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

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

Government Assessment of 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

[NYC_SKP]

1. Sadly, we would be energy independent by now.

Except for the last four presidents.

Carter was the last one to take it seriously.

And it will be the end of us, or the near end.

We are inextricably fucked because we turned a blind eye to the importance of developing sustainable energy policies.

[Dover]

It 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 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.

[NYC_SKP]

3. Yes, to many it is "terrorism" to tamper with our oil dependent way of life.

Very little difference between the Spanish bringing Christianity to South Americans and our bringing Democracy to the region, eh?

[Dover]

4. Pipelineistan

This is an interesting series of articles done by Pepe Escobar about what he calls
the "Liquid War".

Back in March, Pepe Escobar, that itchy, edgy global reporter for one of my favorite online publications, Asia Times, began laying out the great, ongoing energy struggle across Eurasia, or what he likes to call Pipelineistan for its web of oil and natural gas pipelines. In his first report, he dealt with the embattled energy corridor (and a key pipeline) that runs from the Caspian Sea to Europe through Georgia and Turkey – and the Great Game of business, diplomacy, and proxy war between Russia and the U.S. that has gone with it.

Now, in the second of what will be periodic “postcards” from the energy heartlands of the planet, he plunges eastward into tumultuous Central and South Asia and the great devolving battleground that, in Washington, now goes by the neologism of Af-Pak (for the Afghanistan-Pakistan theater of operations). There, the skies are filled with planes and unmanned aerial drones, and civilians as well as combatants die every day in increasing numbers as ever more frequent attacks and expanding conflicts make daily headlines, while, in Afghanistan, Washington continues to build new military bases and ready itself to send in reinforcements.

Those are, of course, the front-page stories. Energy, especially in the form of oil and natural gas, fuels everything from civilization to its various discontents and means of destruction, and yet it remains largely on the business pages of our papers. Even in a time of relatively depressed oil and gas prices, energy runs like an undercurrent just beneath global headlines...cont'd


http://original.antiwar.com/engelhardt/2009/05/12/pipelineistan-goes-af-pak/



:eyes: - Hard, relevant news sure has a challenge competing with the likes of "Rosie" stories here on DU, eh?

[Dover]

2. dupe..n/t