can be brought to bear, the animal sacrifice planned by South Africa to celebrate and bless the 2010 Soccer World Cup can and will be stopped.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 Soccer World Cup Animal Slaughter – Just The Tip Of The Iceberg

Happy slaughter ritual participants

After writing the blog (https://thewordwright.wordpress.com/2009/10/25/2010-soccer-world-cup-animal-sacrifice-planned/) yesterday on the planned ritual slaying of cows by South Africa in lieu of the 2010 Soccer World Cup, a few things kept lingering in my mind. So, I decided to put them in writing today:

One: The bloodthirsty throat slitting – or rather throat hacking – of sacrificial cows are not the worst ceremonies these animals are subjected to in this country. There are some rituals where a bull would be killed with bare hands (obviously the poor animal would be tied down). This involves gouging out his eyes, tongue, testicles and tearing his throat open. As you can imagine the latter takes a while to achieve. Cattle hide is rather tough. And YES. These heinous acts are all perpetrated to celebrate spirituality! ???????

Two: The SPCA is suddenly being referred to as if they could be the potential saviours of cows while, in real every day South African life, they – in a s far as I know – NEVER get involved with any of the so-called ‘cultural’ animal killings. On the one hand, it simply would not be politically correct. (And I am saying the latter with a good measure of sarcasm.) On the other hand, and in all fairness, it could also be very dangerous for the inspectors to try this. Chances are good that the gathering could turn on them – and this could end up in grievous bodily harm or even death. Africa is not for the fainthearted. (No, I am not exaggerating – read the SA newspapers)

Three: The number of  cows earmarked for death by suffering to celebrate the 2010 Soccer World Cup is, compared to the number of cow (and bull and goat and chicken) sacrifices in South Africa,  like a single cup of water out of a great big seething cesspool of a dam.  When you take all of Africa into account, the dam becomes a polluted ocean.

The petition (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/Stop-2010-World-Cup-Animal-Sacrifice) I launched on Saturday night (GMT+2) in an attempt to stop the ritual killing of cows at each of the ten stadiums to be used for the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup is standing at 195 signatories at the time of this writing. We are still 49,805 signatures away from our target.

The petition will be submitted to the FIFA Executive committee and the South African 2010 FIFA World Cup Local Organising Committee.  I believe that if we have enough support, if the media gives the matter sufficient attention and if animal rights organisations internationally endorse the campaign against the planned 2010 World Cup Animal Sacrifice Rituals, it can be stopped.

For now it is work in progress.

2010 Soccer World Cup Animal Sacrifice Planned

Reuters reported that South Africa is considering an application by ‘Traditional Leaders’ to sacrifice animals at the 2010 FIFA Soccer World cup scheduled to take place in June of next year.

It carries a YouTube rating of 18 and is not suitable for sensitive viewers. I am one of those and it took many attempts and a whole lot of tears to work through it.

The FIFA Soccer World Cup is inarguably the premier  football event internationally and probably the most watched sporting event in the world. The upcoming 2010 FIFA World Cup is set to take place between the 11th of June and the 11th of July next year in South Africa –  the 19th time that the event will take place.

South Africa had to compete long and hard against 203 other soccer playing countries, pulling all stops – including the involvement of the much respected, iconic Nelson Mandela – to try and secure our position as host to the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup. I still remember the jubilation with which the FIFA Executive Committee’s decision was met in May 2004 to grant rights to the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup to South Africa. An African FIRST!

The rest is history. Stadiums were built – even in economically non-viable areas – and infrastructure was created in anticipation of the enormous influx of soccer enthusiasts from all over the world. The fact that government spend is MORE than the income to be derived from the event, is incidental. The FIFA Soccer World Cup is creating employment for the ordinary person on the street, marketing opportunities for business and pressure on the government to stamp out crime (albeit that the success of the latter endeavour is questionable).

Just when we thought that is should be smooth sailing from here on end, Reuters broke the news.

South African ‘traditional leaders’ intend performing ritual animal slaughters in order to bless the Soccer Football Stadiums to be used during the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup. Zolani Mkiva, chairman of the Makhonya Royal Trust, said the tournament has to to be blessed in true “African style” and that they are going to slaughter cows in sacrifice at each of the 10 stadiums to be used for the event.

Just in case you have not viewed the YouTube clip, here is how it happens:

The cow’s legs are tethered together and she is flipped on her side. You can hear her moaning. She is held down by two or three people while a fourth one is standing by with a small dish and a fifth person wields the knife. They slit her throat, but the animal does not die. She screams and struggles, trying to throw off her assailant. He stumbles backwards and comes for her again, cutting some more. Her eyelids are still batting and her eyes are filled with panic and fear as he hacks away at her throat. She continues struggling weakly as the man with the dish approaches her to catch the blood spurting from her arteries. She still is not dead. There is no post- or pre-incision stunning.

It will take a while  before she will have bled enough to die – much longer than the 51 second YouTube clip embedded  in this blog.

Now, I cannot help but wonder whether the South African application to the FIFA World Cup Executive Committee ever disclosed the possibility of ritual animal slaughter. Probably not, even though some of the South African delegates MUST have known that this was likely to happen. After all, some of them will have participated in such slaughters before. I also have to wonder whether the FIFA World Cup Executive Committee would have awarded the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup rights to South Africa had they known. I seriously doubt it.

Some sources state that the South African SPCA has been made aware of the application and that they will be involved. Now THAT is a farce in its own right! In South Africa THOUSANDS of animals are ritually slaughtered every year while the SPCA turns a convenient blind eye to the proceedings – all in the name of  ‘culture‘.

Will the application to the South African FIFA Soccer World Cup Committee by these ‘traditional leaders’ be approved? Well, your guess is as good as mine. Here ANYTHING is possible, including approval. After all, we do have a propensity for erring on the side of having  populist political leaders.

My little voice is screaming STOP. But it is guaranteed to remain unheard. Hence this blog. I also started a petition to help prevent this abomination. Whether your national team is playing in the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup or not, please sign and ask others to sign too. I will be blogging about this every day in an attempt to reach more people and promoting this story as far and as wide as I can. I ask you to do the same too. http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/Stop-2010-World-Cup-Animal-Sacrifice

The An Yue Jiang: Lloyds MIU Responds

Note: For background, refer to my blogs on the Zimbabwe China Arms Deal. The An Yue Jiang, which is carrying weapons from China that are destined for Zimbabwe, and that is thought to be heading to Angola, featured prominently in the last few blogs.

The An Yue Jiang, that was added to the Lloyds list on the 20th of April, disappeared off the casualties list of Lloyds MIU this morning. The last entry on the five-ship free portion of the site that remained after the An Yue Jiang was moved or removed, was a vessel that was reported as a casualty on the 19th of April 2008 – 1 day before the An Yue Jiang.

I requested access to Lloyds MIU by using an online form, but was denied on the grounds that Lloyds “only grant trial access to companies with a legitimate business need“. I suppose being a writer makes me less legitimate than most :).

The correspondence
Then, on my WordPress Blog’s Comments, up popped a message from Lloyds themselves. Mark Hankey, their representative, had the following to say:

“We never stated that the vessel sank.

We called it a casualty as it failed to discharge its cargo in the manner it expected. This is normal practice for us as we supply a lot of data to the insurance market and this type of information is of use to them.

We currently have no knowledge of the vessel being refuelled/bunkered or being detained by any navy.”

I then emailed Mr. Hankey, asking him the following:

“Thank you very much for the update you provided to my blog. I would like to publish it, but before I do please can you help me understand:

1. You added it to the list as a casualty because it did not dispose of its cargo as expected. Correct?

2. Could you please let me know why it was taken off the casualty list? Did it dispose of its cargo? Or are there are criteria used?

3. I just want to point out that we never stated that it sank. We merely speculated that the vessel may have run out of fuel as it was not allowed to take in fuel at Durban (it was anchored some 12km outside the port).”

In return, I received the following response from Mr. Hankey (Mr. Hankey’s reponse is in red):

“1. You added it to the list as a casualty because it did not dispose of its cargo as expected. Correct? – correct

2. Could you please let me know why it was taken off the casualty list? Did it dispose of its cargo? Or are there are criteria used? – it’s still there, but due to the timing it has been superseded by more recent casualties on the free part of the database
3. I just want to point out that we never stated that it sank. We merely speculated that the vessel may have run out of fuel as it was not allowed to take in fuel at Durban (it was anchored some 12km outside the port). – cool. Sorry for the misunderstanding. ”

The quandary
I am very grateful that Lloyds took the time to point out that the ship is indeed still on the casualties list. Now there remains but one issue – one that I find hard to get to grips with:

From the outset, I want to make it clear that I am in no position to personally verify whether the ship is still on the list or not because I could not get access to the database, so I am giving Lloyds the benefit of the doubt in this respect. There is no reason not to.

The only things that still bug me (and I regret not having taken thorough notes this morning) are:
(1) that the An Yue Jiang was superseded before an older casualty (the 19th of April casualty) was superseded, and
(2) that it took some 24 hours (perhaps longer) for Lloyds to list the ship after it failed to discharge is cargo in an expected manner.

These are questions I hope to clarify with Mr. Hankey during subsequent correspondence, provided that he will humour more questions from me.

The low-down
So, considering Lloyds’ feedback:

We should not necessarily assume that the vessel has run out of fuel.
We should not necessarily assume that it stopped its slow fuel-saving voyage to Luanda.
We should not necessarily assume that the vessel is headed towards Luanda.
We should not necessarily assume that it has been refuelled.
We should not assume that the ship still carries cargo, and we should not assume that it does.
Finally we should also not assume that the ship has been intercepted by any navy or that it is being led back towards any port – naval or commercial.

But that is not all…

Just where is the An Yue Jiang? The Navy won’t tell and Lloyds cannot tell.
Why is the route suddenly such a secret?
Is the cargo still on board? No response on that one either.
And, why all the attention…even my couple of newbie, basic, itty-bitty blogs are being flooded. And, some of the visitors appear not to be popping by out of curiosity only.

Right now there are simply too many questions and not a single answer to show for it.

PS. Original comment published on my WordPress Blog. You can follow the link from here.

China Zimbabwe Arms Deal: An Yue Jiang now removed from casualty list at Lloyds MIU

The controversial Chinese ship, the An Yue Yang, which is bearing 77 tonnes of arms and weapons destined for Zimbabwe, set sail from Durban without refuelling. When the vessel was reported as a casualty yesterday morning (GMT+2), it confirmed Jasa’s (Justice Alliance of South Africa) suspicions that the An Ye Jiang had insufficient fuel to reach its destination: Luanda, Angola.

Navy sources said that although the ship switched off its transponder when it left the harbour, it was being tracked via satellite by the South African Navy, the South African Police Services, Interpol and other international intelligence organisations. The navy did not wish to comment on the exact location of the An Ye Jiang at that time. (Source: Beeld)

A rough calculation based on a sea speed of approximately 30km/h, would have taken the ship to Luanda by Tuesday evening. Assuming that it had indeed sailed towards Luanda, the ship will have been located somewhere between Port Elizabeth and Cape Town when it (perhaps ran out of fuel, and) was added to the register.

Now, somewhere between midnight and 8am (GMT+2) today, the controversial arms ship was removed from the Lloyds MIU Vessel Casualty register.

There are only two possible reasons for this: The ship may have been clandestinely refuelled during the night or it may have been intercepted by the Navy. If the latter holds true, the ship could be escorted to one of the commercial harbours or, considering the controversies surrounding the vessel, it may even be taken into a naval harbour instead.

Until the Navy decides to offer further information, all we can do is wait.

China Zimbabwe Arms Deal: An Yue Jiang reported as casualty at Lloyds MIU

The controversial weapon carrier, An Ye Jiang set sail from Durban Harbour without refuelling which, according to Jasa (Justice Alliance of South Africa), means that it is unlikely to have sufficient fuel to reach Luanda in Angola.

The ship switched off its transponder when it left the harbour and was seen shortly afterwards heading down the coast of South Africa in a southerly direction. Jasa requested that the ports at East London, Port Elizabeth and Cape Town be placed on alert to ensure that fuel is not clandestinely supplied to the vessel.

It seemingly disappeared until it suddenly appeared 11 hours ago as a casualty on the Lloyds MIU Vessel Casualty register. Does this mean that the ship has run out of fuel as predicted or is it a clever ruse to get hold of fuel without having to re-enter South African waters? Once it has fuel, the Chinese weapons carrier could yet again switch off the transponder and disappear into the blue wide yonder.

Shortly before the order was obtained from the Durban High Court, which prohibited the off-loading and transporting of the arms, another application was filed by the state owned German Bank, which requested that the arms cargo be attached in lieu of an unpaid 40million Euro loan extended in 2000 to the state-owned Zimbabwe Iron and Steel company. The order too was granted.

Should the ship enter South African waters, this order could be executed.

There is also a further option. Navy intervention is possible according to Jasa. The Alliance indicated that should the ship enter South African waters, it could be arrested and taken into one of our harbours. The Jasa spokesman continued to say that: “The arms must then be put in bond until assurances are obtained from the Chinese Government that they will be returned to China. Any promise from the ship owner is insufficient as it becomes unenforceable the moment the ship leaves SA territorial waters. The captain may say he is going home and yet immediately sail for Angola once he has fuel in his bunkers.”