IPI Gasline - Crucial for Energy Requirement

Khalid Khokhar

While Pakistan welcomed the US offer to help it overcome the energy crisis, the US made it clear that it was linked to the relinquishing of long-dreamt-about Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline project. The need for natural gas is more imperative than ever both for India and Pakistan.

Long-term projections indicate that the demand for gas in India is likely to go up from the present 74 to about 500 million cubic meters per day by the year 2025, necessitating large-scale gas imports. Similarly, gas supply in Pakistan, currently 71 million cubic meters per day, is expected to increase by 50% in the next five years. The longer-term outlook would justify significant imports of gas by Pakistan as well. It is very disheartening that while the world around us is moving towards closer economic cooperation, Indo-Pakistan bilateral relations have been stalled by the 26/11 Mumbai attacks impeding joint economic excursions. Nevertheless, realizing the importance of the pipeline as the most favoured option, negotiations on crucial energy imports remained unhindered by the on-going tense relations between India and Pakistan. Now when both the countries have become willing to extend cooperation to each other, it can be hoped that they will promote their mutual cooperation and create a pleasant atmosphere for promoting economic cooperation and resolving controversial issues, like gas imports through trans-national gas pipeline projects, i.e., Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline (IPI), Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan (TAPI) pipeline project and Gulf-South-Asian, Qatar-Pakistan project etc. extending up to the Indian border.

Since the discovery of natural gas reserves in Iran's South Pars fields in 1988, the Iranian government began increasing efforts to promote higher gas exports abroad. Iran contains the world's second largest natural gas reserves "at an estimated 812 trillion cubic feet". The negotiations to bring natural gas to India from Iran via Pakistan began in 1994. The Iranian government proposed the construction of a $7.6 billion Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline, also known as the "peace pipeline", from its South Pars fields in the Persian Gulf to Pakistan's major cities of Karachi and Multan and then further onto Delhi, India. It travels to Pakistan through Khuzdar, with one section of it going on to Karachi on the Arabian Sea coast, and the main section traveling on to Multan, Pakistan. From Multan, the pipeline travels to Delhi, where it ends. At this point, India is free to consider and negotiate further domestic routing of the pipeline. The pipeline would be 2,670 km long with a 48 inch diameter, and hold $3.2 billion of gas. Pakistan could earn as much as $500 million in royalties from a transit fee and save $200 million by purchasing cheaper gas from this pipeline project. The gas pipeline via Pakistan is "a win-win proposition for India and Pakistan" that could serve as a durable confidence-building measure, creating strong economic links and business partnerships among neighbouring countries. But while a rival gas-pipeline project -- the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI), is supported by the Asian Development Bank and America, the IPI does not have any backing from International Financial Institutions (IFIs). However, both IPI & TAPI projects are to be routed through Balochistan, complicating the matters, as the on-going Baloch Insurgency has caused damage to the gas pipelines & other government installations in Balochistan. Pakistan, however, has made clear it would build the pipeline with Iran even if India opts out of the project. The construction of the new pipeline could be finished within five years time.

The US is dissuading India and Pakistan from going ahead with the project and is willing to address the long-term energy needs if New Delhi & Islamabad forgo the proposed gas pipeline with Iran via Pakistan. The pipeline plan seems to be threatened by Washington’s serious reservations about Iran's nuclear ambitions. According to the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act, the US President may impose sanctions on any international firm that does $20 million or more in oil or gas business with Iran (and $ 40 million with Libya). India is eager to push forward a proposed pipeline to carry gas from Iran via Pakistan despite US opposition to the project. US is "stepping up pressure" to scuttle the project, as the project "could violate Iran and Libya Sanctions Act" passed by the US. Washington is willing to give nuclear power technology to India for meeting its growing energy needs but in return wants that India should not do business with Iran, a country the US administration label as a “rogue state”. The pipeline deal is creating "wrinkles" in US-India ties. At least in this rare case, both Pakistan and India stood shoulder to shoulder in rejecting relentless pressure from the US administration to scotch the deal.

The rival TAPI gas pipeline project was signed in April 2008, to build a $7.6 billion pipeline delivering natural gas from Turkmenistan to Pakistan and India. It would cut right through the heart of Western Afghanistan, in Herat, and head south across lightly populated Nimruz and Helmand provinces - the stronghold of Talibans. Turkmenistan had already signed contracts to supply Russia with about 50 billion cubic meters annually, China with 40 billion cubic meters, and Iran with 8 billion cubic meters. The future of the classic IPI vs. TAPI battle may hinge on Gwadar. For its part, China badly needs Gwadar for IPI gas pipeline to be built to western China. Iran's relations with both Russia and China are swelling - China desperately needs Iranian oil and gas, has already clinched a $100 billion gas "deal of the century" with the Iranians. Gwadar really becomes a key transit corridor for either Iranian gas from the South Pars field heading for China, or Caspian gas from Turkmenistan heading Europe-wards. There's US and China’s vested interest in the pipeline diplomacy. The great game is on; with IPI, Iran & China win. With TAPI, Turkmenistan & the US win. The question is, “Who profits?”

Pakistan has made invaluable contributions to combating al Qaeda over the past eight years, capturing scores of key leaders and providing tips that led to the foiling of deadly terrorist plots. The death of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) Chief Baitullah Mehsud and ensuing infighting among the Taliban indicated that Talibans had become weaker and its top leadership is on the run. The success of Pakistan security forces in the on-going military operation against the militants in FATA and Malakand areas, is being appreciated by the world community. The Obama administration and the US Congress are committed to supporting Pakistan on a long-term basis and develop its institutions as well as energy requirements. Pakistan had inked agreement with Iran on June 5, 2009, subject to the approval from their respective governments before September 5, 2009. Pakistan and Iran have formally signed an agreement to activate a bilateral gas pipeline project through a third country law that is why it was signed in Turkey. Pak-Iran gas pipeline project is of vital importance to meet the energy requirements of Pakistan, saving over 5 million dollars on daily basis. However, the project could be shelved for ever if the US opposes the pipeline because it involves Iran, a country the Obama administration considers a “sponsor of terror”. Pak-Iran gas pipeline project should materialise in the supreme national interest at every cost. The US understands Pakistan’s energy requirements and needs. It is hoped that the Obama Administration should give green signal to IFIs to release funds for the proposed IPI gasline project so crucial for it’s survival.

Tipaimukh Dam: A Hazard for Bangladesh

Mamoona Ali Kazmi

The Indo-Bangladesh relations have never been cordial. Regrettably, India’s expansionist policy in the region and anti-Bangladesh propaganda continued unabated. In Bangladesh, India is viewed as a bully, throwing its weight around and threatening the sovereignty of its smaller neighbors.

There are several issues between the two countries, which are of grave concern for Bangladesh. These include water issue, land issue, fencing of border, Indian support to Chakma community, killing of innocent civilians by BSF, subversive activities by India’s intelligence wings, Bangladesh’s high profile criminals taking asylum in India, smuggling from India etc.

Most important issue that mars bilateral relations between India and Bangladesh is water. Most of the rivers, which Bangladesh shares with India are controlled and managed by India. It has evolved plans to divert waters, from the northeast of the country to its drought prone west and south, of some 54 rivers which flow from India to Bangladesh.

India’s construction of dams or barrages on the common rivers one after the other not only violates international law regarding common rivers but also threatens the norms of good neighbourliness and the livelihood of the people of Bangladesh. After building Farraka and Teesta barrages, India has started construction of the Tipaimukh dam on river Barack just a kilometer north of Jakiganj in Sylhet. The construction work of Tipaimukh dam was stalled in March 2007 in the face of protests within and outside India for not following the international conventions about the international rivers. Linked to this dam is the Fulertal barrage. To be located 500 meters downstream from the flowing rivers of the Barack and Tuovai rivers, the Tipaimukh dam lies on the south western corner of the Manipur state of India. Its reservoir will have a water storage capacity of 15,900 million cubic meters with a maximum depth of 1,725.5 meters. The dam and barrage when completed in 2012 are supposed to provide 1500 megawatts of hydel power to the Indian state of Assam but in return its going to bring about a major disaster for Bangladesh, practically contributing to drying up of 350 km long Surma and 110 km long Kushiara rivers which water most of the northeastern region of Bangladesh. The Tipaimukh barrage is going to seriously affect not only agriculture in large portions of Bangladesh, particularly in winter, but is also gong to bring about negative ecological, climatic and environmental changes in vast areas of Bangladesh. Education Minister of India Nurul Islam Nahid said, “If India withdraws water from the Barack River, the free flowing Surma and Kushiara rivers will dry up”. Surma-Kushiara and its 60 tributaries support agriculture, irrigation, navigation, drinking water supply, fisheries, wildlife in numerous areas in the entire Sylhet division and some peripheral areas of Dhaka division. So around five crore people in Sylhet and Dhaka division will face problems as Surma and Kushiara will lose five feet water in the rainy season. Abdul Karim Kim, an organizer of the Sylhet Paribesh Andolon feels that besides other parts of Bangladesh, Sylhet will be gravely affected. “The dam completion will disrupt agriculture, irrigation, navigation, drinking water supply and ground water levels. Sylhet will face the same consequences faced by the south western region of Bangladesh”.

A Water resources expert, Professor Mustafizur Rahman Tarafdar discussed the ill effects of the Tipaimukh dam. He said, “If this dam is eventually constructed as intended, Bangladesh would have to suffer the adverse effects. This dam would lead to hydrological drought and environmental degradation. This dam would cause the Surma and Kushiara to run dry during November to May which would eventually hamper agriculture, irrigation, navigation, shortage of supply of drinking water, etc. This shortage of water in these months would decrease the boost of ground water which over the years would lower the ground water level, which in turn would affect all dug outs and shallow tube-wells. Agriculture, which is dependent on both surface as well as ground water, would also be affected. Also, any interference in the normal flow of water in the Barack would have an adverse effect on the Surma in Bangladesh that, in turn, feeds the mighty Meghna that flows through Bangladesh. Arable land will decrease and production of crops will fall, leading to an increase in poverty. Roughly 7 to 8 percent of total water of Bangladesh is obtained from the Barack. Millions of people are dependent on hundreds of water bodies fed by Barack in the Sylhet region for fishing and agricultural activities. A dam-break is a catastrophic failure of a dam which results in the sudden draining of the reservoir and a severe flood wave that causes destruction and in many cases death downstream. If the Tipaimukh dam were to break, impounding billions of cubic meters of water, it will cause catastrophic floods because of its colossal structure”.

India never bothered to discuss the matter of the Tipaimukh dam with Bangladesh. The Tipaimukh Dam project was entirely developed and approved without informing the government of Bangladesh or involving its people in any meaningful exercise to assess the downstream impacts of the dam. Since the river Barack is an international river, Bangladesh as a lower riparian country should have an equitable share of water. Moreover an access to the design details of the project, planning and design etc also is a right of the country. Mir Sajjad Hossain, member of Joint River Commission (JRC) said, “We do not know what is going on there. We came to know from our sources that India is panning a hydroelectric plant. India has not sent any official documents about the proposal”. This is clearly a gross violation of co-riparian rights of Bangladesh. India has violated provisions of the 1997 UN Watercourse Convention on the Article 5 (1) Equitable Utilization, (7) No Harm Principle, (9) Exchange of Information.

According to International Law, it is illegal to construct any dam on an international river without consent from the other side. But India has violated it by starting the construction of Tipaimukh Dam on the Barack. Unilateral water diversion, or withdrawal of water from international or common rivers, has been the long standing policy of India. India has seldom bothered to think about the impact of such policies on a low riparian country, such as Bangladesh, in diverting water from common rivers. The high commissioner of India Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty to Bangladesh admitted that the Indian government has resumed the process of construction once again from the end of 2008. According to Chakravarty the dam would produce hydroelectricity and would not harm Bangladesh in any way. It would only regulate the rivers’ flow. As it is a project aimed at producing hydroelectricity, no water would be withheld from Bangladesh. But this is not as simple as said by Chakravarty as to produce electricity the water flow would have to be obstructed which means that there will be less flow of water to the riparian neighbouring country. Furthermore, Chakravarty also stated that the water will not be used for irrigation purposes. Where as according to sources the original plan of India is to supply water to the areas of Rajasthan and other states from Barack River, around 900 km away from the Manipur state. How can the people of Bangladesh trust that India’s Tipaimukh dam will not do any harm to them when they have been suffering numerous environmental disasters for the last 35 years due to the barrages, in the upstreams of the Ganges and the Teesta, built by India?

India is withdrawing waters of almost all the common rivers by building dams on the upstream, which will eventually cause Bangladesh to turn into a desert. India’s lack of sensitivity to the neighbours does not speak of friendly act by a friendly country. By constructing Tipaimukh dam India is only looking its own interest. India wants to control the water flow to facilitate irrigation of the Cacher plain. India should not be insensitive to the environmental and the negative consequences of the Tipaimukh dam on the lower riparian Bangladesh.

West’s Silence over Indian Proliferation

Sajjad Shaukat

Setting aside the Indian irresponsible record of non-proliferation, defence agreement signed between the US and India on July 20, this year as part of the deal about civil nuclear technology, agreed upon by the two countries in 2008 has raised new alarms on global and regional level.
Now, New Delhi is officially allowed to obtain the US sophisticated arms and nuclear weapons for its armed forces. In February this year, America had pressurised the International Atomic Agency (IAEA) to sign an accord of specific safeguards with India. It permits New Delhi a broad atomic cooperation, while superseding the IAEA regarding transfer of nuclear equipments and technologies. These arrangements also entail enrichment and reprocessing items under the so-called cover of IAEA. In this regard, Washington also contacted the Nuclear Suppliers Group in order to grant a waiver to India for starting civil nuclear trade on larger scale, while the latter has already been getting nuclear material and arms of all kinds from Israel, Russia, and other European countries.

On the other side, US and European high officials including their media make much hue and cry in relation to the safety of Pakistan’s nukes. In this respect, in the recent past, by manipulating Taliban’s advances in Buner, they misperceived that Pakistan could be overtaken by these extremists who could also possess atomic weapons. On April 22, US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton clearly remarked that atomic weapons of Pakistan could fall into the hands of terrorists. Recently, although the President Barrack Obama admitted that nuclear assets of Pakistan are safe, yet he clarified that America had all options open. On the other hand, Pakistan’s successful military operations which flushed the Taliban out of Buner, Dir and Swat exposed the real designs of the US and Europe which only distort the image of Islamabad in connection with nuclear proliferation. In this context, while rejecting west’s misperceptions, Pakistan’s military and civil leadership has repeatedly been assuring that nuclear assets of the country are under tight security.

Notably, on September 25, 2008, Obama had pledged that if elected, he would encourage India and Pakistan to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and resolve the Kashmir problem to reduce nuclear dangers in South Asia. But he has deviated from his earlier commitments and by following the unilateral approach of the ex-president Bush, he sent Hillary Clinton to sign the defence pact with New Delhi. Surprisingly other major European countries like France, Germany and UK are also silence on US-India nuclear deal. In fact, they are also encouraging New Delhi in this regard.

Nonetheless, double standards of the western counties indicate that they totally ignore India on the question of nuclear proliferation as their sole aim is to de-nuclearise Pakistan which is the only atomic power in the Islamic World.

As regards the question of nuclear proliferation, India’s past and present record is replete with innumerable events.

In July 1998, India’s Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seized eight Kg. of nuclear material from Arun, an engineer in Chennai including two other engineers. It was reported that the uranium was stolen from an atomic research center. The case still remains pending. On November 7, 2000, IAEA revealed that Indian police had seized 57 pounds of uranium and arrested two men for illicit trafficking of radioactive material. IAEA had said that Indian civil nuclear facilities were vulnerable to thefts.

On January 26, 2003, CNN pointed out that Indian company, NEC Engineers Private Ltd. shipped 10 consignments to Iraq, containing highly sensitive equipments entailing titanium vessels and centrifugal pumps. Indian investigators acknowledged that the company falsified customs documents to get its shipments out of India.

In 2004, when the issue of international nuclear black market came to surface, Pakistani nuclear scientist, Dr. A.Q. Khan was only blamed by America and Europe for proliferation activities by neglecting the western nationals and especially those of India. While in February, same year, India’s Ambassador to Libya, Dinkar Srivastava revealed that New Delhi was investigating that retired Indian scientists could possibly be engaged in “high technology programs” for financial gains during employment in the Libyan government.

On June 12, 2004, Berkeley Nucleonics Corporation (BNC), an American company was fined US $ 300,000 for exporting a nuclear component to the Bhaba Atomic Research Center in India.

In December 2005, United States imposed sanctions on two Indian firms for selling missile goods and chemical arms material to Iran in violation of India’s commitment to prevent proliferation. In the same year, Indian scientists, Dr. Surendar and Y. S. R Prasad had been blacklisted by Washington due to their involvement in nuclear theft. In December 2006, a container packed with radioactive material had been stolen from an Indian fortified research atomic facility near Mumbai.

Some weeks ago, death of India’s nuclear scientist, Lokanathan Mahalingam raised new apprehension about Indian proliferation. He was missed from the scenario and after a couple of days; his dead body was recovered from the Kali River. Indian police concocted a story that Mahalingam had committed suicide by jumping into the river. It is a big joke to hide some real facts behind his death because wisdom proves that if an educated person decides to commit suicide, he will definitely adopt a soft way to eliminate his life. Notably, Dr. Haleema Saadia disclosed that death of the scientist is a conspiracy, as soon as his dead body was found, within no time; the police had announced that Mahalingam had committed suicide.

Nevertheless, in connivance with the officials, proliferation of nuclear components and their related-material has continued intermittently by the Indians.

Besides, in the recent past, solid evidence has surprised the world regarding the existence of Hindu terrorism which also shows future dangers of Indian proliferation. In this respect, Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) of the Maharashtra arrested a serving Lt. Col. Srikant Purohit along with some officials who confessed that they were involved in training of the Hindu terrorists, supplying them the military-grade explosive RDX, used in bombings of various Indian cities including Malegaon. The investigation further indicated the confession of Lt. Col. Purohit for the bombing of Samjhota express, while proving close links of the Indian army officials with prominent politicians of BJP, VHP, RSS and Bajrang Dal, who have been pressurizing New Delhi to release the arrested persons. Nevertheless, the enquiry still remains pending. Meanwhile, assassination of Indian Anti-Terrorism Squad Chief Hemant Karkare in Mumbai during terror attacks also endorsed these links. All these developments show that Hindu fundamentalists, trained by Indian military experts or secret agency RAW could obtain Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). Thus they could jeopardise the global peace by using these fatal weapons inside America and Europe so that these developed nations could point finger to Islamabad because of their ‘stereotypes’ against the Muslims in wake of war on terror.

However, it is surprising that despite nuclear proliferation by India in violation of various international agreements and its refusal to sign Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), CTBT and Additional Protocol with the IAEA, the United States also included New Delhi in its joined non-proliferation goals like Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) by praising India as a responsible atomic actor.

In the past, Islamabad offered a number of suggestions to New Delhi to jointly sign NPT and CTBT, but the latter flatly declined. Instead, in 1998, India detonated atomic devices and compelled Pakistan to follow the suit. On July 27 this year, by launching its first nuclear-powered submarine, India has initiated deadly nuclear arms in South Asia.

It seems that all the global non-proliferation conventions led by Washington and its western partners are applicable to Iran, North Korea and especially Pakistan, while India which has played a real role in the international black market from where even terrorists can obtain these fatal weapons, is exempted because the sole superpower has to fulfill its Asian interests through New Delhi at the cost of Islamabad and other regional countries. If American duplicity in the matter continues, Obama’s policy of South Asia will badly fail as all the issues such as terrorism, Kashmir, Afghanistan and non-proliferation are inter-related.

We can conclude that western countries ignore India which is the real nuclear proliferator. So the right hour has come that the international community must take notice of the dangers posed by Indian proliferation to save the world from any prospective nuclear catastrophe.

Sajjad Shaukat writers on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations.