* Gulf
states supporting rebels against Assad
* British
firms bidding for contracts worth billions
* Such
big deals involve political, strategic ties
* British
parliament vote may weaken those ties
* French,
U.S. firms could benefit from British setbacks
By Daniel
Fineren and Brenda Goh
DUBAI/LONDON,
Sept 9 (Reuters) - Britain's decision not to join a military strike on Syria
may have more than a purely political impact: it could over time make it more
difficult for British businessmen to win billions of dollars of contracts in
the Gulf.
British
companies are bidding for several big-ticket deals in the region, including oil
concessions and contracts to supply dozens of fighter jets to the United Arab
Emirates and Qatar.
Most of
the wealthy Gulf oil exporters, particularly Qatar and Saudi Arabia, are
supporting - morally, financially and in some cases militarily - the Syrian
rebels in their civil war with the government of President Bashar al-Assad.
So
Britain's refusal to get involved in military action could weaken its position
in the Gulf as it tries to secure contracts which depend heavily on close
political ties and shared strategic interests.
Companies
from the United States and France, which are considering a strike against the
Syrian government over its alleged use of chemical weapons, may benefit from
any setbacks for British firms.
Jonathan
Eyal, international director at the Royal United Services Institute in London,
said parliament did not seem to have taken this into account in its surprise
vote on Aug. 29 against action in Syria.
While
legislators were clearly aware of the risk to Britain's "special
relationship" with the United States of their vote, the country's
footprint in the Middle East appeared either to have been taken for granted or
undervalued, he said.
"There
was no understanding that what was at stake was Britain's reputation as a major
security actor in the Middle East as a whole. What is the point of buying
equipment which, after all, is only marginally better than that which is
available from the United States, from a country that is unlikely to realise
its security commitments?"
COMPETITION
Gulf
governments have not commented publicly on the British parliament's vote, and
British officials said they do not expect it to affect commercial ties.
"We
have no reason to believe that the UK Parliament's decision on Syria will
impact our trade and investment relationship with Saudi Arabia," the
British embassy in Riyadh said in a statement.
"The
UK will continue to play a full role in seeking to bring an end to the conflict
and hold the Syrian regime to account for its actions...UK exports to Saudi
Arabia grew 26 percent in the first five months of this year and we expect that
growth to continue."
Privately,
however, some British officials were jittery about a cooling of Britain's
traditionally warm relationship with the Gulf even before the decision on
Syria.
Anger
among unelected Gulf rulers over the West's support for the 2011 Arab Spring
uprisings, and British media reports seen as supportive of the Muslim
Brotherhood, were blamed by some analysts for British oil major BP's temporary
exclusion last year from the bidding to run Abu Dhabi's biggest oilfields over
the next few decades.
BP was
allowed to bid again after British Prime Minister David Cameron flew to Abu
Dhabi to promote his country's energy and weapons companies in November 2012.
But the
United States and France have also been flexing their diplomatic muscles to win
business in the Gulf; French President Francois Hollande visited Abu Dhabi in
January this year. This suggests that for some contracts, the Syria issue could
become a factor in decision-making.
Britain's
BAE Systems is competing against France's Dassault Aviation to sell around 60
planes to the UAE. Qatar is weighing whether to replace its ageing fleet with
BAE Eurofighter Typhoons or Dassault Rafales.
BAE has
been locked in talks with Saudi Arabia over the sale of 72 Eurofighters since
it signed a preliminary deal in 2007; it also hopes to sell fighters to
Bahrain. Other fighters competing for Gulf sales include U.S.-based Lockheed
Martin's F-35 and the Gripen from Sweden's Saab.
A Western
aerospace executive in the Gulf noted that many factors were involved in large
deals such as the UAE's fighter purchase, including technology transfers and
governments' desire to diversify their suppliers. But that did not mean Syria
would be ignored, he said.
"The
UK's stand on Syria will play into the minds of the decision-makers in Gulf.
You could make an argument that this will impact Eurofighter's chances,"
he said, declining to be named because of the political sensitivity of the
issue. BAE declined to comment.
STRATEGIC
William
Patey, a former British ambassador to Saudi Arabia and Iraq, and now an
international affairs adviser at consultancy Control Risks, said he did not
expect any immediate impact on British contracts in the Gulf.
"That's
not how it works...I can't see that the Saudis are suddenly going to say, 'No
we are not going to do this deal on Typhoon because the Brits aren't attacking
Syria,'" he said.
But Patey
added that there could be long-term damage if the British parliament's vote on
Syria eventually came to be seen as part of a strategic withdrawal by Britain
from action in the region on behalf of its Gulf allies.
British
ministers have denied that any such withdrawal is on the cards, but the
parliamentary vote showed the matter is not entirely in their hands.
Edward
Hunt, a consultant at IHS Jane's Aerospace and Defence in London, said extended
Western military intervention in Syria could eventually start to help Britain's
commercial competitors if British forces sat it out.
"Historically
equipment tends to sell better when it's been proven in combat situations -
manufacturers always like to see their aircraft being used, successfully
anyway, because that tends to increase sales overseas," he said.
"If
the equipment isn't used, then competitor equipment - obviously the French and
the Americans sell the same sort of equipment as we do - may be favoured in
future procurements and competitions."
BP and
Royal Dutch Shell, Britain's two international energy champions, declined to
comment on how political relations between London and the Gulf might affect
their interests.
In April,
Abu Dhabi National Oil Co (ADNOC) chose Shell ahead of French rival Total to
develop the Bab sour gas field in a project that has been valued at around $10
billion. [ID: nL6N0DH31A]
The
30-year deal showcases Shell's technology for treating potentially deadly gases
from Bab and may therefore put it in a strong position to renew its role in the
UAE's largest onshore oil concession, despite growing competition from Asian
buyers of the UAE's oil.
The
extent to which the Syria issue could affect this will start to become clear
after October, when bids are due from international oil companies seeking to
operate the UAE's onshore fields beyond 2014.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire