Iran-Pakistan gas line big set back for the US
by Gal Luft
While the world's eyes are focused on Iran and Pakistan, little attention has been paid to the two countries'
decision to move ahead with their plans to connect their economies via a natural gas pipeline.
What may seem like a standard energy project could have profound implications for the geopolitics of energy in the
21st century and for the future of south Asia, as well as for America's ability to check Iran's hegemony in the
Persian Gulf.
For both Iran and Pakistan, the pipeline project would be highly beneficial. Iran sees in the pipeline not only an
economic lifeline at a time when the United States and its European allies are trying to weaken it economically, but
also an opportunity, should the pipeline be extended to India, to create an unbreakable long-term political and
economic dependence of 1 bn Indian customers on its gas.
Pakistan, for its part, views the pipeline as the solution to its energy security challenge. Pakistan's domestic gas
production is falling and its import dependence is growing by leaps and bounds. By connecting itself with the world's
second-largest gas reserve, Pakistan would guarantee reliable supply for decades to come. If the pipeline were to be
extended to India it could also be an instrument for stability in often tense Pakistan-India relations as well as a
source of revenue for Islamabad through transit fees.
For the Obama administration, the signing of the pipeline deal is a diplomatic setback which could undermine its
policy of weakening Iran economically. Unlike the Bush administration, which vocally opposed the project, the Obama
team chose to remain mute, either in order to facilitate rapprochement with Tehran or due to its reluctance to burden
US-Pakistan relations at a volatile time when the Taliban is at Islamabad's gate.
Should the worst happen and a Taliban-style regime take over Pakistan, the economies of the world's most radical
Shiite state and that of what could be the world's most radical Sunni state would be connected to each other for
decades to come, like conjoined twins.
But all's not lost for the United States. Years would elapse between the signing of the deal and the actual running
of gas in the pipe. Baluchistan, where the pipeline is supposed to run, is one of Pakistan's poorest and most restive
provinces. In recent years it has been a battleground of militias belonging to Baluch tribes who hate the government
of Tehran as much as they hate the one in Islamabad. Taliban or Al Qaeda members who have reportedly moved from the
tribal border region to Baluchistan and who are known for their dislike of both governments may find common ground
with the Baluch.
One can rest assured that the Baluch Liberation Army (which for years has conducted sporadic attacks against water
pipelines, power transmission lines and gas installations), and Al Qaeda members (who perfected the art of pipeline
sabotage in Iraq) would not spare the Iran-Pakistan pipeline, causing delays in construction and perhaps even
termination of the project altogether.
Open US support for those opposition groups is unthinkable, as any collaboration-overt or covert-would severely
cripple our relations with Islamabad. What the United States can do is minimize the pipeline's damage to its
strategic objectives by ensuring that it ends in Pakistan and does not extend further into India, as both Iran and
Pakistan wish. To date, India has been hesitant to join the project and entrust its energy future in the hands of its
unstable neighbours. The deterioration in the India-Pakistan relations following the terror attacks in Mumbai has
effectively taken the project off the table.
But this could easily change in the future as India's energy crunch deepens: some 400 mm Indians already suffer from
energy poverty. This is what the Obama administration should pre-empt today, by increasing energy cooperation with
India. Pressure on India to curtail its use of coal for power generation may help reduce carbon emissions, but it
could force India to shift to cleaner burning natural gas and hence drive it right into the welcoming arms of Iran.
It is in the interest of the United States to help India increase its share of nuclear power and renewable energy
while constructing liquefied natural gas terminals along the coasts of the Indian subcontinent to allow diversity of
supply.
Without active US participation in the effort to alleviate India's energy poverty, Iran could soon become to India
what Russia is to Europe.
Gal Luft is executive director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security and writes for The Cutting Edge News.
