2018 Commonwealth Games

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
XXI Commonwealth Games
2018 Commonwealth Games.svg

Logo of 2018 Commonwealth Games
Host city Gold CoastQueensland
Country Australia
Motto Share the Dream
Nations participating 71 CommonwealthTeams
Athletes participating 4,426
Events 275 in 19 sports
Opening ceremony 4 April
Closing ceremony 15 April
Officially opened by Charles, Prince of Wales
Officially closed by Edward, Earl of Wessex
Athlete’s Oath Karen Murphy
Queen’s Baton Final Runner Sally Pearson
Main venue Carrara Stadium
Website GC2018.com
<  XX XXII  >

The 2018 Commonwealth Games, officially known as the XXI Commonwealth Games and commonly known as Gold Coast 2018, were an international multi-sport event for members of the Commonwealth that were held on the Gold CoastQueenslandAustralia, between 4 and 15 April 2018. It was the fifth time Australia had hosted the Commonwealth Games and the first time a major multi-sport event achieved gender equality by having an equal number of events for males and female atheletes.[1]

More than 4,400 athletes from 71 Commonwealth Games Associations took part including Gambia where were readmitted as a Commonwealth Games Federation member on 31 March 2018. With 275 sets of medals, the games featured 19 Commonwealth sports, including beach volleyballpara triathlon and women’s rugby sevens. These sporting events took place at 14 venues in the host city, two venues in Brisbane and one venue each in Cairns and Townsville.[2]

These were the first Commonwealth Games to take place under the Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) presidency of Louise Martin, CBE.[3]The host city Gold Coast was announced at the CGF General Assembly in BasseterreSaint Kitts, on 11 November 2011.[4] Gold Coast became the seventh Oceanian city to host the Commonwealth Games. These were the eighth games to be held in Oceania and Southern Hemisphere.

The host nation Australia topped the medal table for the fourth time in the past five Commonwealth Games, winning the most golds (80) and most medals overall (198). England and India finished second and third respectively.[5]VanuatuCook IslandsSolomon IslandsBritish Virgin Islands and Dominicaeach won their first commonwealth games medals.

Host selection[edit]

Countdown clock at Surfers Paradise

On 22 August 2008, the Premier of QueenslandAnna Bligh, officially launched Gold Coast City’s bid to host the Commonwealth Games in 2018. On 7 April 2009, the ABCreported a land exchange deal between Gold Coast City and State of Queensland for Carrara Stadium. According to Mayor Ron Clarke, the land would aid a potential bid for the 2018 Commonwealth Games. The land exchanged would be used as the site of an aquatics centre. In the same article, Mayor Clarke raised the question of the Australian Federal Government’s commitment to a 2018 Commonwealth Games bid in light of the Government’s support for Australia’s 2018 FIFA World Cup Finals bid.[7]On 16 April 2009, Queensland Premier Anna Bligh told reporters that a successful Commonwealth Games bid by Gold Coast City could help the tourist strip win a role in hosting the World Cup.[8]

“Some of the infrastructure that would be built for the Commonwealth Games will be useful for Gold Coast City to get a World Cup game out of the soccer World Cup if we’re successful as a nation,” she said. However the decision on the venues for the 2018 and 2022 FIFA World Cups were made eleven months prior to the bid decision for the 2018 Commonwealth Games, so the potential World Cup venues had already been chosen. On 3 June 2009, Gold Coast City was confirmed as Australia’s exclusive bidder vying for the 2018 Commonwealth Games.[9] “Should a bid proceed, Gold Coast City will have the exclusive Australian rights to bid as host city for 2018,” Bligh stated.

“Recently I met with the president and CEO of the Australian Commonwealth Games Association and we agreed to commission a full and comprehensive feasibility study into the potential for the 2018 Commonwealth Games,” she said. “Under the stewardship of Queensland Events new chair, Geoff Dixon, that study is now well advanced.” On 15 March 2010, it was announced that the Queensland Government will provide initial funding of A$11 million for the 2018 Commonwealth Games bid. The Premier of Queensland has indicated the Government’s support for the bid to the Australian Commonwealth Games Association.[10] On 31 March 2010, the Australian Commonwealth Games Association officially launched the bid to host the 2018 Commonwealth Games.[11] In October 2011, Gold Coast City Mayor Ron Clarke stated that the games would provide a strong legacy for the city after the games have ended.[12]

On 31 March 2010, a surprise bid was made for the 2018 Commonwealth Games by the Sri Lankan city of Hambantota. Hambantota was devastated by the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, and is undergoing a major face lift. The first phase of the Port of Hambantota is nearing completion and it is funded by the government of China. The Mattala International Airport, which is the second international Airport of Sri Lanka is built close to Hambantota. A new Hambantota International Cricket Stadium had also been built, which had hosted matches in the 2011 Cricket World Cup.

On 10 November 2011, the Hambantota bidders claimed they had already secured enough votes to win the hosting rights.[13]However, on 11 November it was officially announced Gold Coast City had won the rights to host the games.[14][15]

2018 Commonwealth Games bidding results
City Country Votes
Gold Coast City Australia Australia 43
Hambantota Sri Lanka Sri Lanka 27

Administration[edit]

In February 2012, Mark Peters was appointed Chief Executive Officer of the Gold Coast City 2018 Commonwealth Games Corporation.[16] The Queensland Government Minister tasked with overseeing the Games was Kate Jones.[17]

Preparation[edit]

Venues[edit]

Concept image for Carrara Stadium and Carrara Sport and Leisure Centre

One of the key technical aspects of Gold Coast City’s successful bid was the fact that the city had 80 percent of the planned venues in place before the bidding deadline. The vast majority of venues were located within 20-minutes driving time of the Athletes Village in Parkwood and were broadly grouped into three areas; Central Gold Coast City, North Gold Coast City and South Gold Coast City. The only competitions held outside of Gold Coast City were track cycling and the preliminary rounds of Basketball which were held in Brisbane and Cairns or Townsvillerespectively, along with the shooting which was held in neighbouring Belmont.[18]

Athletes village[edit]

2018 Commonwealth Games Village

The 2018 Commonwealth Games Athletes Village provided accommodation and services to 6600 athletes and officials in 1252 permanent dwellings: 1170 one and two bedroom apartments and 82 three bedroom townhouses at Southport, Gold Coast.[19]

Queen’s baton relay[edit]

Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games Baton

The Gold Coast 2018 Queen’s Baton Relay was launched on Commonwealth Day, 13 March 2017, on the historic forecourt at Buckingham Palace, signalling the official countdown to the start of the Games. Accompanied by the Duke of Edinburgh and Prince Edward The Earl of Wessex, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II heralded the start of the relay by placing her ‘message to the Commonwealth and its athletes’ into the distinctive loop-design Queen’s Baton which then set off on its journey around the globe. It traveled for 388 days, spending time in every nation and territory of the Commonwealth. The Gold Coast 2018 Queen’s Baton Relay was the longest in Commonwealth Games history. Covering 230,000 km over 388 days, the baton made its way through the six Commonwealth regions of Africa, the Americas, the Caribbean, Europe, Asia and Oceania.

The baton landed on Australian soil in December 2017 and then spent 100 days travelling through Australia, finishing its journey at the Opening Ceremony on 4 April 2018, where the message was removed from the Baton and read aloud by Charles, Prince of Wales.[20]

Transport[edit]

Gold Coast light rail extension at Helensvale

The Gold Coast light rail system, connected a number of the key games venues including the Gold Coast City Aquatic Centre, Broadwater Parklands and the Gold Coast Convention & Exhibition Centre with the major accommodation centres of Surfers Paradise and Broadbeach and the Athletes Village at Parklands. An extension to the system was announced in October 2015, connecting the then current terminus at Gold Coast University Hospital to the railway line to Brisbane at Helensvale. The extension opened in December 2017, in time for the games.[21]

Anti-doping[edit]

The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority conducted an anti-doping drive in the months prior to the games, covering around 2500 tests of Australian athletes, as well as 500 tests against international athletes. Three Australians failed drug tests in this process, along with around 20 international athletes, subject to appeal. The Commonwealth Games Federation conducted in-competition testing and, matching protocol at the Olympic Games, launched a sample storage initiative to allow for future testing of samples up to ten years later, should detection technology improve.[22]

Participating teams[edit]

There were 71 nations competing at 2018 Commonwealth Games.[23] Maldives were scheduled to participate, but in October 2016 they withdrew from the Commonwealth.[24] The Gambia returned to the Commonwealth Games after being readmitted as a Commonwealth Games Federation member on 31 March 2018.[25]

Nations expected to compete at the 2018 Commonwealth Games in Gold Coast

[hide]Participating Commonwealth Games Associations: country name (number of participants)

Number of athletes by team[edit]

Calendar[edit]

OC Opening ceremony Event competitions 1 Gold medal events CC Closing ceremony
April 4
Wed
5
Thu
6
Fri
7
Sat
8
Sun
9
Mon
10
Tue
11
Wed
12
Thu
13
Fri
14
Sat
15
Sun
Events
Ceremonies OC CC N/A
Aquatics Diving pictogram.svg Diving 3 2 3 2 10
Swimming pictogram.svgSwimming 7 9 8 8 9 9 50
Athletics pictogram.svg Athletics 5 6 8 7 10 9 9 4 58
Badminton pictogram.svg Badminton 1 5 6
Basketball pictogram.svg Basketball 1 1 2
Volleyball (beach) pictogram.svg Beach volleyball 2 2
Boxing pictogram.svg Boxing 16 16
Cycling
Cycling (mountain biking) pictogram.svgMountain biking 2 2
Cycling (road) pictogram.svg Road cycling 2 2 4
Cycling (track) pictogram.svg Track cycling 6 4 6 4 20
Gymnastics
Gymnastics (artistic) pictogram.svgArtistic 1 1 2 5 5 14
Gymnastics (rhythmic) pictogram.svgRhythmic 1 1 4 6
Field hockey pictogram.svg Hockey 2 2
Lawn bowls pictogram.svg Lawn bowls 2 2 1 2 3 10
Netball pictogram.svg Netball 1 1
Powerlifting pictogram (Paralympics).svg Powerlifting 4 4
Rugby union pictogram.svg Rugby sevens 2 2
Shooting pictogram.svg Shooting 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 19
Squash pictogram.svg Squash 2 1 2 5
Table tennis pictogram.svg Table tennis 1 1 1 4 2 9
Triathlon pictogram.svg Triathlon 2 3 5
Weightlifting pictogram.svg Weightlifting 3 3 3 3 4 16
Wrestling pictogram.svg Wrestling 4 4 4 12
Daily medal events 19 17 22 31 33 26 15 24 27 44 17 275
Cumulative total 19 36 58 89 122 148 163 187 214 258 275
April 4th
Wed
5th
Thu
6th
Fri
7th
Sat
8th
Sun
9th
Mon
10th
Tue
11th
Wed
12th
Thu
13th
Fri
14th
Sat
15th
Sun
Total events

Sports[edit]

The regulations stated that from the 26 approved sports administered by Commonwealth Governing Bodies, a minimum of ten core sports and maximum of seventeen sports must be included in any Commonwealth Games schedule. The approved sports included the 10 core sports: athleticsbadmintonboxinghockeylawn bowlsnetball (for women), rugby sevenssquashswimming and weightlifting. Integrated disabled competitions were also scheduled for the Games in nine sports: swimming, athletics, cycling, table tennis, powerlifting and lawn bowls. Along with these events for the first time EAD events in triathlon were held, with the medals added to the final tally for each nation. A record 38 para events were contested at these games.[26] On 8 March 2016, beach volleyball was announced as the 18th sport.[27]

The program was broadly similar to that of the 2014 Commonwealth Games, with the major changes being the dropping of judo, the reintroduction of basketball, the debut of women’s rugby sevens and beach volleyball.[28]

On 7 October 2016, it was announced seven new events for women were added to the sport program, meaning there are an equal number of events for men and women. This marks the first time in history that a major multi-sport event has equality in terms of events. In total 275 events in 18 sports are being contested.[29][30]

Numbers in parentheses indicate the number of medal events contested in each sport.

Opening ceremony[edit]

The opening ceremony was held at Carrara Stadium in the Gold Coast, Australia, between 20:00 and 22:40 AEST, on 4 April 2018. Tickets for the ceremony started at 100 Australian dollars with half price tickets available for children.[31] The Head of the Commonwealth, Queen Elizabeth II, was represented by her son, Charles, Prince of Wales.[32]

Parade of Nations[edit]

Following tradition, the host of the previous gamesScotland entered first, followed by the rest of the European countries competing.[33] Following this, all countries paraded in alphabetical order from their respective regions. After the European countries entered, countries from Africa, the Americas, Asia, the Caribbean, and lastly Oceania marched in. The host nation of Australia entered last. Each nation was preceded by a placard bearer carrying a sign with the country’s name.

Closing ceremony[edit]

The closing ceremony was held at Carrara Stadium and was produced by Jack Morton Worldwide at a cost of AU$30 million. Australian pop stars Guy SebastianSamantha JadeDami Im and The Veronicas were among the performers along with children’s entertainers, The Wiggles.[34]

Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex, declared the Games closed and passed the Commonwealth Games flag to Birmingham, England which will host the 2022 Games.[35]

The organising committee decided to bring in the athletes before the start of the ceremony. This caused an uproar on social media as, contrary to public expectations, none of the athletes were shown entering the stadium during the ceremony. Broadcast rights holders Channel 7 complained on air about the decision and concluded that, “it hasn’t really lived up to expectations”. Many spectators and athletes left during the ceremony, resulting in a half-empty stadium for much of the event.[36] Following this, the ABC claimed that Channel 7 was briefed on the closing ceremony schedule,[37] a claim which Channel 7 later refuted.[38]

Medal table[edit]

Only the top ten successful nations are displayed here.

The ranking in this table is consistent with International Olympic Committee convention in its published medal tables. By default, the table is ordered by the number of gold medals the athletes from a nation have won (in this context, a “nation” is an entity represented by a Commonwealth Games Association). The number of silver medals is taken into consideration next and then the number of bronze medals. If nations are still tied, equal ranking is given and they are listed alphabetically by their three-letter country code. Australia tops the medal table rank with 80 gold, second England with 45 gold and third India with 26 gold.

Key

*   Host nation (Australia)

2018 Commonwealth Games medal table
Rank CGA Gold Silver Bronze Total
1  Australia (AUS)* 80 59 59 198
2  England (ENG) 45 45 46 136
3  India (IND) 26 20 20 66
4  Canada (CAN) 15 40 27 82
5  New Zealand (NZL) 15 16 15 46
6  South Africa (RSA) 13 11 13 37
7  Wales (WAL) 10 12 14 36
8  Scotland (SCO) 9 13 22 44
9  Nigeria (NGR) 9 9 6 24
10  Cyprus (CYP) 8 1 5 14
Total (43 CGAs) 275 276 289 840

Marketing[edit]

Borobi

Motto[edit]

The official motto for the 2018 Commonwealth Games was “Share the Dream”. It was chosen to highlight the dreams and experience at the games that were shared by participants of the games, ranging from athletes to volunteers and the host country Australia to the world including the Commonwealth nations.[39]

Emblem[edit]

The emblem of the 2018 Commonwealth Games was a silhouette of the skyline and landscape of Gold Coast, the host city of the games.[40]

Mascot[edit]

Borobi was named as the mascot of the 2018 Commonwealth Games in 2016. Borobi is a blue koala, with indigenous markings on its body. The term “borobi” means koala in the Yugambeh language, spoken by the indigenous Yugambeh peopleof the Gold Coast and surrounding areas.[41]

Medals[edit]

At a charity gala held on 4 November 2017, the medals for the games were officially unveiled. Australian Indigenous artist Delvene Cockatoo-Collins designed the medals, while they were produced by the Royal Australian Mint. The design of the medals was inspired by the coastline of Gold Coast along with Indigenous culture.[42] Furthermore, Cockatoo-Collins mentioned, “the medal design represents soft sand lines which shift with every tide and wave, also symbolic of athletic achievement, The continual change of tide represents the evolution in athletes who are making their mark, Records are made and special moments of elation are celebrated”. Approximately 1,500 medals were created to be distributed to the medallists and each measures approximately 63 millimetres in diameter. The medals weigh between 138 and 163 grams.[43]

United Nations General Assembly resolution ES-10/L.22

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
UN General Assembly
Resolution ES‑10/L.22
United Nations General Assembly resolution A ES 10 L 22 vote.png

  Voted in favor
  Voted against
  Abstained
  Not present
Date 21 December 2017
Meeting no. 10th Emergency Special Session (continuation)
Code A/RES/ES‑10/L.22 (Document)
Subject Status of Jerusalem
Voting summary
128 voted for
9 voted against
35 abstained
21 absent
Result Recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital as “null and void”

United Nations General Assembly resolution ES‑10/L.22 is a emergency session resolution declaring the status of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital as “null and void.”.[1] It was adopted by the 37th Plenary meeting of the tenth emergency special session of the United Nations General Assembly[2] during the tenure of the seventy-second session of the United Nations General Assembly on 21 December 2017. The draft resolution was drafted by Yemen and Turkey.[3]Though strongly contested by the United States, it passed by 128 votes to nine against with 21 absentees and 35 abstentions.

Background[edit]

On 6 December 2017, US President Donald Trump said that he would recognise the status of Jerusalem as being Israel’s sovereign capital[4] in a departure from previous UNGA resolutions as well prevailing international norms where no state either recognises Jerusalem as a national capital nor has an embassy there. The move prompted protests from states and communities in many parts of the world.[5]

Following the failure of an United Nations Security Council resolution three days earlier, after an U.S. veto, to rescind the recognition by any states of Jerusalem as a national capital, Palestinian UN Ambassador Riyad Mansour said that the General Assembly would vote on a draft resolution calling for Trump’s declaration to be withdrawn. He sought to invoke Resolution 377, known as the “Uniting for Peace” resolution, to circumvent a veto. The resolution states that the General Assembly can call an Emergency Special Session to consider a matter “with a view to making appropriate recommendations to members for collective measures” if the Security Council fails to act.[6]

Campaign[edit]

On 20 December, US President Donald Trump threatened to cut US aid to countries voting against the US’ side.[7] The day before the vote, he said: “Let them vote against us…We don’t care…this isn’t like it used to be where they could vote against you and then you pay them hundreds of millions of dollars. We’re not going to be taken advantage of any longer.”[8]Ambassador Nikki Haley warned her country would remember and “take names” of every country that voted in favour of the resolution.[9][10][11][12] The governments of Turkey and Iran denounced USA’s threats as “anti-democratic” and “blackmail“.[13][14] She had sent to a letter to dozens of member states that warned Trump had asked her to “report back on those countries who voted against us.”[15] Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan warned Trump that “he cannot buy Turkey’s democratic will with petty dollars” and “that opposition of other countries will teach the United States a good lesson”.[16][17]

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that Israel rejects this vote before it passes and called the UN “house of lies”.[18]

Canada’s, which was seeking re-negotiations of the NAFTA, Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland‘s spokesman confirmed its intention to abstain from the vote and that the resolution should not have come to the General Assembly.[19]

Content[edit]

The text of the resolution includes the following key statements:[20]

The General Assembly,

  • Bearing in mind the specific status of the Holy City of Jerusalem and, in particular, the need for the protection and preservation of the unique spiritual, religious and cultural dimensions of the City, as foreseen in the relevant United Nations resolutions,
  • Stressing that Jerusalem is a final status issue to be resolved through negotiations in line with relevant United Nations resolutions,
  • Expressing in this regard its deep regret at recent decisions concerning the status of Jerusalem,
  • Affirms that any decisions and actions which purport to have altered, the character, status or demographic composition of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal effect, are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with relevant resolutions of the Security Council, and in this regard, calls upon all States to refrain from the establishment of diplomatic missions in the Holy City of Jerusalem, pursuant to resolution 478 (1980) of the Security Council;
  • Demands that all States comply with Security Council resolutions regarding the Holy City of Jerusalem, and not to recognize any actions or measures contrary to those resolutions;
  • Reiterates its call for the reversal of the negative trends on the ground that are imperiling the two-State solution and for the intensification and acceleration of international and regional efforts and support aimed at achieving, without delay, a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet Roadmap and an end to the Israeli occupation that began in 1967.

It concluded in reading that “any decisions and actions, which purport to have altered the character, status or demographic composition of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal effect, are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with relevant resolutions of the Security Council.”[21]

Motion[edit]

The motion was proposed by Yemen and Turkey.[22]

Debate[edit]

In introducing the resolution as Chair of the Arab Group, Yemen’s Amabassador said the US decision was a “blatant violation of the rights of the Palestinian people, as well as those of all Christians and Muslims.” He emphasized that it constituted a “dangerous breach of the Charter of the United Nations and a serious threat to international peace and security, while also undermining the chances for a two‑State solution and fuelling the fires of violence and extremism.”[23]

Turkey, who was the co-sponsor of the draft resolution, also spoke as current Chair of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation(OIC).[23] Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said that Trump’s decision was an outrageous assault to all universal values. “The Palestinians have the right to their own state based on 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital. This is the main parameter and only hope for a just and lasting peace in the region. However, the recent decision of a UN Member State to recognise Jerusalem, or Al-Quds, as the capital of Israel, violates international law, including all relevant UN resolutions.”[22]

The General Assembly heard from Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad Al‑Malki, who said that the meeting was “not because of any animosity to the United States of America” but instead the sessions was “called to make the voice of the vast majority of the international community — and that of people around the world — heard on the question of Jerusalem/Al‑Quds Al‑Sharif.” He called the US decision to recognise Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and to move its embassy there “an aggressive and dangerous move” which could inflame tensions and lead to a religious war that “has no boundaries.” He added that though the decision would have no impact on the city’s status, it would nevertheless compromise the role of the United States in the Middle East peace process.[23] He urged member states to reject “blackmail and intimidation.”[5]

US Ambassador Nikki Haley then said that her country was “singled out for attack” because of its recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. She added that: “The United States will remember this day in which it was singled out for attack in the General Assembly for the very act of exercising our right as a sovereign nation,” Haley said. We will remember it when we are called upon to once again make the world’s largest contribution to the United Nations, and so many countries come calling on us, as they so often do, to pay even more and to use our influence for their benefit.”[15] She added that: “America will put our embassy in Jerusalem. That is what the American people want us to do, and it is the right thing to do. No vote in the United Nations will make any difference on that…this vote will make a difference in how Americans view the UN.”[22]

Israel’s Ambassador Danny Danon then told the assembly that the vowed that “no General Assembly resolution will ever drive us from Jerusalem.”[4]

Venezuela’s Ambassador, speaking for the Non‑Aligned Movement (NAM), expressed “grave concern about Israel’s ongoing violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including attempts to alter the character, status and demographic composition of the City of Jerusalem. [It was] slso concerned about the decision to relocate the United States embassy [and] warned that such provocative actions would further heighten tensions, with potentially far‑reaching repercussions given the extremely volatile backdrop.[23]

Other speakers included, Pakistan, Indonesia, Maldives, Syria, Bangladesh, Cuba, Iran and China.[23]

Malaysia’s Ambassador Datuk Seri Mohammed Shahrul Ikram Yaakob said that, as a member of the OIC and NAM, “Malaysia joins the international community in expressing our deep concern and rejects the decision by the United States to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. It is also an infringement of the Palestinian people’s rights and their right to self determination.” He called for a peaceful two-state solution and that Malaysia is concerned the situation will only feed into the agenda of extremists.”[2]

Other speakers included, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and South Africa. The Permanent Observer for the Holy See, Tomasz Grysa, emphasised that Jerusalem was most sacred to the Abrahamic faiths and a symbol for millions of believers around the world who considered it their “spiritual capital.” Its significance went “beyond the question of borders, a reality that should be considered a priority in every negotiation for a political solution.” The Holy See, he said, called for a “peaceful resolution that would ensure respect for the sacred nature of Jerusalem and its universal value…reiterating that only international guarantee could preserve its unique character and status and provide assurance of dialogue and reconciliation for peace in the region.”[23]

After the motion was passed, more speeches continued with Estonia, who also spoke on behalf of other states. Australia’s Ambassador then explained her country’s government did “not support unilateral action that undermined the peace process [and] it did not believe today’s text would help to bring the parties back to the negotiating table.”[23]

Other speakers included, Paraguay, whose Ambassador said that the country would abstain because “the question of Jerusalem was a matter for the Security Council, as the primary body responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security.”[23] This was followed by El Salvador, Argentina and Romania.[23]

Canada’s Ambassador Marc-Andre Blanchard called the proposal “one-sided”[23] and said: “We are disappointed that this resolution is one sided and does not advance prospects for peace to which we aspire, which is why we have abstained on today’s vote.” He, however, added that Canada wanted to emphasise Jerusalem’s special significance to the Abrahamic religions of Jews, Muslims and Christians. “Denying the connection between Jerusalem and the Jewish, Muslim and Christian faiths undermines the integrity of the site for all. We also reiterate the need to maintain the status quo at Jerusalem’s Holy sites.[19]

Nicaragua’s explained its support of the resolution, as it “rebuffed recent unilateral attempts to modify the character and status of Jerusalem. Such unilateral actions were in blatant violation of resolution 2234 (2016) and others…unilateral actions jeopardised peace and stability in the Middle East and drew the international community further away from a solution.”[23]

Mexico’s Ambassador then explained the abstention and emphasised that convening an emergency session was a disproportionate response. “The United States must become part of the solution, not a stumbling block that would hamper progress…the international community was further than ever from agreement.”[23]

The Czech Republic then said that while it supported the European Union position, it had abstained because it “did not believe the draft resolution would contribute to the peace process.”[23]

Armenia said that is position “remained unchanged. The situation should be resolved through negotiations paving the way for lasting peace and security.”[23]

Hungary echoed Armenia’s stance and said it would not comment on the foreign relations of the United States.[23]

Latvia then spoke, before Estonia re-took the floor to say it had also spoken on behalf of Albania, Lithuania and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.[23]

Result[edit]

Vote[24] Quantity States
Approve 128 Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cape Verde, Cambodia, Chad, Chile, China, Comoros, Republic of the Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guinea, Guyana, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Russia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Macedonia, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Vietnam, Yemen, Zimbabwe.
Reject 9 Guatemala, Honduras, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Togo, United States.
Abstain 35 Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Bahamas, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cameroon, Canada, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Haiti, Hungary, Jamaica, Kiribati, Latvia, Lesotho, Malawi, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Rwanda, Solomon Islands, South Sudan, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, Uganda, Vanuatu.
Absent 21 Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, East Timor, El Salvador, Georgia, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Mongolia, Myanmar, Moldova, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, São Tomé and Príncipe, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Zambia.

Reactions[edit]

States

Israel – Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected the result shortly after it was announced in call it “preposterous,” while he also thanked the states that supported “the truth” by not participating in “the theatre of the absurd.” He added that: “Jerusalem is our capital. Always was, always will be…But I do appreciate the fact that a growing number of countries refused to participate in this theatre of the absurd. So I appreciate that, and especially I want to again express our thanks to [US] President (Donald) Trump and Ambassador [Nikki] Haley, for their stalwart defence of Israel and their stalwart defence of the truth.” Defence Minister Avigdor Liberman, reminded Israelis of the longstanding Israeli disdain for such votes. “Let us just remember that this is the same UN about which our first ambassador to the organisation, Abba Eban, once said: ‘If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions’. There is nothing new in what just happened at the UN.” He also praised the US as “the moral beacon shining out of the darkness.” Minister of Strategic Affairs and Public Security Gilad Erdan said: “The historic connection between Israel and Jerusalem is stronger than any vote by the ‘United Nations’ — nations who are united only by their fear and their refusal to recognise the simple truth that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and the Jewish people.”

    • However, opposition Joint List Chairman and MK Ayman Odeh called the vote a wake-up call for Israel: “In the international arena, there still exists a large and definitive majority that believes that the Palestinian people, like all other nations, deserve a place in this world and the right to self-determination. This evening’s vote by the majority of the world’s nations against Trump’s announcement, in spite of the pressure and threats, flies in the face of Trump’s and Netanyahu’s diplomatic policy and is a clear statement by the international community in support of peace and the right of the Palestinians to an independent state, whose capital is East Jerusalem,”[8]
Media

Haaretz‘s Noa Landau, wrote, in citing unnamed diplomatic sourced, that Israel was particularly disappointed with countries like India that have enhanced bilateral relations with it recently. “The main disappointment in Israel was with the countries that have enhanced bilateral relations in recent years, especially those that share a particularly conservative worldview with the Netanyahu government. For example, India – whose Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, visited Israel in July, a tour that was memorable mainly for the pastoral photographs of him and Netanyahu embracing and wading in the waves – voted for the resolution against Israel and the United States.”[8]

Others

At a “Solidarity to Save Jerusalem” rally organised by the Barisan National government in Malaysia, one of the attendees Association of NextGen Christians of Malaysia President Joshua Hong said at the Putra Mosque: “We are here because we feel that the decision made by President Trump on announcing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is merely a political decision. He added that the decision also hurts Christian and Arabic churches in Palestine and not just the Muslims. “To us as Christians, Jerusalem is a city of peace and after that announcement, we feel there is no more peace.I think it is not right and unjust. We believe we should continue pursuing the sustainable peace solution for Palestine and Israel, rather than just a single nation declaring it just like that.” He claimed that about 50 members of the group turned up in a show of support for the Palestinian people..[2]

Archery at the 2016 Summer Olympics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archery
at the Games of the XXXI Olympiad
Archery, Rio 2016.png
Venue Sambadrome Marquês de Sapucaí
Dates 6–12 August
Competitors 128
«2012 2020»

The archery events at the 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio de Janeirowere held over a seven-day period from 6 to 12 August. Four events took place, all were staged at the Sambadrome Marquês de Sapucaí.

Competition format[edit]

A total of 128 athletes competed across the four events: the men’s individual, women’s individual, men’s team and women’s team.[1]

All four events were recurve archery events, held under the World Archery-approved 70-meter distance and rules. The competition started with an initial ranking round involving all 64 archers of each gender. Each archer would shoot a total of 72 arrows to be seeded from 1–64 according to their score.

The ranking round was also used to seed the teams from 1 to 12, by aggregating the individual scores for the members of each team.

Each event was played in a single-elimination tournament format, except for the semi-final losers, who would play off to decide the bronze medal winner.

Individual events[edit]

In the individual events, all 64 competitors entered the competition at the first round, the round of 64. The draw was seeded according to the result of the ranking round so the first seed shot against the 64th seed in the first round.

Each match was scored using the Archery Olympic Round, consisting of the best-of-five sets, with three arrows per set. The winner of each set received two points, and if the scores in the set had tied then each archer would have received one point. If at the end of five sets the score had been tied at 5–5, a single arrow shoot-off would have held and the closest to the center would be declared the winner.

Team events[edit]

In the team events, the top four seeded teams from the ranking round will receive a bye to the quarter-final. The remaining eight teams, seeded 5th to 12th, will compete for the remaining four places in the quarter-finals.

For the first time, the team event has followed the same Archery Olympic Round set system as the individual event.

Schedule[edit]

All times are Brasília Time (UTC−3).

Day Date Start Finish Event Phase
Day 0 Friday 5 August 2016 Men’s individual Ranking round
Women’s individual Ranking round
Day 1 Saturday 6 August 2016 9:00 17:45 Men’s team Eliminations/Medal round
Day 2 Sunday 7 August 2016 9:00 17:45 Women’s team Eliminations/Medal round
Day 3 Monday 8 August 2016 9:00 17:45 Men’s individual 1/32 & 1/16 Eliminations
Women’s individual 1/32 & 1/16 Eliminations
Day 4 Tuesday 9 August 2016 9:00 17:45 Men’s individual 1/32 & 1/16 Eliminations
Women’s individual 1/32 & 1/16 Eliminations
Day 5 Wednesday 10 August 2016 9:00 18:55 Men’s individual 1/32 & 1/16 Eliminations
Women’s individual 1/32 & 1/16 Eliminations
Day 6 Thursday 11 August 2016 9:00 17:10 Women’s individual 1/8 Eliminations/Quarter/Semi finals/Medal round
Day 7 Friday 12 August 2016 9:00 17:10 Men’s individual 1/8 Eliminations/Quarter/Semi finals/Medal round

Qualification[edit]

Each National Olympic Committee (NOC) was permitted to enter a maximum of six competitors, three per gender. NOCs that qualified teams for a particular gender were able to send a three-member team to the team event and also have each member compete in the individual event. There were 12 team spots for each gender, thus qualifying 36 individuals through team qualification. All other NOCs might earn a maximum of one quota place per gender for the individual events.[2]

Six places were reserved for Brazil as the host nation, and a further six were decided by the Tripartite Commission. The remaining 116 places were then allocated through a qualification process, in which archers earned quota places for their respective NOCs, though not necessarily for themselves.

To be eligible to participate in the Olympic Games after the NOC has obtained a quota place, all archers must have achieved the following minimum qualification score (MQS):

  • Men: 70m round of 630
  • Women: 70m round of 600

The MQS must have been achieved between 26 July 2015 (starting at the 2015 World Archery Championships) and 11 July 2016 at a registered World Archery event.

Participating nations[edit]

Archers from 56 nations participated at the 2016 Summer Olympics.

Competitors[edit]

Male archers

  • Entry list at 1 August 2016[1]
NOC Name Age Hometown World ranking Team ranking
 Australia Alec Potts February 9, 1996 (age 22) AustraliaSouth Australia Clayton Bay 108 19
 Australia Ryan Tyack June 2, 1991 (age 26) AustraliaQueensland Brisbane 59 19
 Australia Taylor Worth January 8, 1991 (age 27) AustraliaWestern Australia Yangebup 15 19
 Belarus Anton Prilepov February 5, 1984 (age 34) Belarus Mogilev 18
 Belgium Robin Ramaekers October 26, 1994 (age 23) Belgium Tongeren 97
 Brazil Marcus Dalmeida January 30, 1998 (age 20) BrazilRio de Janeiro (state) Rio de Janeiro 17 17
 Brazil Bernardo Oliveira June 8, 1993 (age 24) BrazilFederal District (Brazil) Brasilia 99 17
 Brazil Daniel Rezende Xavier August 31, 1982 (age 35) BrazilMinas Gerais Belo Horizonte 114 17
 Canada Crispin Duenas January 5, 1986 (age 32) CanadaOntario Toronto 20
 Chile Ricardo Soto October 20, 1999 (age 18) Chile Arica 113
 China Gu Xuesong June 21, 1993 (age 24) China Shanghai 39 3
 China Wang Dapeng December 3, 1996 (age 21) China Huangdao 118 3
 China Xing Yu March 12, 1991 (age 26) China Beijing 12 3
 Chinese Taipei Kao Hao-wen March 17, 1995 (age 22) Chinese Taipei Hualien 31 6
 Chinese Taipei Wei Chun-heng July 6, 1994 (age 23) Chinese Taipei Taoyuan 10 6
 Chinese Taipei Yu Guan-lin November 29, 1993 (age 24) Chinese Taipei Nantou 55 6
 Colombia Andres Pila May 11, 1991 (age 26) Colombia Montelíbano 82
 Cuba Adrian Andres Puentes Perez July 3, 1988 (age 29) Cuba Sancti Spíritus 123
 Egypt Ahmed El-Nemr November 21, 1978 (age 39) Egypt Cairo 156
 Fiji Robert Elder April 25, 1981 (age 36) Fiji Suva 199
 Finland Samuli Piippo January 1, 1980 (age 38) Finland Oulu 75
 France Lucas Daniel January 1, 1995 (age 23) France Riom 25 15
 France Pierre Plihon October 29, 1989 (age 28) France Nice 42 15
 France Jean-Charles Valladont March 20, 1989 (age 28) France Champigny-sur-Marne 4 15
 Germany Florian Floto April 12, 1988 (age 29) GermanyLower SaxonyBraunschweig 77
 Great Britain Patrick Huston January 5, 1996 (age 22) United KingdomNorthern Ireland Belfast 38
 India Atanu Das April 5, 1992 (age 25) India Kolkata 22
 Indonesia Riau Ega Agatha November 25, 1991 (age 26) Indonesia Blitar 29 14
 Indonesia Hendra Purnama November 12, 1997 (age 20) Indonesia Bantul 98 14
 Indonesia Muhammad Wijaya November 22, 1996 (age 21) Indonesia Jambi 209 14
 Italy Marco Galiazzo May 9, 1983 (age 34) Italy Padua 381 5
 Italy Mauro Nespoli November 22, 1987 (age 30) Italy Vigna di Valle 11 5
 Italy David Pasqualucci June 27, 1996 (age 21) Italy Genzano di Roma 28 5
 France Rene Philippe Kouassi December 14, 1979 (age 38) France Angers 279
 Japan Takaharu Furukawa August 9, 1984 (age 33) Japan Aomori 19
 Kazakhstan Sultan Duzelbayev March 12, 1994 (age 23) Kazakhstan Almaty 125
 Libya Ali Elghari January 31, 1997 (age 21) Libya Tripoli 440
 Malawi Areneo David June 6, 1995 (age 22) Malawi Gumulira 440
 Malaysia Haziq Kamaruddin July 21, 1993 (age 24) Malaysia Kuala Lumpur 100 18
 Malaysia Khairul Anuar Mohamad September 22, 1991 (age 26) Malaysia Kemaman 41 18
 Malaysia Muhammad Akmal Nor Hasrin July 15, 1995 (age 22) Malaysia Kuala Lumpur 235 18
 Mexico Ernesto Boardman February 23, 1993 (age 24) MexicoCoahuila Arteaga 16
 Mongolia Gantugs Jantsan April 12, 1972 (age 45) Mongolia Ulaanbaatar 114
 Nepal Jitbahadur Muktan August 31, 1979 (age 38) Nepal Kathmandu 338
 Netherlands Mitch Dielemans January 6, 1993 (age 25) Netherlands Geldrop 51 7
 Netherlands Sjef van den Berg April 14, 1995 (age 22) Netherlands Oss 5 7
 Netherlands Rick van der Ven April 14, 1991 (age 26) Netherlands Arnhem 7 7
 Norway Baard Nesteng May 14, 1979 (age 38) Norway Fredrikstad 52
 Slovakia Boris Balaz November 20, 1997 (age 20) Slovakia Liptovský Mikuláš 202
 South Korea Kim Woo-jin June 20, 1992 (age 25) South Korea Chungju 1 1
 South Korea Ku Bon-chan January 31, 1993 (age 25) South Korea Andong 2 1
 South Korea Lee Seung-yun April 18, 1995 (age 22) South Korea Seoul 8 1
 Spain Miguel Alvarino Garcia May 31, 1994 (age 23) SpainGalicia (Spain) A Coruña 9 9
 Spain Antonio Fernandez June 12, 1991 (age 26) SpainExtremadura Cáceres 23 9
 Spain Juan Rodriguez Liebana June 19, 1992 (age 25) SpainCommunity of Madrid Madrid 30 9
 Thailand Witthaya Thamwong September 19, 1987 (age 30) Thailand Lampang 101
 Tonga Hans Arne Jensen February 25, 1998 (age 19) Tonga Nuku’alofa 869
 Turkey Mete Gazoz June 8, 1999 (age 18) Turkey Istanbul 14
 Ukraine Viktor Ruban May 24, 1981 (age 36) Ukraine Kharkiv 36
 United States Brady Ellison October 27, 1988 (age 29) United StatesArizona Globe 6 2
 United States Zach Garrett April 8, 1995 (age 22) United StatesMissouri Wellington 3 2
 United States Jake Kaminski August 11, 1988 (age 29) United StatesNew York (state) Elma 26 2
 Venezuela Elias Malave October 26, 1989 (age 28) Venezuela Maturín 35
 Great Britain Gavin Ben Sutherland June 26, 1979 (age 38) United Kingdom Worthing 177

Female archers[edit]

  • Entry list at 1 August 2016[2]
NOC Name Age Hometown World ranking Team ranking
 Australia Alice Ingley January 13, 1993 (age 25) AustraliaWestern Australia Perth 353
 Austria Laurence Baldauff November 19, 1974 (age 43) Austria Vienna 93
 Azerbaijan Olga Senyuk January 23, 1991 (age 27) Azerbaijan Baku 83
 Bangladesh Shamoli Ray April 5, 1994 (age 23) Bangladesh Dhaka 175
 Bhutan Karma Karma June 6, 1990 (age 27) Bhutan Trashiyangtse 229
 Brazil Marina Canetta April 1, 1989 (age 28) BrazilSão Paulo (state) São Paulo 105 20
 Brazil Ane Marcelle dos Santos January 12, 1994 (age 24) BrazilRio de Janeiro (state) Maricá 64 20
 Brazil Sarah Nikitin December 27, 1988 (age 29) BrazilSão Paulo (state) São Paulo 126 20
 Canada Georcy Thiffeault Picard February 8, 1991 (age 27) CanadaQuebec Montreal 46
 China Cao Hui September 7, 1991 (age 26) China Liaoning 34 6
 China Qi Yuhong August 25, 1989 (age 28) China Shanghai 21 6
 China Wu Jiaxin February 28, 1997 (age 20) China Shanghai 20 6
 Chinese Taipei Le Chien-ying April 17, 1990 (age 27) Chinese Taipei Taipei 7 4
 Chinese Taipei Lin Shih-chia May 20, 1993 (age 24) Chinese Taipei Hsinchu 10 4
 Chinese Taipei Tan Ya-ting November 7, 1993 (age 24) Chinese Taipei Hsinchu 2 4
 Colombia Carolina Aguirre January 29, 1996 (age 22) Colombia Antioquia 79 13
 Colombia Ana Maria Rendon March 10, 1986 (age 31) Colombia Medellín 27 13
 Colombia Natalia Sanchez March 20, 1983 (age 34) Colombia Medellín 36 13
 Dominican Republic Yessica Camilo Gonzalez April 23, 1993 (age 24) Dominican Republic Santo Domingo 157
 Egypt Reem Mansour December 20, 1993 (age 24) Egypt Cairo 179
 Estonia Laura Nurmsalu June 1, 1994 (age 23) Estonia Viljandi 75
 Finland Taru Kuoppa November 14, 1983 (age 34) Finland Lahti 96
 Georgia Kristine Esebua March 19, 1985 (age 32) Georgia (country) Khobi 8 7
 Georgia Yuliya Lobzhenidze August 23, 1977 (age 40) Georgia (country) Tbilisi 85 7
 Georgia Khatuna Narimanidze February 2, 1974 (age 44) Georgia (country) Batumi 37 7
 Germany Lisa Unruh April 12, 1988 (age 29) GermanyBerlin Berlin 16
 Great Britain Naomi Folkard September 18, 1983 (age 34) United KingdomEngland Leamington Spa 67
 Greece Evangelia Psarra June 17, 1974 (age 43) Greece Thessaloniki 95
 India Deepika Kumari June 13, 1994 (age 23) India Jamshedpur 12 4
 India Bombayla Devi Laishram February 22, 1985 (age 32) India Imphal 69 4
 India Laxmirani Majhi January 26, 1989 (age 29) India Chittaranjan 15 4
 Indonesia Ika Rochmawati July 2, 1989 (age 28) Indonesia Bojonegoro 26
 Iran Zahra Nemati April 30, 1985 (age 32) Iran Tehran 47
 Italy Lucilla Boari March 24, 1997 (age 20) Italy Mantua 24 9
 Italy Claudia Mandia October 21, 1992 (age 25) Italy Salerno 74 9
 Italy Guendalina Sartori August 8, 1988 (age 29) Italy Monselice 17 9
 Japan Yuki Hayashi October 2, 1984 (age 33) Japan Kawanishi 33 10
 Japan Kaori Kawanaka August 3, 1991 (age 26) Japan Kotoura 13 10
 Japan Saori Nagamine July 5, 1993 (age 24) Japan Nagasaki 61 10
 Kazakhstan Luiza Saidiyeva March 17, 1994 (age 23) Kazakhstan Shymkent 107
 Kenya Shehzana Anwar August 21, 1989 (age 28) Kenya Nairobi 195
 Mexico Gabriela Bayardo February 18, 1994 (age 23) MexicoBaja California Tijuana 62 12
 Mexico Aida Roman May 21, 1988 (age 29) MexicoMexico City Mexico City 14 12
 Mexico Alejandra Valencia October 17, 1994 (age 23) MexicoSonora Hermosillo 18 12
 Moldova Alexandra Mirca October 11, 1993 (age 24) Moldova Chișinău 60
 Myanmar San Yu Htwe October 14, 1986 (age 31) Myanmar Mindat 191
 North Korea Kang Un-ju February 1, 1995 (age 23) North Korea Pyongyang 72
 Poland Karina Lipiarska-Palka February 16, 1987 (age 30) Poland Gmina Zabierzów 41
 Russia Tuiana Dashidorzhieva April 14, 1996 (age 21) RussiaZabaykalsky Krai Chita 11 2
 Russia Ksenia Perova February 8, 1989 (age 29) RussiaSverdlovsk Oblast Lesnoy 5 2
 Russia Inna Stepanova April 17, 1990 (age 27) RussiaBuryatia Ulan-Ude 48 2
 Slovakia Alexandra Longova February 7, 1994 (age 24) Slovakia Viničné 57
 South Korea Hye Jin Chang May 13, 1987 (age 30) South Korea Daegu 6 1
 South Korea Choi Mi-sun July 1, 1996 (age 21) South Korea Gwangju 1 1
 South Korea Ki Bo-bae February 20, 1988 (age 29) South Korea Gwangju 3 1
 Spain Adriana Martin April 17, 1997 (age 20) SpainCommunity of Madrid Madrid 51
 Sweden Christine Bjerendal February 3, 1987 (age 31) Sweden Lindome 77
 Tonga Karoline Lusitania Tatafu February 20, 1998 (age 19) Tonga Nuku’alofa 309
 Turkey Yasemin Anagoz October 14, 1998 (age 19) Turkey Izmir 31
 Ukraine Veronika Marchenko April 3, 1993 (age 24) Ukraine Lviv 9 8
 Ukraine Anastasia Pavlova February 9, 1995 (age 23) Ukraine Nova Kakhovka 44 8
 Ukraine Lidiia Sichenikova February 3, 1993 (age 25) Ukraine Chernivtsi 45 8
 United States Mackenzie Brown March 14, 1995 (age 22) United StatesTexas Flint 4
 Venezuela Leidys Brito July 5, 1984 (age 33) Venezuela Maturín 55

External links

Medal summary[edit]

Medal table[edit]

Rank Nation Gold Silver Bronze Total
1 South Korea 4 0 1 5
2 United States 0 1 1 2
3 Germany 0 1 0 1
France 0 1 0 1
Russia 0 1 0 1
6 Australia 0 0 1 1
Chinese Taipei 0 0 1 1
Total 4 4 4 12

Medalists[edit]

Event Gold Silver Bronze
Men’s individual
details
Ku Bon-chan
 South Korea
Jean-Charles Valladont
 France
Brady Ellison
 United States
Men’s team
details
 South Korea (KOR)
Ku Bon-chan
Lee Seung-yun
Kim Woo-jin
 United States (USA)
Brady Ellison
Zach Garrett
Jake Kaminski
 Australia (AUS)
Alec Potts
Ryan Tyack
Taylor Worth
Women’s individual
details
Chang Hye-jin
 South Korea
Lisa Unruh
 Germany
Ki Bo-bae
 South Korea
Women’s team
details
 South Korea (KOR)
Chang Hye-jin
Choi Mi-sun
Ki Bo-bae
 Russia (RUS)
Tuyana Dashidorzhieva
Ksenia Perova
Inna Stepanova
 Chinese Taipei (TPE)
Le Chien-ying
Lin Shih-chia
Tan Ya-ting

ICC Under-19 Cricket World Cup

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
ICC Under-19 Cricket World Cup
Administrator International Cricket Council
Format One Day International
First tournament 1988
Last tournament 2014
Tournament format Round-robin
Knock-out
Number of teams 16
Current champion  South Africa (1st title)
Most successful  Australia (3 titles)
 India (3 titles)

The ICC Under-19 Cricket World Cup is an international cricket tournament contested by national Under-19 teams. The tournament was not staged after its first edition in 1988 till 1998 and since then has been organised by the ICC as a biennial event. The number of competing teams in the tournament has increased from eight in 1988 to the present 16 giving an opportunity for a number of associate and affiliate teams to showcase their talent.

Summary of all teams in all tournaments[edit]

The table below provides an overview of the performances of teams over past Under 19 World Cups, as at the end of the2014 tournament. Teams are sorted by best performance, then winning percentage, then (if equal) by alphabetical order.

No longer exist.

Team Appearances Best result Statistics
Total First Latest Played Won Lost Tie NR Win%
 Australia 10 1988 2014 Champions (1988, 2002,2010) 67 50 15 0 2 76.92
 India 10 1988 2014 Champions (2000, 2008,2012) 65 47 17 0 1 73.43
 Pakistan 10 1988 2014 Champions (2004, 2006) 63 45 18 0 0 74.42
 South Africa 9 1998 2014 Champions (2014) 55 40 14 0 1 71.07
 England 10 1988 2014 Champions (1998) 63 36 26 0 1 58.06
 West Indies 10 1988 2014 Runners-up (2004) 65 39 26 0 0 60.00
 Sri Lanka 10 1988 2014 Runners-up (2000) 62 33 28 0 1 54.09
 New Zealand 10 1988 2014 Runners-up (1998) 60 28 31 0 1 47.45
 Bangladesh 9 1998 2014 5th place (2006) 58 40 16 1 1 71.05
 Zimbabwe 9 1998 2014 6th place (2004) 56 25 31 0 0 44.64
 Afghanistan 3 2010 2014 7th place (2014) 18 7 11 0 0 38.88
   Nepal 6 2000 2012 8th place (2000) 37 19 17 0 1 52.77
 Ireland 7 1998 2012 10th place (2010) 43 14 28 1 0 33.72
 Scotland 6 1998 2014 11th place (2012) 36 11 25 0 0 30.55
 Kenya 3 1998 2002 11th place (1998) 17 5 12 0 0 29.41
 Canada 4 2002 2014 11th place (2010) 23 3 18 1 1 15.90
 Namibia 7 1998 2014 11th place (2008) 41 6 34 1 0 15.85
 United States 2 2006 2010 12th place (2006) 11 2 8 0 1 20.00
 United Arab Emirates 1 2014 2014 12th place (2014) 6 1 5 0 0 16.66
 Papua New Guinea 7 1998 2014 12th place (2008,2010) 41 3 38 0 0 7.31
 Denmark 1 1998 1998 13th place (1998) 6 2 4 0 0 33.33
 Netherlands 1 2000 2000 14th place (2000) 6 1 4 0 1 20.00
 Hong Kong 1 2010 2010 14th place (2010) 6 1 5 0 0 16.66
 Uganda 2 2004 2006 14th place (2004,2006) 12 2 10 0 0 16.66
 Bermuda 1 2008 2008 15th place (2008) 5 1 4 0 0 20.00
 Malaysia 1 2008 2008 16th place (2008) 5 1 4 0 0 20.00
Americas 1 2000 2000 16th place (2000) 6 0 6 0 0 0.00
ICC Associates 1 1988 1988 8th place (1988) 7 0 7 0 0 0.00

No longer exist.

The result percentage excludes no results and counts ties as half a win

Team result by tournament[edit]

Legend
  • 1st – Champions
  • 2nd – Runners-up
  • 3rd – Third place
  • Q – Qualified for upcoming tournament
  • * – Team was ineligible for tournament
  • italics – Team is defunct
  •     — Hosts

History[edit]

1988 (Winner: Australia)[edit]

The inaugural event was titled the McDonald’s Bicentennial Youth World Cup, and was held in 1988 as part of theAustralian Bicentenary celebrations. It took place in South Australia and Victoria. Teams from the seven Test-playing nations, as well as an ICC Associates XI, competed in a round-robin format. Australia lost only one match, their final round-robin game against Pakistan by which time they had qualified for the semis. They went on to beat Pakistan by five wickets in the final, thanks to an unbeaten hundred from Brett Williams. England and West Indies made up the last four, but India were the real disappointments. After opening with a good win against England, they suffered hefty defeats in four matches to be knocked out early. The tournament was notable for the number of future international players who competed. Future England captains Nasser Hussain and Mike Atherton played, as did Indian spinner Venkatapathy Raju, New Zealand all-rounder Chris Cairns, Pakistanis Mushtaq Ahmed and Inzamam-ul-Haq, Sri Lankan Sanath Jayasuriya, and West IndiansBrian Lara, Ridley Jacobs, and Jimmy Adams. Australia’s Brett Williams was the leading run-scorer, with 471 runs at anaverage of 52.33. Wayne Holdsworth from Australia and Mushtaq Ahmed were the leading wicket-takers, with 19 wickets ataverages of 12.52 and 16.21 respectively.

The final ranks in the tournament for the 8 teams were: 1.Australia, 2.Pakistan, 3.West Indies, 4.England, 5.Sri Lanka, 6.India, 7.New Zealand, 8.ICC Associates

1998 (Winner: England)[edit]

England were the unexpected winners of the second Under-19 World Cup in South Africa. In 1998, the event was relaunched in South Africa as a biennial tournament. The only previous tournament of its kind was held ten years earlier. In addition to the nine Test-playing nations, there were teams from Bangladesh, Kenya, Scotland, Ireland, Denmark, Namibiaand Papua New Guinea. The teams were divided into four pools, named after Gavaskar, Sobers, Cowdrey and Bradman, and the top two sides from each progressed to two Super League pools, whose winners advanced to the final. In order to give everyone a decent amount of cricket, the non-qualifiers competed in a Plate League, won by Bangladesh, who beatWest Indies in the final. West Indies failed to qualify for the Super League after a fiasco concerning the composition of their squad – they arrived with seven players who contravened the age restrictions for the tournament. The Super League, in which every game was covered live on South African satellite television, also threw up a number of shocks and tense finishes; both pools came down to net run-rate at the finish. England, from being down and almost out, beat Pakistan – who surprisingly lost all three of their games – but lost a rain-affected match to India. Australia had beaten India and Pakistan and were favourites to reach the final. Only a massive defeat by England could deny them: but that is precisely what they suffered. In front of a crowd of about 6,000 at Newlands, they were bowled out for 147. New Zealand joined England in the final, where a century from England’s Stephen Peters won the day. Chris Gayle was the tournament’s leading run-scorer, with 364 runs at an average of 72.80. West Indian Ramnaresh Sarwan and Zimbabwean Mluleki Nkala were the leading wicket-takers, with 16 wickets at 10.81 and 13.06 respectively.

The final ranks in the tournament for the 16 teams were: 1.England, 2.New Zealand, 3.South Africa, 4.Australia, 5.India, 6.Sri Lanka, 7.Pakistan, 8.Zimbabwe, 9.Bangladesh, 10.West Indies, 11.Kenya, 12.Scotland, 13.Denmark, 14.Ireland, 15.Namibia, 16.Papua New Guinea

2000 (Winner: India)[edit]

The 2000 tournament was held in Sri Lanka, and replicated the format from 1998. Participating nations included the nine Test-playing nations, as well as Bangladesh, Kenya, Ireland, Namibia, Holland, Nepal and the Americas. To the disappointment of a large crowd at Colombo’s SSC, Sri Lanka fell at the final hurdle in a final dominated by India. The winners remained unbeaten throughout, and destroyed Australia by 170 runs in the semi-final to underline their supremacy. In the other semi-final, Sri Lanka delighted a crowd of 5000 at Galle by beating Pakistan. The fact that three of the four semi-finalists were from Asia and so more attuned to the conditions was coincidental – they played the better cricket and, in Pakistan’s case, had a very experienced squad. England, the defending champions, were most disappointing, and they won only one match against a Test-playing country, and that a last-ball victory over Zimbabwe. South Africa, one of the favourites, were desperately unlucky to be eliminated after three no-results gave them three points while Nepal, with four points courtesy of one win over Kenya, went through to the Super League instead. The format of the tournament was as in 1997-98, with four groups of four and then a Super League and final. Graeme Smith was the tournament’s leading run-scorer, with 348 runs at an average of 87.00. Pakistan’s Zahid Saeed was the leading wicket-taker, with 15 wickets at 7.60. India’s Yuvraj Singh was named Man of the Series. India clinched the title for the first time under the captaincy ofMohammed Kaif.

The final ranks in the tournament for the 16 teams were: 1.India, 2.Sri Lanka, 3.Pakistan, 4.Australia, 5.West Indies, 6.England, 7.New Zealand, 8.Nepal, 9.South Africa, 10.Bangladesh, 11.Zimbabwe, 12.Ireland, 13.Kenya, 14.Netherlands, 15.Namibia, 16.Americas

2002 (Winner: Australia)[edit]

The fourth Under-19 World Cup held in New Zealand only confirmed Australia’s dominance of the game, and from their opening match, when they obliterated Kenya by 430 runs, through to their comprehensive victory over South Africa in the final, they were never threatened. Participating nations included the ten Test-playing nations, plus Canada, Kenya, Namibia, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, and Scotland. Their captain, Cameron White, was singled out for praise for his leadership, and he chipped in with 423 runs at 70.50. And they didn’t rely on pace either, playing only two seamers and four slow bowlers, with Xavier Doherty, a slow left-armer, leading the wicket-takers with 16 at 9.50 and all without a single wide. In contrast, India, the holders, underperformed in their semi-final against South Africa, a team they had easily beaten a week or so earlier. They also suffered embarrassing defeats to neighbours Pakistan and Bangladesh. Pakistan, however, provided the main upset when they lost to Nepal by 30 runs, and Nepal also gave England a few uneasy moments. Zimbabwe won the plate competition, with their expected opponents, Bangladesh, beaten in the semi-final by Nepal. Australian Cameron Whitewas the tournament’s leading run-scorer, with 423 runs at an average of 70.50 and Xavier Doherty was the leading wicket-taker, with 16 wickets at 9.50. Tatenda Taibu, Zimbabwe’s captain, was Man of the Series for his 250 runs and 12 wickets, not to mention his wicket-keeping in between bowling stints.

The final ranks in the tournament for the 16 teams were: 1.Australia, 2.South Africa, 3.India, 4.West Indies, 5.Pakistan, 6.New Zealand, 7.England, 8.Sri Lanka, 9.Zimbabwe, 10.Nepal, 11.Bangladesh, 12.Namibia, 13.Scotland, 14.Kenya, 15.Canada, 16.Papua New Guinea

2004 (Winner: Pakistan)[edit]

The 2004 tournament was held in Bangladesh. More than 350,000 spectators saw the 54 matches played in the tournament. The finale ended with a close final between the two best teams – West Indies and Pakistan. It was won by Pakistan by 25 runs against West Indies and a 30,000 crowd acclaimed the victorious Pakistanis almost as their own. The players, from the ten Test countries and six other nations, were feted wherever they went, and the appetite for cricket was remarkable: even Zimbabwe v Canada sold out. The shock was the elimination from the main competition of holders Australia, bowled out for 73 and beaten by Zimbabwe in the group stage when Tinashe Panyangara took 6 for 31, the second-best figures in the competition’s history. And Australia then lost to Bangladesh in the plate final amid thumping drums and gleeful celebrations. The downside was the quality of the cricket, which was often mediocre on some indifferent pitches, and the reporting of six unidentified bowlers for having suspect actions. Pakistan would have finished unbeaten but for a hiccup against England – when both teams had already qualified for the semis. England reached the last four, which was progress, and Alastair Cook looked a class apart. But they came unstuck against West Indies’ spinners in the semi-final. India completed the semi-finalists. Dhawan and Suresh Raina were the backbone of a strong batting line-up, and Raina’s 90 from just 38 balls against the hapless Scots was as brutal an innings as one will see at any level. Both looked international-class already, though faced with a tough task breaking into their senior side’s formidable top order. The captain Ambati Rayudu had been hailed as the next great batting hope, having scored a century and a double in a first-class match at the age of 17. But he did not score the runs promised and was banned by the referee John Morrison from the semi-final after allowing a funereal over-rate during the Super League win against Sri Lanka: eight overs were bowled in the first 50 minutes. India’s Shikhar Dhawan was named Man of the Tournament, and was the tournament’s leading run-scorer, with 505 runs at an average of 84.16. Bangladeshi Enamul Haque was the leading wicket-taker, with 22 wickets at 10.18.

The final ranks in the tournament for the 16 teams were: 1.Pakistan, 2.West Indies, 3.India, 4.England, 5.Sri Lanka, 6.Zimbabwe, 7.South Africa, 8.New Zealand, 9.Bangladesh, 10.Australia, 11.Ireland, 12.Scotland, 13.Nepal, 14.Uganda, 15.Canada, 16.Papua New Guinea

2006 (Winner: Pakistan)[edit]

This tournament was always going to struggle to live up to the overwhelming response that greeted the previous event in Bangladesh. Despite free tickets the matches were sparsely attended even when the home side were in action, but it shouldn’t detract from an impressive two weeks which finished with Pakistan securing their second consecutive title in an extraordinary final against India at the Premadasa Stadium. Pakistan crumbled to 109, but in a thrilling passage of play reduced India to 9 for 6. Jamshed Ahmed and Anwar Ali, two of the success stories of the tournament, did the damage and there was no way back for India who fell 38 runs short. These two teams and Australia were the pick of the sides and along with England – who surpassed expectation to reach the semi-finals after beating a talented Bangladesh side – made up the final four. A number of players caught the eye, notably Australia captain Moises Henriques, the Indian batsmen Sumit thakur – the tournament’s leading run-scorer – and team-mate Rohit Sharma, along with legspinner Piyush Chawla, who a few weeks later made his Test debut against England. However, perhaps the best story of the tournament was Nepal claiming the Plate trophy after a thrilling victory against New Zealand having also beaten South Africa during the event.

The final ranks in the tournament for the 16 teams were: 1.Pakistan, 2.India, 3.Australia, 4.England, 5.Bangladesh, 6.Sri Lanka, 7.Zimbabwe, 8.West Indies, 9.Nepal, 10.New Zealand, 11.South Africa, 12.USA, 13.Ireland, 14.Uganda, 15.Namibia, 16.Scotland

2008 (Winner: India)[edit]

It was the first time the tournament was held in an Associate Member country. The 2008 Under-19 Cricket World Cup was held in Malaysia from 17 February to 2 March 2008. Along with hosts, 15 other teams battled in 44 matches packed into 15 days across three cities. India, still smarting from the loss in the previous edition had reason to be upbeat with Tanmay Srivastava, a mature batsman who eventually finished as the tournament’s leading run-getter, in their ranks. Australia and England had forgettable campaigns, coming up short against the big teams after making mincemeat of the minnows. Defending champions Pakistan were fortuitous to reach the semi-finals as their batsmen never really got going and, against South Africa in the semi-finals, their luck finally ran out while chasing 261. New Zealand, boosted by Man of the Tournament Tim Southee, were impressive before losing to India in a narrow run-chase under lights and cloudy skies in the other semi-final. South Africa’s captain Wayne Parnell had played a major role in ensuring their passage to the summit clash, picking up the most wickets in the tournament en route. But they had lost to India in the group stages and lightning did strike twice. India under the leadership of Virat Kohli, after being bowled out for 159, emerged triumphant by 12 runs under the D/L method and were crowned champions for the second time.

The final ranks in the tournament for the 16 teams were: 1.India, 2.South Africa, 3.Pakistan, 4.New Zealand, 5.England, 6.Australia, 7.Sri Lanka, 8.Bangladesh, 9.West Indies, 10.Nepal, 11.Namibia, 12.Papua New Guinea, 13.Ireland, 14.Zimbabwe, 15.Bermuda, 16.Malaysia [1]

2010 (Winner: Australia)[edit]

The 2010 Under-19 Cricket World Cup was held in New Zealand in January 2010. The tournament was hosted in New Zealand after the ICC took it away from Kenya on the flimsiest of reasons which ridiculed its own mission to spread the game. Kenya were further kicked by the ICC as their side was not allowed to participate as it had not won the African qualifying event – a weakened side had been fielded as at the time, as hosts, they did not need to qualify. As it was, New Zealand did a decent job but crowds were dismal and the group stages were as tediously predictable as in the senior tournament, with the better-funded big nations dominating. South Africa did beat Australia in a good match but a dead rubber. The competition came alive in the quarter-finals as West Indies beat England and Sri Lanka defeated South Africa. The best tie of the competition came when Pakistan beat fierce rivals India by two wickets with three balls remaining in a low-scoring match. The final between Australia and Pakistan was a rematch of the first tournament, and Australia won by 25 runs in a game where fortunes ebbed and flowed throughout.

The final ranks in the tournament for the 16 teams were: 1.Australia, 2.Pakistan, 3.West Indies, 4.Sri Lanka, 5.South Africa, 6.India, 7.New Zealand, 8.England, 9.Bangladesh, 10.Ireland, 11.Canada, 12.Papua New Guinea, 13.Zimbabwe, 14.Hong Kong, 15.USA, 16.Afghanistan

2012 (Winner: India)[edit]

2012 Under-19 Cricket World Cup was held in Tony Ireland Stadium, Australia. Along with the 10 ten test playing nations, Afghanistan, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, Ireland, Scotland and Namibia also participated in this tournament. Australia lost against India in the final on 26 August 2012. India’s third U19 World Cup means they tie for the most with Australia. Sri Lanka could not go through into the last eight but won the Plate championship by defeating Afghanistan by 7 wickets. Reece Topley of England was the highest wicket taker whereas Anamul Haque of Banglasdesh was the top run getter. India won the final against Australia with 14 balls to spare and 6 wickets remaining. Captain Unmukt Chand played a match winning innings of 111* not out in 130 balls with the help of 6 sixes & 7 fours. Sandeep Sharma also excelled with four wickets under his belt.

The final ranks in the tournament for the 16 teams were: 1.India, 2.Australia, 3.South Africa, 4.New Zealand, 5.England, 6.West Indies, 7.Bangladesh, 8.Pakistan, 9.Sri Lanka, 10.Afghanistan, 11.Scotland, 12.Ireland, 13.Nepal, 14.Papua New Guinea, 15.Zimbabwe, 16.Namibia

2014 (Winner: South Africa)[edit]

2014 Under-19 Cricket World-Cup was held in Dubai(U.A.E) in 2014. It was the first time that U.A.E hosted an ICC event. Afghanistan was the only non-full member to qualify for the Quarter Finals. This was the first time that Afghanistan reached the last eight of this tournament, courtesy of their stellar performance against Australia in the group stage. In fact, this was the second time that a non-test playing nation qualified for the Super League/ Quarter Finals, Nepal being the first one in the 2000 edition. India wobbled in the Quarter Finals against England and finally lost in the final over. This was the first semi-final berth for England in last four editions. Pakistan beat England in the semis to reach its fifth Under-19 Final, becoming the first team to do so. South Africa beat Australia in the second semi-final. In a one-sided final, South Africa beat Pakistans and claimed its maiden U-19 World Cup title. Corbin Bosch, son of former South African cricketer Tertius Bosch, was the Man of the Match in the finals and Aiden Markram was the Man of the Series. South Africa did not lose even a single match in the entire tournament.

The final ranks in the tournament for the 16 teams were: 1.South Africa, 2.Pakistan, 3.England, 4.Australia, 5.India, 6.West Indies, 7.Afghanistan, 8.Sri Lanka, 9.Bangladesh, 10.New Zealand, 11.Zimbabwe, 12.UAE, 13.Namibia, 14.Scotland, 15.Canada, 16.Papua New Guinea

Results[edit]

Year Venue Winner Runners up Semi Finalist 1 (3rd Place) Semi Finalist 2 (4th Place) Plate Champions†
1988  Australia  Australia  Pakistan  West Indies  England Not Played
1998  South Africa  England  New Zealand  South Africa  Australia  Bangladesh
2000  Sri Lanka  India  Sri Lanka  Pakistan  Australia  South Africa
2002  New Zealand  Australia  South Africa  India  West Indies  Zimbabwe
2004  Bangladesh  Pakistan  West Indies  India  England  Bangladesh
2006  Sri Lanka  Pakistan  India  Australia  England    Nepal
2008  Malaysia  India  South Africa  Pakistan  New Zealand  West Indies
2010  New Zealand  Australia  Pakistan  West Indies  Sri Lanka  Bangladesh
2012  Australia  India  Australia  South Africa  New Zealand  Sri Lanka
2014  United Arab Emirates  South Africa  Pakistan  England  Australia  Bangladesh
2016  Bangladesh
2018  New Zealand
2020  South Africa

† The Plate Championship is played among teams not qualified for the second round and is treated as play-off for 9th position as 8 nations advance to the second round of the main tournament.

♦ Officially, no semi finals were played in this tournament. These teams were the 3rd and the 4th ranked teams in the Super League.

Team Australia
1988
South Africa
1998
Sri Lanka
2000
New Zealand
2002
Bangladesh
2004
Sri Lanka
2006
Malaysia
2008
New Zealand
2010
Australia
2012
United Arab Emirates
2014
Bangladesh
2016
New Zealand
2018
South Africa
2020
Total
 Afghanistan 16th 10th 7th Q 3
 Australia 1st 4th 4th 1st 10th 3rd 6th 1st 2nd 4th Q Q Q 10
 Bangladesh 9th 10th 11th 9th 5th 8th 9th 7th 9th Q Q Q 9
 Bermuda 15th 1
 Canada 15th 15th 11th 15th 4
 Denmark 13th 1
 England 4th 1st 6th 7th 4th 4th 5th 8th 5th 3rd Q Q Q 10
 Fiji Q 1
 Hong Kong 14th 1
 ICC Americas 16th 1
 ICC Associates 8th 1
 India 6th 5th 1st 3rd 3rd 2nd 1st 6th 1st 5th Q Q Q 10
 Ireland 14th 12th 11th 13th 10th 12th 6
 Kenya 11th 13th 14th 3
 Malaysia 16th 1
 Namibia 15th 15th 12th 15th 11th 16th 13th Q 7
 Netherlands 14th 1
   Nepal 8th 10th 13th 9th 10th 13th 6
 New Zealand 7th 2nd 7th 6th 8th 10th 4th 7th 4th 10th Q Q Q 10
 Pakistan 2nd 7th 3rd 5th 1st 1st 3rd 2nd 8th 2nd Q Q Q 10
 Papua New Guinea 16th 16th 16th 12th 12th 14th 16th 7
 South Africa * 3rd 9th 2nd 7th 11th 2nd 5th 3rd 1st Q Q Q 9
 Scotland 12th 13th 12th 16th 11th 14th 6
 Sri Lanka 5th 6th 2nd 8th 5th 6th 7th 4th 9th 8th Q Q Q 10
 Uganda 14th 14th 2
 United Arab Emirates 12th 1
 United States 12th 15th 2
 West Indies 3rd 10th 5th 4th 2nd 8th 9th 3rd 6th 6th Q Q Q 10
 Zimbabwe 8th 11th 9th 6th 7th 14th 13th 15th 11th Q Q Q 9

10 Weirdest Snakes

Missing AirAsia Flight Was Predicted

As early as the end of the world community on the 15th of this month predicted AirAsia aircraft to happen, repeatedly warned people away from Malaysia Airlines, AirAsia away, saying, “Do not listen to the words, over a period of time after the accident pulls this post, it is too late to regret.

WASHINGTON December 28, 2014 Reuters (Epoch Times reporter Luo sub-reports) were shocking media on December 28 morning plane carrying 162 people lost contact AirAsia flight QZ8501, Sina Weibo, Jan. 15 Community Day on the horizon, some people predicted the crash of AirAsia, AirAsia called on Chinese people away, do not become a victim of another MH370, and calls promptly notify their relatives and friends. The posts in AirAsia aircraft after the accident became the center of focus online, causing everyone wonder and hot.

On the 28th morning, a Surabaya to Singapore from Indonesia AirAsia flights QZ8501 lost contact with the control tower in Jakarta, Beijing lost to time is 7:17. There are 162 people, including seven crew members on the plane lost contact, it is understood no Chinese passengers on the plane.

There were Han Chinese media in their own way Weibo shocking was predicted AirAsia aircraft lost contact event, he made a screenshot, and accompanied by a word: this friend on the 15th of this month predicted today AirAsia aircraft lost contact events.

This is the landlord, “the people have their own music” in the month at 20:15 on the 15th with the title “was ruined after MAS, AirAsia Blackhand also extended to” send a message to the End of the World community, which reads: “International Blackhand the Malaysia Airlines and Malaysia Airlines MH370 MH17 after the hijacking and shot down, as the world’s sixth-largest airline Ma Hangji this collapse, in a lethargic state. Now, the big black hand again targeted in AirAsia, as always, must ruin AirAsia, Because AirAsia also belong to Malaysia. Given Blackhand forces too powerful, too vicious heart, suggested that the Chinese passenger travel, away from AirAsia, do not become another victim of MH370. ”

After issuing this post, he bursts a few posts that night followed by further explanation: “It was a happy business travel or go out to work to learn, do not care to sit MAS or AirAsia, became a target, loss of dead people be careful.” “We want this message promptly notify their relatives and friends,” “untouchables, hide from! Who saw this post, benefits.” “The most important people to own life insurance.”

Even that night around 11:12, he wrote the post, said:. “This is a life-saving message to Europe or the US tour, do not take AirAsia Malaysia Airlines airliner Do not listen to the words, over a period of time after the accident pulls out this post, and that too late to regret. ”

Then after another two days on the 16th, the 17th, was renamed the landlord or the reminder: “This is a major event in human life, we have to pay attention,” and stressed that “far from AirAsia, Malaysia Airlines away, cherish life.”

After 58 minutes he was 17 am and 10:10 made about the contents of two identical posts “away from AirAsia, Malaysia Airlines away, cherish life,” disappeared. He patiently made a total of 39 posts related content.


As early as the end of the world community on the 15th of this month predicted AirAsia aircraft to happen, repeatedly warned people away from Malaysia Airlines, AirAsia away, saying, “Do not listen to the words, over a period of time after the accident pulls this post, it is too late to regret a. “(network screenshot)

After the 28th AirAsia aircraft lost contact, a lot of people come back again, have the thread, said: “What the landlord,” “admiration” “I go, this is amazing,” “horrible ……” “kneel” ……

Others say: “The landlord came out, you are still guessing this thing you planned aircraft Oh really gone?!” “The landlord know insider ah!”

Someone said that Sina’s AirAsia plane lost contact with the topic, and mentioned no Chinese passengers on the aircraft lost contact, do not know with the landlord to remind also relevant? Internet is also some speculation that this could predict the “man of God” is not the Ministry of State Security personnel.

AirAsia aircraft lost contact after a lot of people watching the landlord of the original post, and leave a message discussion thread pages of press time reporter has reached 30, but also more than 650,000 hits, but the name of the landlord has not appeared again.

This is clearly the name of the landlord written incident involves the like: “Should AirAsia is a joint venture of this incident involved – Thai AirAsia.”

According to Baidu information: AirAsia is a Malaysian airline, is Asia’s first low-cost airline. Malaysia’s second international airline. Parent company AirAsia Berhad. AirAsia Thai AirAsia and Indonesia have AirAsia two joint venture companies.

Editor: JIANG Xiao

Petronas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the Byzantine nobleman and general, see Petronas (general).
Not to be confused with the Brazilian oil company Petrobras.


PETRONAS
, short for Petroliam Nasional Berhad, is a Malaysian oil and gas company that was founded on 17 August 1974. Wholly owned by the Government of Malaysia, the corporation is vested with the entire oil and gas resources in Malaysia and is entrusted with the responsibility of developing and adding value to these resources. PETRONAS is ranked among Fortune Global 500‘s largest corporations in the world. Fortune ranks PETRONAS as the 75th largest company in the world in 2013. It also ranks PETRONAS as the 12th most profitable company in the world and the most profitable in Asia.[2][3][4]

Petroliam Nasional Berhad (PETRONAS)
ڤيتروليام ناسيونل برحد
Type Government-owned corporation
Industry Oil and gas
Founded 17 August 1974
Headquarters Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Area served Malaysia
Key people Tan Sri Shamsul Azhar Bin Abbas, Group CEO and President
Products Petroleum, natural gas,petrochemicals
Services Shipping services
Revenue Increase US$100.744 billion (2014)[1]
Net income Increase US$21.91 billion (2012)
Total assets Increase US$161.472 billion (2014)[1]
Total equity Increase US$89.29 billion (2012)
Owners Malaysian Government
Employees 39,236 (2010)
Website www.petronas.com.my

Since its incorporation, PETRONAS has grown to be an integrated international oil and gas company with business interests in 35 countries. As of the end of March 2005, the PETRONAS Group comprised 103 wholly owned subsidiaries, 19 partly owned outfits and 57 associated companies. Together, these companies make the PETRONAS Group, which is involved in various oil and gas based activities. The Financial Times has identified PETRONAS as one of the “new seven sisters“:[5] the most influential and mainly state-owned national oil and gas companies from countries outside the OECD.

The group is engaged in a wide spectrum of petroleum activities, including upstream exploration and production of oil and gas to downstream oil refining; marketing and distribution of petroleum products; trading; gas processing andliquefaction; gas transmission pipeline network operations; marketing of liquefied natural gas; petrochemicalmanufacturing and marketing; shipping; automotive engineering; and property investment.

PETRONAS provides a substantial source of income for the Malaysian government, with 45% of the government’s budget dependent on PETRONAS’ dividend, moreover in 2011 government real balance has 5 percent deficit of Gross Domestic Product.[6]

The company is headquartered at the Petronas Towers which was officially opened on Malaysia’s 42nd National Day, 31 August 1998 – in the corporation’s 24th Anniversary year.

History

PETRONAS was not the first company to extract oil or gas in Malaysia. It was Royal Dutch Shell that began the oil exploration in Sarawak, then under the White Rajahs, at the end of the 19th century. In 1910, the first oil well was drilled in Miri, Sarawak. This became the first oil producing well known as the Grand Old Lady. Shell was still the only oil company in the area in 1963, when the Federation of Malaya, having achieved independence from Britain six years before, united with Sarawak and Sabah, both on the island of Borneo, and became Malaysia. The authorities in the two new states retained their links with Royal Dutch Shell, which brought Malaysia’s first offshore oil field onstream in 1968.

Meanwhile, the federal government turned to Esso, Continental Oil, and Mobil, licensing exploration off the state of Terengganu, in the Malay Peninsula, the most populous region and the focus of federal power. By 1974, however, only Esso was still in the area. It made its first discoveries of natural gas in that year and then rapidly made Terengganu a bigger producer of oil than either Sarawak or Sabah. By 1974, Malaysia’s output of crude oil stood at about 81,000 barrels per day (12,900 m3/d).

Setting up a state oil and gas company: 1970s

Several factors converged in the early 1970s to prompt the Malaysian government into setting up a state oil and gas company, as first proposed in its Five Year Plan published in 1971. Former Chief Minister of Sarawak, Tun Abdul Rahman Ya’kub was one of the people who proposed the idea of Malaysia setting up their own oil company. These were years in which power in the world oil industry began to shift away from the majors, which then controlled more than 90% of the oil trade, toward the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), as well as a proliferation of new private and state companies joining in the search for reserves. By 1985, the majors, reduced in number from seven to five, were producing less than 20% of the world total. It seemed that Malaysia would either have to join the trend or continue to leave its oil and gas entirely to Royal Dutch/Shell and Esso, multinational corporations necessarily attuned to the requirements of their directors and shareholders, rather than to the priorities the government of a developing country might seek to realise.

Further, an agreement between Malaysia and Indonesia, signed in 1969, had settled doubts and disputes about each country’s claims over territorial waters and offshore resources at a time when both were heavily indebted to Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) governments and banks as well as to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. Setting up a state oil and gas company, through which the government could get international capital but avoid tangling with foreign oil companies or governments, had worked for Indonesia: why not for Malaysia as well? The oil crisis of 1973–74 made the government even more aware of Malaysia’s dependence on foreign oil and foreign capital in general.

Another factor in the decision was that the technology had recently been developed for extensive exploration and drilling offshore. The local geography included a combination of broad basins of sedimentary rock with calm and shallow waters around the Sunda Shelf, making exploration for gas and oil relatively easier and more successful than in most areas of the world. Malaysian crude turned out to be mostly high quality with low sulphur content.

A final and crucial factor in the creation of PETRONAS, and its continuation in much the same form since, has been the political stability of Malaysia. Since the restoration of parliament in 1971, the country has been ruled by the National Front (Barisan Nasional), the heirs to the Alliance Party which had been dominant from 1957 to 1969 and the originators in 1971 of the New Economic Policy, which was designed to improve the economic position of Bumiputras—native Malays and other natives in Sabah and Sarawak—relative to Chinese and Indian Malaysians and to foreign corporations. The difficulties this policy has caused for foreign companies and investors are outweighed by the benefits they believe they gain from Malaysia’s political stability.

The Malaysian government chose to create a state company, rather than using taxes, production limits, leasing, or other familiar instruments of supervision. The government wanted, and needed, the co-operation of the majors but also sought to assert national rights over the use of the country’s resources. A state company, having both supervisory powers over the majors and production activities of its own, was a workable compromise between allowing the majors full rein and excluding them, along with their capital and expertise, altogether.

PETRONAS was established in August 1974 and operates under the terms of the Petroleum Development Act passed in October 1974. It was modelled onPertamina, the Indonesian state oil and gas company founded in 1971 in succession to Permina, which had been set up in 1958. According to the 1971 plan, PETRONAS’ goals would be to safeguard national sovereignty over oil and gas reserves, to plan for both present and future national need for oil and gas, to take part in distributing and marketing petroleum and petrochemical products at reasonable prices, to encourage provision of plant, equipment, and services by Malaysian companies, to produce nitrogenous fertilizers, and to spread the benefits of the petroleum industry throughout the nation.

On 6 September 1974, Malaysia’s then prime minister, Tun Abdul Razak, announced the appointment of Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah as chairman and chief executive of PETRONAS. Tun Razak said: “From among the new blood, I intended to bring Tengku Razaleigh into the Cabinet. However, I have an important job for him, a job as important as that of a Cabinet Minister. I have decided to appoint him as chairman and chief executive of PETRONAS, which is equivalent to being a Cabinet Minister.”.[7] Subsequently, Razaleigh had to relinquish his job as Chairman of PERNAS which he held from 1970, but retained the chairmanship of Bank Bumiputra.

Having created PETRONAS, the government had to choose what forms its dealings with private oil companies would take. Starting with its legal monopoly on oil and gas activities and resources, it had several options: it could simply award concessions without taking part in production, management, or profits; it could try offering services at the supply end; or it could make contracts to cover profit-sharing, production-sharing, joint ventures—sharing both profits and costs—or all stages of the process, under “carried-interest” contracts. PETRONAS’ first move was to negotiate the replacement of the leases granted to Royal Dutch/Shell on Borneo and to Esso in THE PENINSULA with production-sharing contracts, which have been the favoured instrument, alongside joint ventures, ever since. These first contracts came into effect in 1976. Allowing for royalties to both federal and state governments, and for cost recovery arrangements, they laid down that the remainder would go 70% to PETRONAS and 30% to the foreign company. Esso began oil production in two offshore fields in 1978, exporting its share of the supply, unlike PETRONAS, whose share was consumed within the country.

PETRONAS went downstream for the first time in 1976, when it was chosen by the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) to begin construction on the second ASEAN joint industrial project, a urea plant. The subsidiary, Asean Bintulu Fertilizer (ABF), is based in Sarawak and now exports ammonia and urea all over the world.

Also in 1976, Malaysia became a net exporter of oil, but exports were at such a low level as to make the country ineligible to join OPEC. This situation benefited Malaysia, and PETRONAS, by allowing the company a degree of commercial and political flexibility and reinforcing PETRONAS’ chief purpose, Malaysian self-reliance.

PETRONAS supervised its foreign partners’ oil activities, taking no direct role in production until 1978, when the government saw to the creation of a subsidiary for oil exploration and production, PETRONAS Carigali. It began its work in an oil field off THE PENINSULA. PETRONAS retained its supervisory powers over all oil and gas ventures, particularly on issues of health and safety and environmental control.

Developing natural gas: the late 1970s to the mid-1980s

The government was determined to develop Malaysia’s natural gas as well as its oil Shipping Company (MISC), of which it owned 61%. These were to take LNG exports out of Malaysia, save the cost of hiring foreign tankers, and expand the country’s fleet under its own control—in contrast to cargo shipping, which was controlled by international conferences. Shell BV, the Royal Dutch/Shell subsidiary that was building the LNG plant off Sarawak with Japanese and Asian Development Bank aid, accepted production sharing with PETRONAS but baulked at sharing equity, transport management, or refining. Negotiations went on, pushing commencement further and further back, until 1977, when PETRONAS and the government, faced with the costs of maintaining the tankers between delivery and first use, surrendered management rights—leading to a repeal of part of the Petroleum Development Act—and settled for PETRONAS’ taking 60% of equity in the new company Malaysia LNG. The Sarawak state government took 5%, and the other 35% was divided equally between Shell BV and the Mitsubishi Corporation. Production of LNG in Sarawak at last began in 1983.

After negotiations lasting from 1977 to 1982, PETRONAS had concluded contracts with Tokyo Electric Power and Tokyo Gas for the sale and delivery of LNG through to the year 2003. Malaysia LNG was to send almost the entire output of its Bintulu gas fields to Japan, under these contracts and another one, signed in 1990, to supply Saibu Gas of Fukuoka, in southwestern Japan, for 20 years from 1993.

When in 1982 PETRONAS Carigali formed an exploration and production company with Société National Elf Aquitaine of France, it allowed Elf better terms for recovering costs than it had offered in earlier ventures. This development came against the background of the government’s imposition of a depletion policy on PETRONAS, Royal Dutch Shell, and Esso in trying to postpone the exhaustion of oil reserves. These were then estimated to be about 2.84 billion barrels (452,000,000 m3), and it was officially predicted that by the late 1980s Malaysia would be a net oil importer once again. By 1980, oil and gas already represented 24% of Malaysian exports, and the government decided to impose a tax on these exports at a 25% rate. The new policy and the new tax combined to cause Malaysia’s output and exports of crude oil to fall in 1981 for the first time since PETRONAS was established. Output rose again, beyond its 1980 level, in the following year, but exports took until 1984 to surpass their 1980 level.

However, the depletion policy was being undermined by external circumstances. Through the early 1980s, a worldwide oil glut, which OPEC proved unable to control, forced the Malaysian government to increase production to offset deterioration in its balance of increased payments to a deficit of $1 billion. It became clear that this could only be sustained by relaxing the conditions for joint ventures between PETRONAS and the major oil companies. In 1982, the PETRONAS–government share, which had risen to 80%, was cut to 70%, and taxes on company income were also cut.

PETRONAS went into refining and distribution in 1983. It initiated the construction of refineries at Malacca and at Kerteh to reduce its dependence on Royal Dutch/Shell’s two refineries at Port Dickson and Esso’s refinery in Sarawak. These two majors, and other foreign companies, already covered much of the domestic retail market, but the new subsidiary PETRONAS Dagangan was given the initial advantage of preference in the location of its stations. By 1990, 252 service stations carried the PETRONAS brand, all but 20 on a franchise basis, and another 50 were planned. Some were set up on grounds of social benefit rather than of strict commercial calculation.

As production from Royal Dutch/Shell and Esso’s existing fields moved nearer depletion, the companies sought new fields and new contracts. In 1985, the government and PETRONAS revised the standard production-sharing contract, increasing the rate of recovery of capital costs from 30% to 50% of gross production in the case of oil and from 35% to 60% in the case of natural gas, abolishing signature, discovery, and production bonus payments and increasing the foreign partners’ share of the profits. At first the drastic fall in oil prices during 1986, which cut Malaysia’s income from exported oil by more than a third even though the volume of exports rose by 16%, discouraged interest in the new arrangements, but by 1989 PETRONAS had signed 22 new contracts with 31 companies from 11 countries. However, the contract period was still restricted to five years—compared, such as, with the 35-year contracts available in neighbouring Singapore—and there was still a 25% levy on exported crude oil, a measure that was intended to promote the domestic refining industry. These conditions, cited as disincentives to foreign investment, were eventually relaxed over the next several years.

The government and PETRONAS aimed to encourage the replacement of fast-depleting oil within Malaysia itself and simultaneously to foster heavy industries which could help reduce the country’s overwhelming dependence on exporting its natural resources. In 1980, petroleum products accounted for 88% of the country’s commercial consumption of energy, the rest being provided from hydroelectric plants in Sarawak, too far away from the main population centres to become a major alternative. Five years later, gas accounted for 17%, hydroelectricity for 19%, coal for 2%, and petroleum products for 62% of such consumption, and about half of each year’s gas output was being consumed in Malaysia.

The PETRONAS venture responsible for this shift in fuel use, and—along with Malaysia LNG—for Malaysia’s becoming the third largest producer of LNG in the world, was the Peninsular Gas Utilization Project (Projek Penggunaan Gas Semenanjung), the aim of which was to supply gas to every part of THE PENINSULA. Its first stage was completed in 1985, following the success of smaller gasification projects in the states of Sarawak and Sabah, and involved the extraction of gas from three fields in the Natuna Sea, between the Peninsula and the island of Borneo; its processing in a plant at Kertih on the Peninsula’s east coast; and its distribution to the state of Terengganu by pipeline and abroad via an export terminal.

PETRONAS’ least happy venture was its ownership of the Bank Bumiputra, the second-largest, but least-profitable, of the commercial banks incorporated in Malaysia. PETRONAS spent more than MYR3.5 billion over five years trying to rescue the bank from the impact of the bad loans it had made, starting with its support of the Carrian property group of Hong Kong, which collapsed in 1985, taking the bank’s share capital down with it. In 1991, PETRONAS sold the bank back to another state company, Minister of Finance Inc., and announced its intention to concentrate on oil, gas, and associated activities in future.

Just as PETRONAS was disposing of this liability, the crisis caused by the Iraqi regime’s invasion of Kuwait culminated in military action against Iraq on behalf of the United Nations. PETRONAS had already raised Malaysia’s oil production rate from 605,000 to 650,000 barrels per day (103,000 m3/d) in late 1990 as the crisis unfolded. This move only reinforced the company’s awareness of the need to vary its policies, since, with known reserves of 2.94 billion barrels (467,000,000 m3), and assuming no new major finds of oil, Malaysia risked seeing output decline to 350,000 barrels per day (56,000 m3/d) in 2000 and running down to depletion within another five years. This was exacerbated by the possibility that Southeast Asia in general would enjoy rapid economic growth in the 1990s, so that demand for oil there would rise twice as fast as demand in the relatively more sluggish, more mature economies of North America and Europe. The Malaysian government, and its state oil and gas company, was forced to decide what mixture of policies to adopt in response.

Battling oil depletion: the late 1980s

Fortunately for Malaysia, exploration was by no means at an end and could yet produce more reserves. The Seligi field, which came onstream at the end of 1988 and was developed by Esso Production Malaysia, was one of the richest oilfields so far found in Malaysia waters, and further concessions to the majors would encourage exploration of the deeper waters around Malaysia, where unknown reserves could be discovered. Meanwhile, computerised seismography made it both feasible and commercially justifiable to re-explore fields which had been abandoned, or were assumed to be unproductive, over the past century. In 1990, PETRONAS invited foreign companies to re-explore parts of the sea off Sabah and Sarawak on the basis of new surveys using up-to-date techniques.

Another way to postpone depletion was to develop sources of oil, and of its substitute, natural gas, outside Malaysia. Late in 1989, the governments of Vietnam andMyanmar (Burma) invited PETRONAS Carigali to take part in joint ventures to explore for oil in their coastal waters. In 1990, a new unit, PETRONAS Carigali Overseas Sdn Bhd, was created to take up a 15% interest in a field in Myanmar’s waters being explored by Idemitsu Myanmar Oil Exploration Co. Ltd., a subsidiary of the Japanese firm Idemitsu Oil Development Co. Ltd., in a production sharing arrangement with Myanma Oil and Gas Enterprise. Thus began PETRONAS’ first oil exploration outside Malaysia. In May 1990, the governments of Malaysia and Thailand settled a long-running dispute over their respective rights to an area of 7,300 square kilometres in the Gulf of Thailand by setting up a joint administrative authority for the area and encouraging a joint oil exploration project by PETRONAS, thePetroleum Authority of Thailand, and the US company Triton Oil. In a separate deal, in October 1990, the Petroleum Authority of Thailand arranged with PETRONAS to study the feasibility of transferring natural gas from this jointly administered area, through Malaysia to Thailand, by way of an extension of the pipelines laid for the third stage of the Peninsular Gas Utilization Project.

That project was on course to becoming a major element in the postponement of oil depletion. Contracts for line pipes for the second stage of the project were signed in 1989 with two consortia of Malaysian, Japanese, and Brazilian companies. This stage, completed in 1991, included the laying of 730 kilometres of pipeline through to the tip of THE PENINSULA, from where gas could be sold to Singapore and Thailand; the conversion of two power stations—Port Dickson and Pasir Gudang—from oil to gas; and the expansion of PETRONAS’ output of methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE), propylene, and polypropylene, which were already being produced in joint ventures with Idemitsu Petrochemical Co. of Japan and Neste Oy of Finland. The third and final stage of the project was to lay pipelines along the northwest and northeast coastlines of the Peninsula and was completed in 1997.

Another new venture in 1990 was in ship-owning, since PETRONAS’ existing arrangements with MISC and with Nigeria’s state oil company would be inadequate to transport the additional exports of LNG due to start in 1994, under the contract with Saibu Gas. PETRONAS did not lose sight of the government’s commitment to Malaysian self-reliance, and the company’s second refinery at Malacca, completed in 1994, with a capacity of 100,000 barrels per day (16,000 m3/d), promoted the same policy. The fact that it was built in a joint venture with Samsung of Korea, the Chinese Petroleum Corporation of Taiwan, and Caltex of the United States did not negate the policy, for the subsidiary company PETRONAS Penapisan (Melaka) had a decisive 45% of equity while sharing the enormous costs of and gaining advanced technology for the project. More to the point, a side effect of the refinery’s completion was that PETRONAS was able to refine all of the crude oil it produced, instead of being partially dependent on refining facilities in Singapore.

PETRONAS, with its policies of promoting self-reliance, helping to develop associated industries, and varying the sources and uses of oil and gas, played an important role in the Malaysian economy as a whole. Under governments which—by current, if not historical, Western standards—were strongly interventionist, the contribution of oil taxes to the federal government’s revenue hovered at around 12% to 16% until 1980, when it showed a marked increase to 23%, followed by another leap to 32% in 1981. From then until 1988 the proportion fluctuated between 29% and 36%. PETRONAS was not just another big oil company: it controlled a crucial sector of the economy and remained, for better or worse, an indispensable instrument of the state.

Expanding globally: the 1990s and beyond[edit]

A Petronas station seen in Pattaya,Thailand.

During the mid- to late 1990s, international exploration, development, and production remained key components in PETRONAS’ strategy along with diversification. A key discovery was made in the RUBY field in Vietnam in 1994. That year, the firm also saw its first overseas production from the Dai Hung field in Vietnam and established its first retail station outside of Malaysia in Cambodia.[citation needed] In 1995, a subsidiary was created to import, store, and distribute liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). In addition, the company’s polyethylene plant in Kerteh began operations. PETRONAS marked a significant milestone during this time period—two of its subsidiaries, PETRONAS Dagangan Bhd and PETRONAS Gas Bhd, went public on the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange. Between 1993 and 1996, it purchased the former sub-Saharaian branch of Mobil Oil, rebranded as Engen Petroleum.

In 1996, PETRONAS entered the aromatics market by way of a joint venture that created Aromatics Malaysia Sdn Bhd. It also formed a contract with China National Offshore Oil Corporation and Chevron Overseas Petroleum Ltd. to begin exploration of block 02/31 of the Liaodong Bay area in China. While the Asian economy as a whole suffered from an economic crisis during 1997 and 1998, Malaysia was quick to bounce back due to successful government reforms. From its new headquarters in the PETRONAS Twin Towers, the state-owned concern continued its development in the oil and gas industry. Soon India’s Liberty Group purchased a 1% stake in Petronas

During 1997, PETRONAS heightened its diversification efforts. The firm set plans in motion to build three petrochemical plants in Kuantan as well as an acetic facility in Kerteh. Its first LPG joint venture in China was launched that year and the company acquired a 29.3% interest in Malaysia International Shipping Corporation Berhad (MISC). In 1998, PETRONAS’ tanker-related subsidiary merged with MISC, increasing PETRONAS’ stake in MISC to 62%. That year, PETRONAS introduced the Petronas E01, the country’s first commercial prototype engine. The company also signed a total of five new production sharing contracts (PSCs) in 1998 and 1999, and began oil production in the Sirri field in Iran.

PETRONAS entered the new century determined to expand its international efforts. The company forged deals for two new exploration plots in Pakistan and began construction on the Chad-Cameroon Integrated Oil Development and Pipeline Project. By 2002, PETRONAS had signed seven new PSCs and secured stakes in eight exploration blocks in eight countries, including Gabon, Cameroon, Niger, Egypt, Yemen, Indonesia, and Vietnam. The firm also made considerable progress in its petrochemicals strategy, opening new gas-based petrochemical facilities in Kerteh and Gebeng.

By 2003, Malaysia was set to usurp Algeria as the world’s second-largest producer of LNG with the completion of the Malaysia LNG Tiga Plant. Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad commented on the achievement in a May 2003 Bernama News Agency article, claiming that “the PETRONAS LNG complex now serves as another shining example of a vision realized of a national aspiration, transformed into reality by the same belief among Malaysians that ‘we can do it.'” Indeed, PETRONAS had transformed itself into a global oil company over the previous decade, becoming a national symbol for success. The company realised, however, that it would have to continue its aggressive growth strategy to insure its survival in the years to come.

The PETRONAS overseas expansion drive continues with the acquisition of Woodside Energy Ltd Mauritania assets for $418 million in 2007.[8] The venture proved successful as they discovered oil in May 2008[9]

In 2004, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Mustapa Mohamed[citation needed], stated that PETRONAS contributed RM 25 Billion to the country’s treasury accounting for 25% of revenue collected via dividends and other revenues. PETRONAS continuously provides the Malaysian government dividends from its profits. Since inception in 1974, PETRONAS have paid the government RM 403.3 billion, with RM 67.6 billion in 2008. The payment represents 44% of the 2008 federal government revenue.[10] PETRONAS continues to focus on international exploration projects as 40% of revenue in 2008 was derived from international projects such as Iran, Sudan, Chad and Mauritania. The company’s international reserves stood at 6.24 billion barrels oil equivalent in 2008.[11]

On 29 October 2012, PETRONAS sources said it will renew a bid for gas producer Progress Energy Resources after Canada blocked its bid earlier this month. The $6-billion bid was approved by Ottawa on 7 December 2012.[12]

On 17 January 2013, PETRONAS issued a statement that an onshore oil and gas discovery has been made in the state after drilling a test well about 20 kilometres away from the city of Miri in northern Sarawak. The well was found to have a net hydrocarbon thickness of 349 meters. It had flow rates of 440 barrels of crude oil per day and 11.5 million standard cubic feet of gas per day. The find is the first onshore oil discovery in Malaysia in 24 years. [13]

[edit]

Petronas logo used until 2013

PETRONAS Logo was created in 1974 by Dato’ Johan Ariff of Johan Design Associates.[14] He is also responsible in creating the Logo of many PETRONAS subsidiaries, JVs, link-companies and properties, including Kuala Lumpur City Centre (KLCC), MISC, MMHE, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS (UTP), Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre, Putrajaya Holdings, Prince Court Medical Centre (PCMC), PETLIN, Malaysian Petroleum Club and Mesra Mall, to name a few.

Logo Concept

The basic structure is geometric, embodying metaphoric and alpha glyphic nuances of an oil drop and a typography ‘P’, the latter being evident in the triangle assigned at the top right corner. The triangle is also an essential element to define directional movement and dynamism. The placement of a solid circle in the Logo is interpretive if the wheel of the oil and gas industry while outline of the drop simulates a driving system, the energy which to be derived from oil.

The Corporate Colour chosen for the Logo is EMERALD Green, an obvious reference to the sea from where oil and gas are drilled.

The Corporate Logotype named ‘Alpha PETRONAS’ is designed in uppercase exclusively for PETRONAS and its subsidiaries. Each alphabet is rendered with a rounded profile to assume fluidity and viscosity, while emphasising the oil based operation.

Logo Refreshed

PETRONAS recently introduced a refreshed version of its corporate logo[15] at the 2013 Asia Oil and Gas Conference (AOGC 2013). A renewed “look and feel” has been incorporated to the original PETRONAS’ oil drop logo to reflect the visual expression of PETRONAS’ Group Positioning, reimagining energy™. The refreshed logo is part of a group-wide exercise to further strengthen the visual potential of PETRONAS’ corporate icon by making it more contemporary while building on the existing equity and legacy of the PETRONAS brand.

In essence, the refreshed logo symbolises the growth and progression of the PETRONAS brand. PETRONAS was established during the oil and gas crisis in the early 1970s. Over the years it has focused on building its business and operational capabilities and continues to seek more efficient and better methods of managing and adding value to Malaysia’s oil and gas resources and meet increasing energy demands. This challenging spirit has propelled PETRONAS from being a manager of Malaysia’s hydrocarbon resources to become a fully integrated oil and gas multinational. The organisation was among the earliest national oil companies (NOC) to venture globally which has inspired many other NOCs to join the global oil and gas arena, changing the dynamics of today’s oil and gas industry. PETRONAS will continue to play an active role in oil and gas by focusing on collective efforts to do things differently by challenging industry norms to achieve real sustainable long-term growth. Throughout its journey, PETRONAS has ensured that people benefit from its activities through business and employment opportunities, education sponsorship and quality products and services.

The refreshed version is PETRONAS’ third generation logo. The original PETRONAS logo was developed in 1974 when PETRONAS was first incorporated. The basic structure comprises an oil drop feature and symbol “P” that conveys its core business in oil and gas, and dynamism of the company. At the centre of the oil drop is a solid circle that symbolises the complete cycle or value chain of the oil and gas industry. Meanwhile, the familiar PETRONAS emerald green represents the seas and land where oil and gas originates. The refreshed logo’s softer curves have been added to the oil drop which depicts a continuous flow that symbolises PETRONAS’ drive for progress and challenging spirit in meeting the energy demands and expectations of its stakeholders. The PETRONAS name has been repositioned below the oil drop and the font has been sharpened to enhance visibility and give prominence to the oil drop in the logo.

Subsidiaries

PETRONAS has more than 100 subsidiaries and around 40 Joint Venture companies in which PETRONAS has at least 50% stake in the company. Although PETRONAS is considering to listing more of its subsidiaries,[17] so far the company has listed at least 3 of its subsidiaries in the Bursa Malaysia.

PETRONAS Dagangan Berhad

A Petronas petrol station at km 54, Karak-Kuala Lumpur Highway

Involved in the distribution and sale of finished petroleum products and operations of service stations for the domestic market. The company has over 800 petrol stations around Malaysia as of July 2007[18]and further increase to 870 stations in January 2008[19]

The company has also teamed up with local food and beverage companies, banks and transportation companies to provide better services at their petrol stations. Companies include McDonald’s, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Dunkin’ Donuts, Konsortium Transnasional Berhad, Maybank, and CIMB Bank.

PETRONAS Gas Berhad

Involved in the provision of gas processing and transmission services to PETRONAS and its customers as a throughput company. Owns and operates thePeninsular Gas Pipeline which is 2,550 kilometres in length and runs from Kerteh in Terengganu to Johor Bahru in the South and Kangar in the North of Peninsular Malaysia.

MISC Berhad

Main article: MISC Berhad

Involved in ship-owning, ship-operating and other logistics and maritime transportation services and activities. Currently has the largest fleet of LNG transport vessels

KLCC Properties Berhad

Main article: KLCC Properties

Involved in the development and the management of the Kuala Lumpur City Centre project which includes the Petronas Twin Towers, Menara Exxon Mobil andKLCC Park. Other properties under its care include Dayabumi Complex which located near Dataran Merdeka.

PETRONAS Chemicals

The PETRONAS Chemicals is the latest company to be publicly listed. The IPO was done on 26 November 2010 with investor rise around US$4.40 billion, effectively become one of the largest IPO exercise in South East Asia.[20]

The business is the largest petrochemical producer and seller in South East Asia. Products include olefins, polymers, fertilisers, methanol and other basic chemicals and derivative products[21]

Malaysian Marine and Heavy Engineering

MMHE was listing on 29 October 2010 with MYR 1 billion raised on its IPO exercise.

The business builds offshore structures for oil and gas applications, help repair large vessels and converts vessels into Floating production storage and offloadingand FSOs.[22]

Other principal subsidiaries

Some of the key subsidiaries are:-

Others include PETRONAS Assets Sdn Bhd; PETRONAS Maritime Services Sdn Bhd; PETRONAS Trading Corp. Sdn Bhd; PETRONAS Argentina S.A.; PETRONAS Australia Pty Ltd.; PETRONAS Thailand Co. Ltd.; PETRONAS Energy Philippines Inc.; PETRONAS Cambodia Co. Ltd.; PETRONAS Technical Services Sdn Bhd; PETRONAS Group Technical Solutions Sdn Bhd; PETRONAS South Africa Pty Ltd.; PETRONAS India Holdings Company Pte Ltd.; PETRONAS China Co. Ltd.; PETRONAS International Corp. Ltd.; PETRONAS Marketing Thailand Co. Ltd.; Myanmar PETRONAS Trading Co. Ltd.; PETRONAS Marketing (Netherlands) B.V.and Indianoil Petronas

Motorsport

Visible Petronas logo on the car of BMW Sauber F1.

Petronas has sponsored the Formula One Malaysian Grand Prix as the title sponsor since its inaugural race in 1999.

Team Petronas Syntium Proton competed in the 2002, 2003 and 2004 British Touring Car Championship seasons.

Petronas has supported TOM’S, aToyota automobile racing squad inSuper GT since 2008.

PETRONAS was one of the main sponsors of the BMW Sauber Formula One team alongside Intel, and it supplies lubricants and fuel to the team. It also owned 40% ofSauber Petronas Engineering, the company that builds chassis which formerly usedFerrari designed engines used by the Sauber team, until being bought out by German motor company BMW. PETRONAS is also the main sponsor for Malaysian Grand Prix, and co-sponsors the Chinese Grand Prix. PETRONAS was the exclusive premium partner of the Sauber Petronas (1995–2005) and BMW Sauber F1 Team(2006–2009). BMW had acquired the controlling stake of the former Sauber Petronas Engineering, but left the sport after the 2009 season. On 21 December 2009, PETRONAS was confirmed as moving from BMW Sauber to the newly formedMercedes Grand Prix team.[23]

In terms of further Formula One involvement, every year PETRONAS took the BMW Sauber team to various parts of Malaysia for F1 demos so the public who are unable to go to the track itself get to experience a little bit of what F1 offers. Other promotional events are held in the run up to the race and the drivers play an integral part in this so much so that Nick Heidfeld conceded that there were more fans for BMW Sauber in Malaysia than in most other countries.

As part of its corporate social responsibility programme, PETRONAS also brings underprivileged children to watch the race.

PETRONAS also sponsors the Malaysian Cub Prix races. It also sponsors many other sporting events and teams, mostly motorsports. Some of these sponsorships includes the PERT (Petronas EON Rally Team), the now defunct Foggy Petronas Superbike team (in which PETRONAS debutes their own superbike, the FP1), and also the Petronas Adventure Team, a 4X4 adventure team. More recently Petronas is also a major sponsor for PETRONAS TOYOTA TEAM TOM’S which is currently participating in Super GT series, which they won the team title in 2008 and driver title in 2009. The series also race in Malaysia every season at Sepang International Circuit. PETRONAS signed a three-year sponsorship agreement with Fiat Yamaha motoGP team. The PETRONAS branding can be seen startingQatar race on the 10 to 12 April 2009.

Since 2010, PETRONAS is also the main sponsor of Mercedes Grand Prix team.

Education

PETRONAS awards education sponsorships in the form of convertible loans to Malaysian and international students to further their studies at local or foreign universities. The PETRONAS unit that is responsible for handling education matters is called the Sponsorship & Talent Sourcing Unit (STS). These sponsorships are awarded based on academic results, co-curricular activities, family background as well as an assessment of student personality (which is conducted throughout a program called EduCamp, which all prospective PETRONAS students are required to undergo). Students who are absorbed by PETRONAS at the end of their tertiary studies have their convertible loans converted into full scholarships. These students are under contract agreement to work for the company for two years for every one year they are sponsored. PETRONAS has its own university, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS (UTP). Built in 1997, the campus is located in Seri Iskandar, Perak.

List of Banks owned by the Rothschild Family

“Give me control over a nations currency, and I care not who makes its laws” – Baron M.A. Rothschild

rothcrest

ROTHSCHILD OWNED BANKS:
Afghanistan, Bank of Afghanistan,
Albania, Bank of Albania,
Algeria, Bank of Algeria,
Argentina, Central Bank of Argentina,
Armenia, Central Bank of Armenia,
Aruba, Central Bank of Aruba,
Australia, Reserve Bank of Australia,
Austria, Austrian National Bank,
Azerbaijan, Central Bank of Azerbaijan Republic,
Bahamas, Central Bank of The Bahamas,
Bahrain, Central Bank of Bahrain,
Bangladesh, Bangladesh Bank,
Barbados, Central Bank of Barbados,
Belarus, National Bank of the Republic of Belarus,
Belgium, National Bank of Belgium,
Belize, Central Bank of Belize,
Benin, Central Bank of West African States, (BCEAO),
Bermuda, Bermuda Monetary Authority,
Bhutan, Royal Monetary Authority of Bhutan,
Bolivia, Central Bank of Bolivia,
Bosnia, Central Bank of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Botswana, Bank of Botswana,
Brazil, Central Bank of Brazil,
Bulgaria, Bulgarian National Bank,
Burkina Faso, Central Bank of West African States, (BCEAO),
Burundi, Bank of the Republic of Burundi,
Cambodia, National Bank of Cambodia,
Came Roon, Bank of Central African States,
Canada, Bank of Canada – Banque du Canada,
Cayman Islands, Cayman Islands Monetary Authority,
Central African Republic, Bank of Central African States,
Chad, Bank of Central African States,
Chile, Central Bank of Chile,

China, The People’s Bank of China,

Colombia, Bank of the Republic,
Comoros, Central Bank of Comoros,
Congo, Bank of Central African States,
Costa Rica, Central Bank of Costa Rica,
Côte d’Ivoire, Central Bank of West African States, (BCEAO),
Croatia, Croatian National Bank,
Cuba, Central Bank of Cuba,
Cyprus, Central Bank of Cyprus,
Czech Republic, Czech National Bank,
Denmark, National Bank of Denmark,
Dominican Republic, Central Bank of the Dominican Republic,
East Caribbean area, Eastern Caribbean Central Bank,
Ecuador, Central Bank of Ecuador,
Egypt, Central Bank of Egypt ,
El Salvador, Central Reserve Bank of El Salvador,
Equatorial Guinea, Bank of Central African States,
Estonia, Bank of Estonia,
Ethiopia, National Bank of Ethiopia,
European Union, European Central Bank,

money-world-

Fiji, Reserve Bank of Fiji,
Finland, Bank of Finland,
France, Bank of France,
Gabon, Bank of Central African States,
The Gambia, Central Bank of The Gambia,
Georgia, National Bank of Georgia,
Germany, Deutsche Bundesbank,
Ghana, Bank of Ghana,
Greece, Bank of Greece,
Guatemala, Bank of Guatemala,

Guinea Bissau, Central Bank of West African States, (BCEAO),
Guyana, Bank of Guyana,
Haiti, Central Bank of Haiti ,
Honduras, Central Bank of Honduras,
Hong Kong, Hong Kong Monetary Authority,
Hungary, Magyar Nemzeti Bank,
Iceland, Central Bank of Iceland,
India, Reserve Bank of India,
Indonesia, Bank Indonesia,
Iran, The Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran,

Iraq, Central Bank of Iraq,

Ireland, Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland,
Israel, Bank of Israel,
Italy, Bank of Italy,
Jamaica, Bank of Jamaica,
Japan, Bank of Japan,
Jordan, Central Bank of Jordan,
Kazakhstan, National Bank of Kazakhstan,
Kenya, Central Bank of Kenya,
Korea, Bank of Korea,
Kuwait, Central Bank of Kuwait,
Kyrgyzstan, National Bank of the Kyrgyz Republic,
Latvia, Bank of Latvia,
Lebanon, Central Bank of Lebanon,
Lesotho, Central Bank of Lesotho,

Libya, Central Bank of Libya,

us-homeland-security-seal-plaque_m-747261

Uruguay, Central Bank of Uruguay,
Lithuania, Bank of Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Central Bank of Luxembourg,
Macao, Monetary Authority of Macao,
Macedonia, National Bank of the Republic of Macedonia,
Madagascar, Central Bank of Madagascar,
Malawi, Reserve Bank of Malawi,
Malaysia, Central Bank of Malaysia,
Mali, Central Bank of West African States, (BCEAO),
Malta, Central Bank of Malta,
Mauritius, Bank of Mauritius,
Mexico, Bank of Mexico,
Moldova, National Bank of Moldova,
Mongolia, Bank of Mongolia,
Montenegro, Central Bank of Montenegro,
Morocco, Bank of Morocco,
Mozambique, Bank of Mozambique,
Namibia, Bank of Namibia,
Nepal, Central Bank of Nepal,
Netherlands, Netherlands Bank,
Netherlands Antilles, Bank of the Netherlands Antilles,
New Zealand, Reserve Bank of New Zealand,
Nicaragua, Central Bank of Nicaragua,
Niger, Central Bank of West African States, (BCEAO),
Nigeria, Central Bank of Nigeria,
Norway, Central Bank of Norway,
Oman, Central Bank of Oman,
Pakistan, State Bank of Pakistan,
Papua New Guinea, Bank of Papua New Guinea,
Paraguay, Central Bank of Paraguay,
Peru, Central Reserve Bank of Peru,
Philip Pines, Bangko Sentralng Pilipinas,
Poland, National Bank of Poland,
Portugal, Bank of Portugal,
Qatar, Qatar Central Bank,
Romania, National Bank of Romania,
Russia, Central Bank of Russia,

Rwanda, National Bank of Rwanda,
San Marino, Central Bank of the Republic of San Marino,
Samoa, Central Bank of Samoa,
Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency,

Senegal, Central Bank of West African States, (BCEAO),
Serbia, National Bank of Serbia,
Seychelles, Central Bank of Seychelles,
Sierra Leone, Bank of Sierra Leone,
Singapore, Monetary Authority of Singapore,
Slovakia, National Bank of Slovakia,
Slovenia, Bank of Slovenia,
Solomon Islands, Central Bank of Solomon Islands,
South Africa, South African Reserve Bank,
Spain, Bank of Spain,
Sri Lanka, Central Bank of Sri Lanka,
Sudan, Bank of Sudan,
Surinam, Central Bank of Suriname,
Swaziland, The Central Bank of Swaziland,
Sweden, Sveriges Riksbank,
Switzerland, Swiss National Bank,

Tajikistan, National Bank of Tajikistan,
Tanzania, Bank of Tanzania,
Thailand, Bank of Thailand,
Togo, Central Bank of West African States, (BCEAO),
Tonga, National Reserve Bank of Tonga,
Trinidad and Tobago, Central Bank of Trinidad and Tobago,
Tunisia, Central Bank of Tunisia,
Turkey, Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey,

Uganda, Bank of Uganda,
Ukraine, National Bank of Ukraine,
United Arab Emirates, Central Bank of United Arab Emirates,

United Kingdom, Bank of England,

United States, Federal Reserve, Federal Reserve Bank of New York,

US-FederalReserveSystem-Seal_svg_

Vanuatu, Reserve Bank of Vanuatu,
Venezuela, Central Bank of Venezuela,

Vietnam, The State Bank of Vietnam,
Yemen, Central Bank of Yemen,
Zambia, Bank of Zambia,
Zimbabwe, Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe,
Bank For International Settlements, (BIS),

One-fifth of incoming UN Security Council has no ties with Israel

 

By HERB KEINON

Israel is losing a good friend on the council with the exit of Australia.

The United Nations, in an annual exercise, voted in five countries last week to begin serving two-year stints on the Security Council, beginning on January 1. Although there was some good news for Israel in the results, most of it was bad.

The good news is that the Turkey of Israel-bashing President Recep Tayyip Erdogan failed in its bid for one of the five rotating, non-permanent seats, losing in balloting to Spain. The bad news is that of the five new members, two of them – Venezuela and Malaysia – do not even have diplomatic relations with Israel.

What that means is that when the members of the new council take their seats in January for a year in which Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is likely to make the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a major agenda item on the council’s schedule, fully 20 percent of the 15-member body are so hostile to Israel as to refuse to have diplomatic relations. (Venezuela and Malaysia will be joining Chad – which still has another year to serve on the council – in this dubious distinction.) In 2011, when the Palestinians tried unsuccessfully to secure the nine votes on the council needed to gain membership as a UN state, only one of the 15 countries – Lebanon – did not have ties with Israel.

Even if the Palestinians do get nine votes, the US can – and probably will – use its veto to quell the type of resolution that the Palestinians are now considering: calling for a strict timetable for a full Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 lines if an agreement is not reached within a year. But not only does Washington not want to have to use this veto – which would seemingly pit it against the opinion of the world – but Israel does not want to put the US in the position of having to do so.

The Palestinians are likely to wait until the new Security Council to push through their measure, because the incoming class is considerably more favorably inclined to them than the outgoing one.

In addition to the five permanent, veto-wielding members of the Security Council – the US, China, Russia, France and Britain – the outgoing, 2014 council includes Lithuania, Chile, Jordan, Chad, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Korea, Argentina, Australia and Luxembourg.

The last five countries will be replaced in Jan uary, with Rwanda being replaced by Angola, South Korea by Malaysia, Argentina by Venezuela, Australia by New Zealand, and Luxembourg by Spain.

Israel is losing a good friend on the council with the exit of Australia.

Australia under Prime Minister Tony Abbott is outspokenly supportive of Israel; New Zealand is not. Still, if the US, Australia and the EU are opposed to a Palestinian resolution – and apply pressure on Wellington – it is difficult to imagine New Zealand bucking the pressure and voting with the non-aligned and Muslim blocs. But, as one source in Jerusalem said, if Israel could rely on Australia with its eyes closed, it can rely on New Zealand only with its eyes open.

Rwanda, one of Israel’s strongest friends in Africa, is being replaced by Angola, a country with which Israel has strong business ties – Israeli firms are active in developing Angola’s vast infrastructure – but not nearly as close as a relationship as it enjoys with Rwanda. In 2011, the refusal of Gabon to back the Palestinian move in the Security Council helped sink it, a role Angola could play in 2014 – but a role it is not guaranteed to want to play.

Spain is replacing Luxembourg as Europe’s non-permanent member of the council, and there is unlikely to be any change of voting patterns with this development. Both countries are considered to be tough toward Israel inside the EU, with Luxembourg even worse than Spain when looking at – and ranking – Israel’s friends and critics inside the EU.

Spain’s government has been more understanding toward Israel in the last couple of years, even though Spanish public opinion is overwhelmingly negative. In any event, Spain – like Luxembourg – is unlikely to vote independently on high-profile Israeli-Palestinian issues, but rather follow the EU’s position. Luxembourg, one source said, is a self-righteous, moralizing, lecturing little country. Spain, he said, is a self-righteous, moralizing, lecturing big country.

Another incoming member, Venezuela, is a stridently anti-Israeli and anti-US country that is aligned with Iran and Cuba. It will replace Argentina. Truth be told, Argentina could not be counted on to support Israel in Security Council votes, so it is unlikely this is a swing vote. But there is a difference: While Argentina might have gone along with a pro-Palestinian campaign in the council, Venezuela will likely lead it.

The biggest change in terms of losing one friendly country that would give Israel a fair hearing in exchange for a hostile country that will not, is the replacement of South Korea with Malaysia.

Whereas Israel could expect South Korea to abstain in significant votes on its issues in the Security Council – partly because it does not want to follow China’s lead, and partly because it keeps an eye on how Washington votes – Malaysia will surely vote against Israel, and, like Venezuela, likely lead the campaign in the council against it.

While the Security Council will in 2015 be more tilted toward the Palestinians, this does not mean that the game is over and the Palestinians have their nine votes to force a US veto in the bag. It does mean, however, that they are closer to that goal. And one of ramifications of this is that Israel will be more reliant next year for Washington to “save” it in the Security Council than it was in 2014.