Who really controls Kurdistan’s gas? The Dana Gas deal, the KRG’s silence and the hidden cost of selling energy to Iraq

Image
By Dr. Pshtiwan Faraj | Kurdish Policy Analysis      A $2.239 billion arbitration settlement, a contract running until 2049, expanded rights for Pearl Petroleum and a new battle over gas sales to Baghdad are raising uncomfortable questions about who ultimately controls Kurdistan’s most strategic natural resource. The latest dispute over Khor Mor gas is exposing a much deeper problem in the Kurdistan Region’s energy sector: the public still does not appear to have a clear picture of who controls the region’s gas, who is authorized to sell it, and how much of its future value has already been committed to private companies. At the center of the controversy is Pearl Petroleum, the consortium led by Dana Gas and Crescent Petroleum, and a settlement agreement reached with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) on August 30, 2017. Kurdistan Parliament member Kawa Sheikh Ali has now sharply criticized that agreement, asking why a government would effectively commit its natural ...

Technological Chokepoints: The New Battleground of Global Power

Technological Chokepoints: How to Balance Resilience and Leverage in a Weaponised Economy. From semiconductors to digital infrastructure, control over critical technologies is reshaping economic security and geopolitical leverage.

LONDON, April 22 (Kurdish Policy Analysis) – Control over critical technologies such as semiconductors, artificial intelligence systems, and digital infrastructure is increasingly shaping geopolitical power, as governments seek to balance economic resilience with strategic leverage in a more fragmented global economy.

A report by Tony Blair Institute for Global Change highlights how “technological chokepoints” — areas where supply chains are highly concentrated or dominated by a small number of actors — have become central to economic statecraft.

These chokepoints include advanced semiconductor manufacturing, cloud computing infrastructure, and critical software ecosystems, where a handful of countries and companies maintain disproportionate control over global supply.

The report argues that in what it describes as a “weaponised economy,” states are increasingly willing to use access to technology as a tool of political pressure, mirroring earlier strategies seen in energy markets.

Recent years have seen export controls, sanctions, and investment restrictions reshape global supply chains, particularly in sectors linked to national security. Governments are now prioritising resilience by diversifying suppliers, investing in domestic production, and strengthening alliances with trusted partners.

However, the report warns that efforts to reduce dependency can come at a cost. Building redundant supply chains and domestic capacity requires significant investment and may reduce efficiency, potentially slowing innovation and increasing costs for consumers.

The challenge for policymakers, it says, lies in striking a balance between maintaining access to global markets and protecting against vulnerabilities that could be exploited during geopolitical crises.

The findings come amid heightened tensions between major powers over technology leadership, where competition extends beyond economic rivalry into national security concerns and long-term strategic dominance.

#Technology #Geopolitics #SupplyChains #Semiconductors #AI #GlobalEconomy #DigitalPower

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Lindsey Graham Passing Reshapes Republican Foreign Policy—and Raises Questions for the Kurds

Lindsey Graham's Death Leaves a Void in US-Kurdish Relations

Trump warns Iran: 'Pickaxe Mountain' nuclear site is next