Pakistan-Iran gas pipeline defies US

President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have inaugurated a controversial gas pipeline linking the two neighbours.

The US has warned that the project could incur sanctions connected with Iran's nuclear programme.

The long-delayed pipeline is seen in Pakistan as a way of alleviating the country's chronic energy shortages.

The work on the Iranian side is almost complete. Monday marks the start of construction in Pakistan.Live television footage showed the two presidents shaking hands with dignitaries as the ceremony got under way at the border.

A total of 780km (485 miles) of pipeline is due to be built in the country over the next two years.

Dubbed the "peace pipeline", talks on the project began in 1994. The pipeline was initially intended to carry gas on to India, but Delhi withdrew from negotiations in 2009 just a year after it signed a nuclear deal with the US.

The US says the project would enable Iran to sell more of its gas, undermining efforts to step up pressure over Tehran's nuclear activities.

"If this deal is finalised for a proposed Iran-Pakistan pipeline, it would raise serious concerns under our Iran Sanctions Act. We've made that absolutely clear to our Pakistani counterparts," State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland told reporters last week.

Washington - a major donor to Pakistan - has also argued that there are other ways to ease Pakistan's energy crisis. One option favoured by the US is a plan to import gas from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan, which has been under discussion for years.

But power shortages have become a major and pressing issue in Pakistan, and the government there insists it will not bow to pressure.

A nationwide power cut last month was blamed on a technical fault in a plant in south-western Balochistan province, but it highlighted the energy challenges the country faces.

Blackouts are common in Pakistan because of chronic power shortages, and many areas are without electricity for several hours a day,

Last year Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar said the pipeline was "in Pakistan's national interest" and would be completed "irrespective of any extraneous considerations".

However BBC world affairs correspondent Mike Wooldridge says Pakistan acknowledges that the pipeline route through the troubled province of Balochistan presents significant security challenges.

Separatist rebels fighting for autonomy and an increased share of mineral resources have frequently targeted pipelines in the gas-rich province.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21736725#

Sanctions and pipelines
By Khurram Husain

PLACE your bets. Will Pakistan risk inviting American and European Union sanctions upon itself, as well as the ire of its key ally Saudi Arabia, in return for Iranian help in overcoming a crippling energy crisis?

The simple answer is no. But the times are far from simple. For one, Pakistan’s own energy crisis is getting worse exponentially. By some estimates, put out by the Petroleum Institute, the country’s oil import bill will cross $50 billion in a little over 10 years’ time. That’s about five times what it is today.

Put it another way. Our peak shortages of gas today are just over one billion cubic feet of gas per day. By 2025, just over 10 years from now, these shortages will hit eight billion cubic feet, assuming a growth rate of four per cent per annum.

It’s hard to overemphasise the significance of this. Pakistan is one of the few countries in the world that has been relatively insulated from the full impact of the oil price hikes of the past decade precisely because we’ve had indigenous natural gas to fall back on.

As the price of oil went into triple digits, our consumption of indigenous natural gas intensified, until today when it accounts for almost half of our primary energy consumption in the country.

The result is all around us. The growing shortages have aggravated inter-provincial disharmony, and inaugurated an ugly chapter in our economic history: the bitter wrangling between industry and sectors over gas allocations.

Seen through the prism of Pakistan’s growing gas crisis, the Iranian pipeline seems like a solution as natural as the gas it will presumably carry. But as a wise old professor once wrote: geography proposes, history disposes.

The proximity of Iranian gas is geography’s proposition. But the sanctions imposed on that country by the international community hold the destiny of this proposition in their hands.

Let’s not underestimate the forces that stand behind the sanctions. Let’s recall that in addition to America, the EU and the UN all have Iran-specific sanctions in place.

US sanctions on Iran began with an executive order that became effective on Nov 14, 1979. Since then, there have been 24 additional executive orders tightening the noose further, the last of which became effective on Oct 9, 2012.

The earliest sanctions seized Iranian government properties in the US, went on to block all assets that were pledged to American banks, and in 1995 made illegal any investment by American firms in the Iranian oil and gas sector.

The latest executive order, of October 2012, goes so far as to “prohibit any transfers of credit or payments between financial institutions or by, through, or to any financial institution, to the extent that such transfers or payments are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.”

This clause unplugs Iran from the global clearing house of all inter-bank payments as far as they are processed through New York.

Then on Dec 26, 2012, came an amendment to this order, issued by the treasury department, which expanded “the categories of persons whose property and interest in property are blocked” if they are found “to have provided material support for certain Government of Iran-related entities or certain activities by the Government of Iran”.

A little further down, the note clarifies that amongst the entities to whom it is prohibited to “provide material support” is the Central Bank of Iran and amongst the “activities by the Government of Iran” that are prohibited from being provided support to are the “purchase or acquisition of US bank notes or precious metals by the Government of Iran.”

And there’s the clincher. With these laws in place, you cannot transact with Iranian banks, you cannot make a payment to the Central Bank of Iran in dollars, and you cannot make that payment in gold without running the risk of being unplugged from the US financial system.

But as mentioned earlier, there are complications. Carefully read the myriad documents where the sanctions laws are clarified and you’ll notice strange loopholes in the text.

For instance, the prohibitions laid out earlier, according to the clarification, will “not apply to any activity relating to a project:
“1. For the development of natural gas and the construction and operation of a pipeline to transport natural gas from Azerbaijan to Turkey and Europe;

“2. That provides to Turkey and countries in Europe energy security and energy independence from the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of Iran; and

“3. That was initiated before August 10, 2012.” Basically the red lines the US is trying to draw around Iran are not so red when they touch the matter of helping break Europe’s energy dependence on Russia. So can Pakistan ask for some of the red to be taken out of the red lines for the sake of its energy security as well?

The history of the sanctions clearly tells us that an executive order issued by the president would be enough for the purpose, without requiring any congressional approval.

So will Pakistan really press ahead with the project? Are the red lines drawn by the Americans really all that red after all?

It’s highly unlikely that Pakistan will risk calling the US warnings about sanctions a bluff. But it’s equally unlikely that the Americans will allow the sanctions to be triggered — that requires a determination from the secretaries of treasury and state — and push Pakistan’s economy into meltdown, because that is what would happen to us in the event. Our economy cannot withstand that sort of a blow, anymore than it can withstand the continuous declines in its gas supplies.

What’s more likely is that Pakistan is using Iran to build a negotiating position on some other table, and when the offer there is up to par, they’ll bargain geography’s proposition away on the tables of history.

The writer is a Karachi-based journalist covering business and economic policy.

khurram.husain@gmail.com

__________________
"Nay! man is evidence against himself. Though he puts forth his excuses." Holy Qur'an (75:14-15)

A pipeline to some sovereignty
By Ayaz Amir

Just last year the leading national flavour was anti-Americanism... and the heroic assertion of national sovereignty. After the Raymond Davis affair, the stealth assault on Bin Laden’s hideout in Abbottabad and the killing of our soldiers in the Salala incident everyone who mattered was supping, and supping high, at the table of these twin flavours.

To recall a thrilling circumstance, in the forefront of this mass national mood stood the intrepid ISI-tutored heroes of everyone’s favourite organisation, the Defence of Pakistan Council.

Against this backdrop of aroused national consciousness, is it not a little strange that when a real opportunity for asserting national resolve comes in the form of the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline, there is deathly silence across the frontiers of national patriotism?

Right-wing holy fathers most vociferously expressive of that anti-American mood are quiet, not a word on this subject on their sacred lips; the warriors of the Defence of Pakistan Council are quiet; the usual patriotic brigade is quiet. It is as if, as the Urdu expression goes, they have all smelt a snake.

Is it for fear of arousing the ire of the Great Satan, the US? But then these same elements have little qualms about glorifying the Taliban and damning the Great Satan in Afghanistan and Fata. So this can’t be the true explanation.

What is it then? Is it because the gas pipeline has to do with Shiite Iran, a connection impossible to swallow for these champions of righteousness?

If this is so, and I suspect it is, let us bewail (one more time) our misfortune. We have become adept at killing in the name of religion and its deadly variant, sectarianism. As if this wasn’t enough, must we now view questions related to national well-being through the prism of American and Saudi displeasure?

America has its fixations about Iran. The Saudis have their own ideological problems with Iran. That is their business. We are friends with both the US and Saudi Arabia. May these friendships grow. But we are also friends with Iran and how we deal with Iran is our business. Just as Europe needs gas from Russia, we need gas from Iran. This pipeline is in our national interest and all Pakistanis, regardless of political affiliations, should own it.

America’s Iran sanctions are nuclear-related. What has Pakistani procurement of Iranian gas got to do with Iran developing or not developing nuclear-weapons capability? If the US, bending logic to its own ends, makes eyes at Pakistan or threatens it with sanctions then Pakistan – government and people – must stand up for what is right.

No loud rhetoric – we can do without that – but we should be firm and when American pressure increases, as it is bound to, we must argue our point patiently. And if our friends don’t get it, let us murmur our apologies.

We shouldn’t invite American sanctions but, at the same time, we shouldn’t cave in to threats. If the US held a monopoly on wisdom it would be a different matter. But as we regrettably know, a history of folly stretching from Vietnam to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the blind support to Israel not tempered by other circumstances, testifies to the sad fact that it does not.

Did the US approve of our quest for nuclear weapons? Of course it did not. Pakistan was not just threatened by sanctions but hit with them, earning it the sobriquet of being the most-sanctioned country in the world. But we stuck to that road because there was broad national agreement that national security demanded no less. Failures in so much else, in this journey we succeeded.

The gas pipeline represents another journey in which we should succeed. Whatever American or Saudi objections, we need it, not only gas from Iran but gas from wherever available on favourable terms, Qatar included.

Talking of Qatar, the Saudis were never in love with Al-Jazeera, nor were the Americans whose ideas of democracy sensibly keep shifting wherever their interests so demand. But the Amir of Qatar, a man with a mind of his own, persisted with the idea. With the result that the Saudis have to live with it and the Americans too, despite an attempt to bomb the Al-Jazeera office in Kabul at the start of the present Afghan war.

And let’s not forget the Americans have a large military presence in Qatar...which only tells us that foreign policy should not be a zero-sum game. Gas from Iran, friendship with China, close ties with Saudi Arabia, easing of tensions with India, retaining a strong relationship with the US, all these should exist at the same time, different strands in the fabric of a dynamic foreign policy.

Was there a Pakistani ruler more Sunni, nay more of an out-and-out Salafist, than General Ziaul Haq, the prime initiator of so many of our present troubles, the godfather, if one has to be chosen, of our sectarian politics? Yet while he sought material and spiritual support from Saudi Arabia he forged, at the same time, a strong relationship with Iran. There were not too many heads of state at his funeral but the Iranian president was one of them.

Of course there is one valid objection: why this deal so late in the day? It should have been concluded earlier instead of at the fag end of the PPP’s reign of unforgettable disaster. But then apart from any wily calculations that may be there, so many things in our history should have been done earlier, at the right time, instead of waiting for the waters to rise to our heads. So too with this pipeline, so too with our energy crisis, we are getting serious about these needs when the danger lights are already flashing red.

Forget about other things. The roads leading outside not any remote village but Islamabad itself take forever to build. The building, the expansion, the rebuilding of the Kashmir Highway from Islamabad to Peshawar Road has been going on for the last 30 years. The road from Islamabad to Rewat took about 20 years (if imperfect memory serves, slightly more). So let us not despair. A transnational gas pipeline is slightly more complicated to put together.

Our American friends who can be counted upon to lose all balance when it comes to Iran will of course work themselves up into a lather of excitement about this deal. And they will keep dangling various fictitious carrots. Let us keep a straight face and examine these carrots carefully and let our concerned officials grip Ambassador Olson’s hand firmer than ever. And for further discussions if there must be any, let us invite the State Department spokesperson, Victoria Nuland...a good-looker if there is one.

There is also a second objection, more valid than the first. It is unfortunate that President Zardari, tainted by so much, should have his name associated with this pipeline, which is enough to discourage the most excitable optimists. But his term is to finish later this year, unless the political class bungles and we are saddled with him for a longer period...a disaster more striking than any American sanctions that may come our way.

So if the gods are not to laugh more at our expense and he goes quietly into the night, then the next government can take credit for this venture. Bhutto started the bomb but any number of people takes credit for it...why not the same with this pipeline?

In any event, this is a test of national sovereignty more litmus and more real than the fake storms we went through last year. And if only our friends in the Defence of Pakistan Council and other warriors who take it as their God-appointed duty to stand guard over the watchtowers of national patriotism could bring themselves to say a good word about the gas deal with Shiite Iran, maybe this has a beneficial effect on other fronts in our expanding sectarian wars.

__________________
"Nay! man is evidence against himself. Though he puts forth his excuses." Holy Qur'an (75:14-15)

By: Imran Malik | March 10, 2013 . 24

The geopolitical landscape of the AfPak Region (APR) and South Central Asian Region (SCAR) is about to undergo a massive transformation. As the US/Nato/Isaf combine prepares to egress, new regional alignments are emerging with serious geopolitical, economic and strategic connotations. This change is manifested by two dynamic events with global implications.
Firstly, Pakistan and China have closed a deal on Gwadar.

Secondly, unconvinced of the energy alternatives offered by the US, Pakistan has formalised an agreement and understanding with Iran on the Iran-Pakistan (IP) gas pipeline project, a $4 billion oil refinery at Gwadar and 1,000 MW of electricity - much to the consternation of the US and its allies.

Is Pakistan pre-empting another US desertion - a la 1989?

The US policy failure in the APR and the SCAR is apparent. Its writ has clearly weakened, its Afghan campaign has gone awry and its driven urgency to egress is symptomatic of its defeatist mindset.

Terrorism still thrives and rudderless attempts at negotiations with the Taliban appear stillborn. The overall Afghan internal situation stays unresolved. India - its “potential plenipotentiary” - is not even remotely relevant to the APR much less in control of it. It just wretchedly wallows on the periphery waiting pitiably for glory and greatness to be thrust upon it.

The US is thus set to lose its most dominating and central position in the SCAR – Afghanistan.

The remnants of the US/Nato/Isaf (13,000 to 14,000 troops) and mercenaries like Blackwater, Xe will not be enough to secure Western interests in the region. However, in cahoots with the CIA-MI6-RAW-MOSSAD-NDS combine their capacity and reach to create mischief would still be significant and multidimensional. Their collective main aim could, thenceforth, be to deny this strategic space (Afghanistan, APR) to any regional power or bloc - China, Russia or the SCO.

Furthermore, they will move to keep the region destabilised, create fissures within it, generate upheavals, stoke uprisings, encourage terrorist activities, cause wanton destruction and widespread mayhem and challenge the emergence of a unified regional alignment or bloc. They will try to sabotage the various efforts that the regional countries make to integrate their respective economies through mutually beneficial joint projects. They will raise the tempos to destabilise Pakistan and Iran even further.

As an unintended consequence of these developments (Gwadar and IP), the US-Israeli decision on Iran could be ominously hastened.

Pakistan, however, will be their main quarry. And the battlefields will be Pakistan at large, Karachi and Balochistan in particular.

The US and its allies must be viewing this convergence of Chinese, Pakistani and Iranian strategic and economic interests in Gwadar and Balochistan with extreme trepidation. In one fell swoop, the Straits of Hormuz and the Sea Lines of Communication (SLOCs) to and from the Persian Gulf have come under Chinese oversight.

Furthermore, regional economies are getting integrated “independent” of Western influence and domination. The prospects of a network of oil and gas pipelines (IP, even TAPI) flowing from the Middle East (ME) and CARs to Pakistan and China are that much brighter now. However India, due to its shortsighted policies, might end up losing access to all fossil fuel pipelines and trade routes to Iran, Turkey, Afghanistan, CARs, Russia and Europe - even Xinjiang, western China.

The US administration will react according to its laws on the issue and the reality of Israeli lobbies and political dynamics within its body politic. It will exert pressures through at least five tiers - the United Nations, the European Union, allies like the Arab states, Japan, Australia, India, etc, bilaterally itself and through international financial institutions like the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, International Monetary Fund et al. It is likely to pend its own bilateral sanctions till the Afghan imbroglio is conclusively brought to a closure and the US/Nato/Isaf combine has safely egressed from the region. Thereafter, it is likely to start turning the screw itself, too.

Pakistan is thus likely to face multidimensional pressures for the “sins” of Gwadar and the IP gas pipeline. However, it would be wary of the efforts of these foreign intelligence agencies to further destabilise it.
Karachi, its economic hub, is already under relentless terrorist attacks - foreign inspired, aided, and funded. Gwadar and the IP will receive particular attention, too.

RAW has its “consulates” along the Pak-Afghan border and will react with customary bitterness.

MOSSAD, which infiltrated the Jundullah posing as CIA, will be super active particularly along the Iran-Pakistan border.

CIA-MI6-NDS will have their own axes to grind.

All activities for further development of Gwadar and the IP project will come under severe terrorist attacks. Diplomatic and economic pressures, too, will be generated. The Western think-tanks and known hawks on the Balochistan issue will be encouraged to hold conferences and mould international opinion favourably.

Pakistan, therefore, must brace itself to foil these inimical interior and exterior manoeuvres.

Pakistan needs to set its own house in order first. Elections and transfer of power must be expeditious and peaceful. The new government should engage the terrorists directly and with a clear end in mind. The Law Enforcement Agencies (police, rangers, FC etc) must be further trained, reorganised and special counterterrorist units be raised within them.

A series of battalion/wing strength cantonments be built along the length of the IP from which the LEAs could sally forth to patrol and secure the areas.
A special aviation task force, comprising an RPV unit as well as a heliborne quick-reaction force, should be created to deter and crush all subversive activities against Gwadar or IP. The capacities of our intelligence agencies must be enhanced appropriately.

Concurrently, Pakistan must launch a pre-emptive diplomatic offensive to assuage the concerns of the Arabs, the European Union and the US. It should seek to act as a bridge between the Arabs and Iran.

The port of Gwadar and the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline are clearly in Pakistan’s supreme national interests and must be pursued. Pakistan, China and Iran should continue efforts to integrate other regional countries into a mutually beneficial multidimensional bloc as well.

All said and done, Pakistan must stay the course - come what may!
The writer is a retired brigadier and a former defence attaché to Australia and New Zealand. Currently, he is on the faculty of NUST (NIPCONS). Email: im_k@hotmail.com

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...-gwadar-and-ip

By: Khalid Iqbal | March 11, 2013 .

The high-profile inaugural ceremony of the Iran-Pakistan (IP) gas pipeline marks a watershed in the foreign policy of Pakistan. There was an interesting altercation during the recent weekly briefing at the Foreign Office:

Question. “As Pakistan is going to sign the IP gas pipeline, but it seems that Pakistan is in a fix on account of US pressure on Pakistan because of Iran being sanctioned. There is a point of view that Pakistan would not be in a position to carry out this project under international obligations and pressures. As President Zardari said that the IP gas pipeline would be pursued in national interest. Is it in national interest or public demand?”

Answer. “We are not in a fix. We are very clear about this project. It is in our national interest to go ahead with this project. Pakistan being an energy-deficient country, is hugely suffering both economically and socially. Yes, we have seen some reports and a statement by the American Ambassador. We know about their concerns, but we expect and hope that all our friends, including the US, would show more understanding on this issue.”

So, the emerging regional pivot in our foreign policy is in our national interest; it is, indeed, reflective of public aspirations as well. Against the context of national security, the core function of diplomacy is about dealing with immediate and distant neighbours. Pakistan wishes to have a peaceful periphery; it is in its self-interest to work with the rest of Asia, as a whole as well as in the context of its various sub-regional denominations. Without enduring primacy in one’s own neighbourhood, no country can become a credible player on the larger canvas.

Likewise, while living in a troubled region, it is not possible to concentrate on domestic issues. Bad influences from troubled neighbourhood invariably permeate and influence the domestic dynamics. Hence, there is a centrality of peaceful neighbourhood with peace at home as well as peace abroad, including broader regional and global perspectives.

Though creating a stable and prosperous neighbourhood is the key to redefining Pakistan’s regional and global roles, it is a task easier said than done. Caution is due; treading this path should not end up in the appeasement of neighbours at the cost of core national interests.
Fundamental to the strategy of constructing a peaceful periphery is the resolution of longstanding problems with the neighbours.

In Pakistan’s context, at the top of this list is the Jammu and Kashmir dispute with India. Unless the differences are first removed on the basis of justice and fair play, the rhetoric of artificial bonhomie crumbles the moment any misunderstanding occurs between the neighbours.

Over the last one year or so, Pakistan has taken several steps that point towards its focus for regional outreach. Emanating signals indicate that there is substantial political will to move the South and Central Asian regions towards shared prosperity. While demonstrating such will, Pakistan has taken keen interest in expediting certain initiatives to promote economic cooperation in bilateral, sub-regional, regional and trans-regional frameworks. The grant of MFN status to India, Afghan Transit Trade Agreement, IP gas pipeline and change in the management of Gwader Port are some of these steps.

Of these, first two became a reality via American persuasion and WTO obligations respectively; and the last two have materialised out of domestic and regional compulsions, despite the US pressures to the contrary. Projects like CASA 1000 and TAPI pipeline would also ensure yet greater connectivity between Central and South Asia. The proliferation of trade would further integrate Pakistan with its regional neighbours in a more substantial and sustainable way, through a healthy balance of interdependencies.

However, in the context of operationalisation of MFN status to India, Pakistani stakeholders have serious reservations due to India’s non-tariff barriers. There is a need to assess and evaluate the extent to which level playing field will be available to Pakistani exporters to India.

Likewise, in the case of gas purchase projects, pricing needs careful scrutiny, buying gas at around 70 percent of crude oil will make it unaffordable for domestic consumers and the electricity generated by expensive gas would also be costly.

Asia is no longer the backyard of global politics of cold war era that allowed Pakistan to deal with Asian states mostly under bilateral frameworks. Though Pakistan is an active participant in the activities of most of the regional forums, like ECO, SAARC, SCO, etc, there is no forum representative of Asia as a whole.

Pakistan should float the idea for such structure, so that new emphasis on the ‘regional’ approach in Pakistani foreign policy is constructed with due regard to the global perspective embedded in Asia’s international relations. Though non-materialisation of President Vladimir Putin’s visit was a setback to Pakistan’s effort towards securing its regional moorings, hopefully, alternative methods could be found to achieve this objective.

The journey towards regionalism is not likely to be smooth and without pressures. As things are moving ahead with appreciable speed on the front of IP project, the US is all-out to exert pressure on Pakistan, on an issue that is purely a bilateral transaction between the two neighbours.

During his recent visit to Tarbela, the US Ambassador, Mr Richard Olson, reiterated his country’s opposition to the IP project, while stating that Washington supports the TAPI project. Though the Ambassador was there in connection with the completion of the first phase of up-gradation of power station that materialised through American aid, he made it a point to create a bad taste, on this happy occasion, by making unwarranted comments.

The much-delayed IP pipeline project is, in fact, just a beginning, as it would not bridge the entire gap between the demand and supply of gas. Pakistan would definitely need to pursue the TAPI initiative as well. It looks forward to mustering American help in the early completion of TAPI project, but not at the cost of IP. Moreover, IP has reached advanced stages of implementation, while TAPI is just on papers since the 1990s.

The regional factor is also of vital importance for wrapping up the Afghan conflict. Without undertaking by all immediate neighbours of Afghanistan, durable peace in the war-torn country would remain a pipedream. Fast emerging national consensus on engaging Pakistani Taliban in purpose-oriented talks and facilitation of Afghan Taliban for taking part in the political reconciliation processes of their country are some other omens that would have a healthy impact on the regional landscape and domestic dynamics. Pakistan needs to engage the other five immediate neighbours of Afghanistan for agreeing on a code of conduct in post-2014 Afghanistan.

This, however, does not mean that Pakistan should limit its outreach or confine itself to regional orientation only. Meaningful roles at the UN, the OIC, the NAM, etc would help Pakistan maintain its appearance on broader horizons. National consensus is on a balanced foreign policy aimed at finding regional solutions to regional problems, while staying relevant at the global level.

The writer is a retired air commodore and former assistant chief of air staff of the Pakistan Air Force. At present, he is a member of the visiting faculty at the PAF Air War College, Naval War College and Quaid-i-Azam University. Email: khalid3408@gmail.com

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...regional-pivot

By: Farhan Bokhari | March 12, 2013

With just days before the tenure of his elected government ends, President Asif Zardari has chosen to portray himself as the ultimate nationalist by choosing to defy US pressure on the pipeline deal with Iran. The tail end of the regime led by Zardari’s PPP makes it difficult to know if the new political leaders, to be elected in polls this summer, will choose to continue with the project or go into retreat mode.

Setting aside years of US pressure on Pakistan to avoid signing up on the pipeline, given Washington’s concern over the project injecting foreign exchange into Iran’s sanctioned economy, Zardari’s gesture has been justified by his regime as broadly in sync with the country’s national interest.

There is much that could be used to question Washington’s position given that any engagement between Iran’s economic stakeholders and the outside world could conceivably help in ultimately bridging the gap between Tehran and its opponents. But aside from that logic and looking at the issue from Pakistan’s perspective, Zardari’s own position remains suspect.

If, indeed, he was genuinely committed to pushing the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline as a matter of key national interest, Zardari should have pursued the project in good time during the PPP’s five-year tenure. Such timely action would have at least ensured adequate progress on the project.

But the government appears to be in a rush on a range of fronts. For instance, the decision to move ahead with other projects involving investments running into billions of rupees just before the end of the government’s term, must only add to the widely prevalent scepticism surrounding the leadership.

In the past few weeks, the country’s ruling coalition unexpectedly approved a massive injection of Rs100 billion in the largely ailing Pakistan International Airlines or PIA, the state air carrier. While many critics have warned that the best solution to PIA’s continuing woes must lie in its immediate privatisation even at a modest price, Zardari’s ruling camp is determined to try and salvage one of Pakistan’s poorest run businesses.

Tragically, the PIA is also among Pakistan’s state-owned companies, which have been repeatedly used by one elected regime after another as a source of patronage for winning votes and, of course, for receiving payoffs. For years, it has been surrounded by rumours of prospective employees routinely paying large bribes to secure jobs in the airline. Unsurprisingly, PIA has also failed to bounce back from the red, having been rescued periodically.
Elsewhere too, the PPP-led ruling structure’s record in revamping and reshaping Pakistan’s economy remains dismal at best. In the five years since taking charge, the elected rulers have overseen a steady decline in investments, as they have failed to tackle some of the biggest challenges faced by the country, such as increasing energy shortages.

Among the worst setbacks to the country has been the systematic growth in the toleration for corruption, nepotism and a failure to improve the quality of governance. For years, the ruling camp remained single-mindedly obsessed with blocking all efforts aimed at the reopening of investigations of corruption in Switzerland against Zardari, going back to allegations from the 1990s when he was accused of having taken kickbacks from two Swiss companies.
Rather than deal with the fallout driven by the matter fuelling public scepticism, the authorities have simply taken refuge in Zardari’s immunity from prosecution in his position as the President.

Sadly, politics is a cut-throat business where legal immunities often do little to change the popular mindset. For Pakistanis looking at the increasingly dismal future of their country, Zardari’s upcoming trip to Iran for the gas pipeline project leaves behind a long trail of broken promises by the government, which only evokes disbelief.

For many, the ultimate question is, indeed, the track record of a regime, which has failed to lift Pakistan’s prospects beyond where they inherited the country following the 2008 elections.

With or without Zardari’s trip to Iran, that popular view of the way Pakistan has been run in the past five years is simply doomed to remain firmly in place.
The writer is a political and economic analyst. This article has been reproduced from the Gulf News.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...ng-us-pressure

By: Malik Muhammad Ashraf | March 12, 2013 .

Iran's President Mehmoud Ahmadinejad and Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari jointly laid the foundation for the construction of the Iran-Pakistan (IP) gas pipeline project at Shah Bahar on March 11 amidst severe pressure from the US on Pakistan to abandon it. Hopefully, the 781-km-long pipeline will become operational by December 2014. The project, which had remained in doldrums since 1996 for myriad of debilitating factors, was formally approved by the federal cabinet in its meeting on January 30, 2013.

For the energy-starved Pakistan, the IP gas pipeline project is of paramount importance to boost industrial production. Apart from the economic considerations of mutually beneficial cooperation between the two countries, IP is a significant step in the direction of building regional linkages. The move is also in conformity with the new thinking in the conduct of foreign relations that lays greater emphasis on strengthening regional security through economic and political cooperation with neighbours and countries of the region.

Pakistan is located in the South Asian region and its economic and security interests are inextricably linked to geographical realities. The initiative represents a logical and realistic departure from the past philosophy of the architects of our foreign policy to look beyond the region for the country’s economic and security needs, which has pushed it towards the precipice. The new approach by the present government is going to serve our long-term strategic, economic and political interests in this region, though the strategy might suffer some minor hiccups due to its conflict with the strategic interests of US in our part of the world.

The USA, apart from threatening to impose sanctions on Pakistan, has even tried to lure it away by offering to help in tiding over the energy crisis through other means. US State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland, during a press conference on February 9, said that the IP gas pipeline was a bad idea and America has not changed its position on the subject and it was considering giving Pakistan different options to overcome its energy needs without Iran’s help.

Again, speaking to the media on February 21, she hinted to the possibility of sanctions against Pakistan in case it went ahead with the venture. The US Ambassador to Pakistan, Richard G. Olson, the other day, also openly opposed the venture saying that his country would support TAPI, but not IP gas pipeline.

Nevertheless, it is heartening to note that the government of Pakistan has spurned the pressure and refused to be dictated on the issue and has remained steadfast in its decision to ensure implementation of the project.
Further, Iran and Pakistan are working on a number of other joint projects. President Zardari, while talking to the speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Ali Ardashir Larijani, when he visited Pakistan to attend the meeting of the parliamentary assembly of ECO, emphasised the need for early completion of all bilateral projects, including IP, 1,000MW Taftan-Quetta transmission line, 400MW Gwadar Power Supply Project, Noshki-Dalbandin Highway and up-gradation of the Quetta-Taftan track. He said: “We have to take control of our own affairs and find our own solutions to the problems.” It is good that the two countries are also signing an agreement for setting up of an oil refinery at Gwadar with a capacity to refine 400,000 barrels of oil daily.
Speaking on the subject in the National Assembly, Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar said: “The government will not compromise on the project and will ensure its implementation within the stipulated time span.” She also informed the house that “this project did not come under the sanctions regime imposed on Iran by the UN, which related to only the oil sector and did not cover the gas transmission ventures.” In the same vein, she maintained: “Pakistan will respect the UN sanction. However, it was not bound to abide by the sanction imposed by the US and European Union.”

The resolve to take our own decisions and resist undue pressures to compromise on national interests marks a discernible paradigm shift in the conduct of our foreign relations; and if the same thinking had permeated since the early days of independence, we would not have been where we stand today.

Most of our troubles and the challenges that we face - one way or the other - owe their existence to the wrong policies pursued by the past regimes and the machinations of our so-called friend, the USA.

Having said that, the Pak-US relationship always remained tactical in nature with the former using the latter to advance its own strategic and global interests. The US has exhibited scant respect for the interests and sovereignty of Pakistan ever since the latter became its ally in the early 50s by joining Seato and Cento. It jeopardised our security by flying the U2 spy plane from Budaber base near Peshawar without the knowledge of the government, which irritated former Soviet Union to the extent that it threatened Pakistan of dire consequences.

In addition, the USA did not help us when we were attacked by India in 1965, and instead imposed embargo on the sale of military hardware to Pakistan; an extremely unfriendly act against an ally.

Next, the much hyped sixth fleet never intervened to save the dismemberment of Pakistan when India attacked former East Pakistan (now Bangladesh).

Further, Pakistan was abandoned to suffer the fallout of the Afghan war after the Soviet forces withdrew from that country; we are still paying the price for the folly of our rulers to become a tool for the advancement of US interests in the region.

The USA bitterly opposed our nuclear programme and even imposed sanctions through the Pressler Amendment. The post-9/11 Pakistan was forced to join the war on terror as a front line state, which has had devastating effects on the nation’s security, law and order situation and the economic growth.
Pakistan has suffered a loss of nearly $68 billion by participating in the US campaign against terrorism and what it has given to it is not even peanuts. Our country is confronted with existentialist threat. It has pummelled our sovereignty with impunity in complete disregard to the international laws. The continuation of drone attacks, the Salala episode and the operation to take out Osama bin Laden are examples of the highhanded tactics of the USA, which by no stretch of imagination can be characterised as friendly acts. The government, therefore, is moving in the right direction to atone for the past blunders and safeguard national interests.

The writer is a freelance columnist. Email: ashpak10@gmail.com

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...owards-reality

In Iranian gas we trust
By Aasim Zafar Khan

It all looks so good on paper doesn’t it? Two Islamic countries coming together, holding hands, and shaking their fists in defiance to all and sundry, saying ‘we’ll do it our way’. Couldn’t have been scripted any better, even if George Lucas of Star Wars fame was involved. Still, it’s too early to say if this movie will pass the censor board and reach the cinemas.

Consider this. Country 1 is Iran. Their back has already been broken by dilapidating sanctions by the United States, which considers Tehran to be a major threat to world peace. The United States believes that any of its allies that do business with Iran, are, well, no longer allies. Then we have Saudi Arabia, the Sunni capital of the Muslim world. Never under their watch would they let Tehran, the Shia capital of the Muslim world, take centre stage.

Country 2 is Pakistan. Ravaged by terrorism and economic doom, Pakistan is ostensibly a staunch ally of the United States in its war against terrorism. Pakistan also happens currently to be one of the highest recipients of US aid money. What happens, or doesn’t happen, with that money is not the concern here. Then there’s Saudi Arabia, Pakistan’s godfather. Riyadh’s influence on Islamabad has been so strong, and so encompassing that it would be safe to assume that Pakistan is well on the road to becoming a fundamental Sunni Wahabi state, much like Saudi Arabia.

To put it mathematically, how can Pakistan, whose most influential allies are the United States and Saudi Arabia, do business with Iran, whose most staunch opponents are the United States and Saudi Arabia?

It can’t, given the geopolitics. As the sun sets on President Zardari’s government, he has, yet again, played it beautifully. By signing on the dotted line with his counterpart Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, our president has sent the message that he has finally grown a pair and is standing up to US pressure. Secondly, he has told the common Pakistani, and the industrialist and the businessman that he understands Pakistan’s gas and energy emergency, and that he’s willing to go to whatever lengths to overcome it. Not a bad message to send on the eve of general elections.

But the onus of completing this pipeline, conjuring up the money needed to finance it, and then securing it, will lie on the next government – possibly of the PML-N. Now we all know how particularly close Nawaz Sharif is to the house of Saud; after all, he spent all his years of exile in the kingdom. And as mentioned earlier, Saudi Arabia is vehemently opposed to any deal benefiting Iran. And then there’s the United States, which has made clear its displeasure on the matter and even threatened sanctions on Pakistan if it goes ahead with the pipeline. This will be unnecessary and unneeded pressure for the future government as it deals with the multitude of problems left behind by the PPP.

To be honest, these threats of sanctions don’t seem to have much bite. After all, it’s highly unlikely that the US will first slap sanctions on us and then politely ask for safe passage for their withdrawal from Afghanistan next year. It doesn’t happen like that.

What the US could do is perhaps ask the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (WB) to tighten their noose on us. After all, Pakistan is alive primarily on their life support machine. On the flip side, it is also entirely possible, considering Pakistan’s history, that this is yet another ploy by Pakistan to extract more aid money from the US.

So back to the math, given the geopolitics, how can Pakistan do business with Iran? Will it do business with Iran? Or is this just politics without the realisation of gas?

Right now there are more questions than answers. The pipeline, on its own, is a no-brainer. Pakistan needs the gas and Iran, the cash. But international affairs don’t play out like that. With the United States and Saudi Arabia both involved, we are a very long way off from realising even a cubic foot of Iran’s much-coveted natural reserve.

The writer is the chief operating officer of an FM radio network and tweets @aasimzkhan

__________________
"Nay! man is evidence against himself. Though he puts forth his excuses." Holy Qur'an (75:14-15)

March 10, 2013 . 2

US Spokesperson Victoria Nuland’s grumble that Iran is unreliable while cautioning Pakistan it should not do anything to court sanctions is a stark evidence of the US amplifying its rant against the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline as the project enters its final stage. Interestingly, she said her country was in favour Indo-Pak bilateral trade. Trade with India, for one thing has nothing to do with the IP pipeline. How can Pakistan refuse cooperation with Iran and start trusting India. Going so far as to shower it with MFN status whose arms buying spree and recent border clashes have given jitters to many would have severe repercussions. Sadly, at a time when a project that can turn out to be the lifeblood of our ailing industry and commerce is about to become a reality, it is being met by stiff resistance from the US. Who would regard that as an act of a friend? Under no circumstances should Islamabad give into pressure. The Asian Development Bank has recoiled at the thought of the US sanctions on the IP agreement. Our Iranian friends have built the pipeline right up to our doorstep as again confirmed by the Iranian Counsel General in Karachi on Friday who also held out the assurance of providing electricity. It is in the country’s supreme interest that attempts to stymie the project are summarily brushed off.

The history of Pakistan is replete with cases where India betrayed not only our trust, but also of the international community: Kashmir, the water dispute, the distribution of assets between Pakistan and India. One can go on citing incidents of its perfidy. It simply cannot be trusted.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...seless-concern

March 12, 2013 . 4

The groundbreaking ceremony of the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project performed jointly by President Asif Ali Zardari and President Mehmoud Ahmadinejad at Gabd, located in Iran close to Pakistan border, on Monday was, by all logic, a giant leap in history. For the Pakistan government that has not, at least during the past five years or so, been known much for disregarding the US command or counsel to suddenly ignore the threat of sanctions is an act of no small courage. Overwhelmed by financial constraints, it looks up to Washington for relief through international financing institutions like the IMF to which it is at present heavily indebted and might have to have recourse for another package to bail itself out. Sanctions at this stage would further hamper the already crippled economy to get reactivated. Going ahead with building the pipeline signifies that Pakistan has finally realised that its salvation lies in aggressively pursuing a policy of fulfilling energy requirements. Economic networking with Tehran and through Gwadar with Beijing would make for regional cohesion of common interests and would largely go towards enabling us to meet the challenge emanating from our eastern border. Viewed from that angle as well, the decision to pursue the long-delayed project was a strategic move of sterling significance for Pakistan and stability in the region. And that might also persuade the leadership in New Delhi to see the advantages of living in harmony with neighbours, respecting their right of sovereign status and eschewing its hegemonic ambitions. No doubt, it would also have a positive impact on integrating Central Asian States with this region.

The project, when on line, would initially supply 750 million cubic feet of natural gas to Pakistan, to go up to one billion cubic feet later, and help generate as much as 4,000MW of power, a great boon for a country where life, in all its manifestations, has been ruinously affected for want of enough of power supply. It would be complete within 15 months of the start of the work and is expected to be ready by December 2014. The financing part of the 781km long pipeline would, no doubt, pose serious problems for cash-strapped Pakistan though out of the revised cost of $1.3 billion, Tehran would give a loan of $500 million for the work to take off. Islamabad would foot the bill afterwards. Reportedly, in an attempt to ward off sanctions, payment to Iran would be against the charges for the gas Pakistan would receive.

For Pakistan, the gas flowing from Iran would be a dream come true. The alternative project TAPI suggested by the US is virtually a non-starter, at least for the unstable conditions in the area through which its pipeline is designed to pass and its long gestation period during which Pakistan cannot afford to live in the doldrums. One should expect the US to be more indulgent towards its key partner in the war on terror and a host of other arrangements of common interest in the past and would desist from applying the sanctions.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...eap-in-history