Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

ForeignPolicy

U.S. Stands in the Way of International Pipeline Deal

By Abbas Maleki, MIT Center for International Studies. Posted October 30, 2007.


A major natural gas pipeline that would stretch from Iran to Pakistan and India faces serious hurdles, including fierce opposition from the U.S.
Advertisement

A major natural gas pipeline that would stretch from the fields of southern Iran to Pakistan and India -- itself a remarkable prospect -- is being planned. But it faces serious hurdles, not least the fierce opposition of the U.S. government.

The history of relations between Persia and the Indian subcontinent is more than 2000 years old. Until 200 years ago, Persian was the language of literature and government in India. After separation of Pakistan from India, Iran faced a dilemma of its relations with these two new states. During the Shah's era, Iran preferred to have close relations with Pakistan, although economic ties with India were not ignored. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and Pakistan's support of hardliners in Afghanistan, Iran found India as a new partner in Asia. India has been slowly but surely forging a comprehensive relationship with Iran on energy and commerce, infrastructure development, and military ties. Iran looks to India as a developed, democratic, and politically lucrative country for cooperation. For instance, some 8,000 Iranian students are studying in India, compared with 2,000 in the United States.

A big market for India, Iran has the world's second largest oil and gas proven reserves, and acts as an important access route for India to Central Asia and Afghanistan. Case in point: India is seeking new routes to reach to Central Asia. One of them is the North-South Corridor, which links India to Russia and all of the former Soviet Union via the Persian Gulf, Iran and Caspian Sea. Iran's considerations are boosting trade, having secure borders, and avoiding "encirclement" by American proxies. At the same time, Iran is opposed to the hegemonic presence of the United States and its troops in the Indian Ocean. India has not been hesitant to play the Iran card to draw concessions from the United States on other matters of bilateral concern. So the pipeline is freighted with more significance than merely the delivery of natural gas.

The Scope of the Proposal

The Iran-Pakistan-India Pipeline (IPI) would run totally 2,670 km (1,660 miles), about 1,115 km (690 miles) in Iran, 705 km (440 miles) in Pakistan and 850 km (530 miles) in India, and the total investment is estimated at $7 billion and may take four to five years to complete. Apart from the fact that the IPI pipeline makes good economic sense, particularly in promoting regional cooperation, it is immensely important to the on-going peace process between India and Pakistan. A number of observers of the India-Pakistan conflict have termed this project as the mother of all confidence-building measures between India and Pakistan and named it the Peace Pipeline.

The project has been dealt a major jolt by the news that New Delhi and Islamabad have rejected the draft final agreement circulated by Iran, which calls for a three-year review cycle on the gas price. Causing yet another delay in the trilateral deal, the pricing dispute will either be resolved by a new round of negotiations or turn into an unbridgeable difference putting the IPI's fate under question marks. Prior to his resignation in early August 2007, Iran's petroleum minister, Kazem Vaziri Hamaneh, had announced that the seventh round of negotiations for the IPI contract would be held in Tehran on July 29, 2007. It did not happen and, what is more, a former Iranian deputy oil minister, Hadi Nejad Hosseinian, has questioned the deal on the ground that it gives a huge discount to India and is some 30 percent below the value of gas sold to Turkey. Another Iranian politician, Akbar Mohtashemipour, from Iran's reformist side, has publicly questioned the wisdom of exporting Iran's gas at a time when the cold regions of Iran face gas shortages. The IPI issue has been moved to Iran's Foreign Ministry, and during the past year and a half, the Iranian negotiation team has changed three times.

Interestingly, the Asian Development Bank has assessed that the deal is feasible. Dan Millison, ADB's senior energy specialist, said that the ADB's assessment was based purely on economic grounds and the rising demand for energy from India and Pakistan.

American Pressure

The U.S. position, however, is not linked to the economic side of the deal. It is driven by strategic politics, by Washington's Iran policy. The United States, which has had adversarial relations with Iran since the 1979 revolution, has been accusing Iran for some years of harboring nuclear-weapon ambitions. The U.S. has been trying to heighten the UN Security Council sanctions under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, and has voiced its opposition to the IPI pipeline as part of that strategy.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: pakistan, india, iran, natural gas, ipi pipeline

Abbas Maleki is the director of the International Institute for Caspian Studies in Tehran and a senior research fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. He served as Iran’s deputy foreign minister from 1985 to 1997.



Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
You see, only Nazi Amerika and its fascist allies can have such infrastructure
Posted by: xbj on Oct 30, 2007 5:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Like pipelines from Iraq's oil fields to Israel.

Don't like it? Die. So says Amerika.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If America is OUTSOURCING all its labor to India and Pakistan,
Posted by: maxpayne on Oct 30, 2007 10:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the least they could get is the oil needed to get them to work ok. Never mind, guess the US and Israel loves SLAVE labor no matter what ! The next thing that will happen is the US will redirect the pipeline to Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, the WORST VIOLATORS of human rights !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

False Facts & Making A Case For Environmental Destruction
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman on Oct 30, 2007 6:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The history given at the beginning of the column is disingenuous to put it diplomatically. Iran did not align itself with Pakistan because it "preferred to." It did so because the Shah was put into power by the U.S. and Pakistan is a U.S./western Europe ally, created by Britain when it left India.

And why would any sane person, let alone any progressive, support a pipeline for fossil fuel, be it natural gas or petroleum. Extraction and burning of these things is very environmentally destructive. I fully support the U.S.'s opposition to a pipeline, though I oppose its support of multiple pipelines. Unfortunately, the environment is totally ignored both by the different sides in this issue and by the column itself. I say, a pox on all their houses. Hopefully, there will be no pipeline or pipelines and the planet will be better off. Of course, one cannot expect the gluttonous U.S. to oppose anything that would ease its thirst for fuel to fulfill U.S. energy WANTS (that's right, they are not "needs") and it would be hypocritical of the U.S. to do so considering how much energy it consumes, the vast majority being totally needlessly. But there are infinitely better things to blame the U.S. for and I'm surprised that a progressive website would publish a column berating the U.S. for opposing what would be an environmentally devastating project.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is anyone surprised?
Posted by: l_m_n on Oct 31, 2007 5:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is simply about who gets the oil.

India is a booming country with a growing need for oil that is currently causing a lot of headaches for the US in the aquisition of their own new oil blocks. China too, for that matter.. they recently sent a Nigerian satellite into space in exchange for some oil. These guys are desperate and will do anything!

So, they build a pipeline to ensure easy access that is unmitigated by the US. And what does the US do? Complain.

Imagine.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Refer to Cheney's Energy Task Force report of May 2001...
Posted by: Sissi_phus on Oct 31, 2007 8:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... for background on the political ramifications of this proposed project.

The energy task force report was one of the fist priorities of the then-new administration. Reading it at the time was like peering into a crystal ball and seeing the future. (Particularly chapter 8.)

In essence, Cheney/Bush/Co wanted to secure the Caspian (not to mention the Iraqi) gas and oil supplies for themselves. In the report they used the term "Energy Security" a lot. And let's not kid ourselves here - the term means "secure access to cheap and uninterrupted supplies of fuel". What it does not mean is worldwide energy policy being dictated by foreign powers. Especially not when those powers have the bomb.

The US has their own plan for a Caspian pipeline and they're actively pursuing that plan as we post.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Iran-India Pipeline Unrealistic
Posted by: stevelevine on Nov 9, 2007 9:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's unrealistic and almost a vain waste of time given the regional politics I think to expect this pipeline to materialize. Let's see whether Pakistan and India can genuinely agree to host such a line, then talk about where the energy would be sourced.

Steve LeVine, author
The Oil and the Glory (Random House)
http://www.oilandglory.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]