Dueling Pipelines - American-backed Afghanistan route (TAPI) vs. Iran's "Pipeline of Peace" (IPI)?

[Dover]

TAPI or IPI? Just another story you're unlikely to run across in your usual news source.

This is only the latest chapter in what is a very long, dark and convoluted story that is as rocky and treacherous as the terrain these pipelines are meant to cross. But it should be known that
the 'pipelines issue' and the gas/oil they are meant to carry are still very much part of the impetus
for war, geo-politics, our national energy policy and of course private interests. Some things just don't change...


What Are The Prospects For Iran-Pakistan 'Pipeline Of Peace'?



May 25, 2009
By Bruce Pannier

The signing of a 25-year deal under which Iran aims to export some 150 million cubic meters of gas to Pakistan per day has resurrected a moribund pipeline project known as the "Pipeline of Peace."

Not much has been heard about the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline for some time, but that all changed on the sidelines of a regional summit that brought together Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad and Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari in Tehran on May 24.

At a signing ceremony, the two leaders hailed the prospects of a pipeline that would start in the Iranian city of Asalouyeh, travel to Pakistan, and could eventually end in India.

But there are some major obstacles to overcome before any Iranian gas actually crosses the border into Pakistan -- and even more before that gas can be routed to India.

The first major question is where the money will come from.

The first leg of the plan is to build a 2,100-kilometer long pipeline from Iran's South Pars gas field into Pakistan -- at an estimated $7.5 billion. The next step would be to build a 600-kilometer extension that would go on to India.

But while a rival gas-pipeline project -- the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) -- is supported by the Asian Development Bank, the IPI does not have any backing from international financial institutions. Furthermore, TAPI is not as vulnerable to the financial or political opposition that IPI could experience due to the involvement of Iran, whose nuclear program has made it a pariah in the international community.

Complicating matters for both projects is that they are to be routed through Baluchistan. Considering that Baluch nationalists have already blown up domestic gas pipelines on the Pakistani side of the border in their fight for greater autonomy from Islamabad, their stance on a new pipeline from Iran (or Afghanistan) could be easily guessed. ...cont'd

http://www.rferl.org/content/What_Are_The_Prospects_For_IranPakistan_Pipeline_Of_Peace/1739236.html

-------------------------------------------------

Iran, Pakistan Sign Pipeline Deal (Asia Times)

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KE27Df03.html

-------------------------------------------------


TAPI - Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline

The Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline (TAP or TAPI) is a proposed natural gas pipeline being developed by the Asian Development Bank. The pipeline will transport Caspian Sea natural gas from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan into Pakistan and then to India. Proponents of the project see it as a modern continuation of the Silk Road. The Afghan government is expected to receive 8% of the project's revenue.

The 1,680 kilometres (1,040 mi) pipeline will run from the Dauletabad gas field to Afghanistan. From there TAPI will be constructed alongside the highway running from Herat to Kandahar, and then via Quetta and Multan in Pakistan. The final destination of the pipeline will be the Indian town of Fazilka, near the border between Pakistan and India. cont'd

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline


Some History:
------------------------------------------------

A Timeline of Oil and Violence (Afghanistan)
http://www.ringnebula.com/Oil/Timeline.htm

------------------------------------------------

Afghanistan's Natural Resources:
http://www.rall.com/2004/06/trans-afghanistan-pipeline-project.html

------------------------------------------------

U.S. Silk Road Policy
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=115&topic_id=171417

[XemaSab]

1. .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIK7084f8FM

[Dover]

2. Is IPI pipeline less risky than TAPI line? (An article written a year ago)

Is IPI pipeline less risky than TAPI line?


Playing the Great Game calls for grit, sound calculations and a determination to win at all costs. More so, when spiralling energy prices make a mockery of energy security for countries that are heavily dependent on imports. India is. It already imports 70 of its energy requirements and with the economy growing at approximately eight percent, the figure is expected to increase to as much as 90 percent in the next two decades. Yet, India plays the energy game with a strange mixture of pusillanimity and a bravado that verges on the imprudent.
Nothing exemplifies this better than two major initiatives India took recently. First, it signed up for the Turkmenistan gas pipeline after watching from the sidelines for well over a decade and resisting all inducements to join it, even the blandishments of the US. Then, within days it went out of its way to lionise Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad during a stopover in Delhi < Images >, making it appear that the hoarier Iran-Pakistan India (IPI) pipeline was back on the agenda. But only seemingly so since the government has been sending out clear signals thereafter that it considers the IPI pipeline too risky at this juncture.

Far more significant is India's decision to throw its weight behind the Turkmenistan pipeline that is plagued by a host of uncertainties, not least the adequacy of supplies. The 1,680-km line that will snake its way from the Dauletabad gas field in the central Asian country, cut across Afghanistan and Pakistan, taking in Herat, Kandahar and Multan before reaching Fazilka on the Indian border. Called TAPI as an acronym for the names of the countries it crisscrosses, this pipeline is better known in the West as the Trans Afghan Pipeline because close to half its length (830 km) lies in war-torn Afghanistan; just 170 km of this audacious venture will lie in Turkmenistan.

This is undoubtedly a pipeline that will call for more than the usual guts demanded of those who play the Great Game. TAPI, much more than IPI, straddles the most volatile region in the world. About 47,000 troops, primarily US and British, are fighting the Taliban < Images > forces in Afghanistan where an increasing number of suicide bombings have added to the mayhem. The latest reports say the US intends to increase its troops and firepower in the embattled country.

It was surprising, therefore, that Delhi plumped for the TAPI project with very little discussion on its merits. Announcing the agreement, Minister of State for Petroleum and Natural Gas Dinsha Patel < Images > gave some sketchy details of what India expects to gain from the $ 7.6 billion pipeline -- still an estimate -- that is expected to bring gas to India from 2014. Patel says TAPI is projected to supply 90 mmscmd (million standard cubic meters daily) of gas, of which Afghanistan will get 5 mmscmd during the first two years and 14 mmscmd from the third year onwards. The rest is to be shared equally between Pakistan and India. That's roughly around 30 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas annually.

The agreement came three weeks after the ministry signed a memorandum of understanding with its Turkmenistan counterpart in Ashgabat during the visit of Vice President Hamid Ansari to Turkmenistan in April. According to one view, it was an indication that India was ready to take the plunge on an alternative to the IPI pipeline, while petroleum ministry sources say it is not a case of either/or but a question of widening the options...cont'd

http://world.rediff.com/www/money/2008/may/31guest.htm

[Dover]

3. It's interesting to me that this recent deal signed between Iran and Pakistan in late May

coincides with Obama's recent trip to the Middle East and Europe. From what I gather after reading the Asia Times article linked to above, Iran and Pakistan are attempting to force India's hand by signing without them, and accusing India of delay tactics. India has for years been noncommital of participation in either of the pipelines, although as I understand it, they've been more inclined toward the TAPI (American) pipeline in the recent past.
Iran/Pakistan are essentially telling India that China may become their new partner and India will be left in the dust.

And the U.S. has consistantly tried to undermine Iran's efforts on the IPI pipeline due to their nuclear ambitions (or so we've said), although I'm sure highly profitable and scarce energy resources from the Caspian region in which we've invested, has as much or more to do with it.
And of course this is probably the primary reason behind our presence in Afghanistan rather than
'terrorism' per se. So when we talk about 'terrorism', I believe what we are really referring to are those regional elements that are interfering with our oil/gas interests in this region by creating instability and sabotaging the infrastructure that is required to proceed with these projects.

[Dover]

Pipelineistan - The Liquid War

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x454646

[Dover]

4. dupe post..n/t