|
Despite
the United States' looming threat of sanctions against Iran, owing
to its nuclear ambitions and America's nuclear energy carrot to
India which may be extended to Pakistan some time later, the two
key South Asian neighbours still seem determined to go ahead with
the long-term gas purchase agreement with Iran.
The
7.4-billion dollar Iran-India-Pakistan (IPI) natural gas pipeline
project is seen as a vital energy link for the South Asian economies.
In her last visit to South Asia in March and subsequent diplomatic
interactions, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her team have
been telling India and Pakistan that any act which gave Iran a long-term
role in international politics and offered monetary benefits would
invoke American disapproval. The US has been using a variety of
tactics to convey its displeasure not only to Pakistan and India
but also to Iran. Washington is also perturbed over India's import
of liquid gas worth 22 billion dollars from Iran.
In
March, Dr Rice reportedly urged Islamabad to consider redirecting
the pipeline to Qatar or the Central Asian Republic of Turkmenistan
in order to bypass Iran. She also reportedly warned Pakistani Foreign
Minister Khurshid Kasuri that the pipeline project could be in violation
of the US, Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996, which prohibits
investments in the Iranian oil sector of over 22 million dollars.
Some
observers believe that if the pipeline deal goes through, the US
could impose sanctions on Indian companies involved in the project.
Pakistan
and India have already gone into the details of the project after
forming a joint working group headed by their oil ministry secretaries
to assess the technical, financial, and legal aspects of the proposed
4 billion dollar Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline.
After the Islamabad meeting of the joint working group (JWG)
in September, Pakistan and India are in the phase of conducting
independent third party 'certification' of the hydrocarbon reserve
in South Pars allocated by Iran to a gas pipeline for South Asia.
Iran
has expressed its readiness to designate phase 9, 10, 15, 16, 17
and 18 of the South Pars gas field for the IPI project. Tehran claims
that its gas reserves - to the tune of 14 trillion cubic feet -
are enough to meet its export demands. Iran has the world's second
largest gas reserves after Russia, but they have yet to be independently
certified.
There are various international companies such as DNM, Ryder Scott,
Schlumberger, PGS etc which have the expertise to carry out hydrocarbon
reserve certification which involves geological, reservoir capacity
and engineering aspects.
India
and Iran have jointly indicated around 140-150 million standard
cubic meters per day of gas but the final decision to firm up quantities
is expected in the next JWG meeting in November.
Pakistan has indicated it would need 30 million standard
cubic meters per day (mmscmd) of gas during 2010-11 which would
go up to 60-70 mmscmd in 2014-15, while India has stated a minimum
requirement of 90 mmscmd of gas.
Islamabad
and New Delhi have also agreed to finalise the tripartite framework
agreement on the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline. In the mid-November
meeting scheduled for New Delhi, the Indian side will provide drafts
of the tripartite agreement. The second meeting of JWG concluded
with the production of a joint statement, which noted that the Iranian
side had provided the technical portion of the pre-feasibility report
for the project.
Both the sides examined in detail the various technical,
financial, commercial and legal aspects of the project. The JWG
discussed the gas reserve certification and allocation, gas quality,
system configuration and project structure besides other issues
like pipeline routing, delivery points, transportation tariff, transit
fee and operating costs and pipeline security.
"The IPI pipeline project should be a safe and secure
world class project," said the joint statement. India and Pakistan
agreed to "adopt the best international practices and standards."
At the same time, the joint working group also agreed to adopt international
standards relating to health, safety and the environment in the
implementation of the project.
After the finalisation of the tripartite agreement, the work
on the project would begin by June 2005 while the gas supply may
resume by 2010, according to Pakistani Petroleum Secretary Ahmad
Waqar. The responsibility for the security of the pipeline would
be on the Pakistan Army, and Islamabad would charge an additional
100 million rupees for providing this facility. A decision may be
reached on the entry point of the pipeline into Pakistan from Iran
in the next JWG meeting in New Delhi.
In yet another forward move on the project despite US opposition,
the Pakistan side will be soon appointing its financial advisory
consortium for the project while the Indians have already appointed
an international company, M/s Ernst & Young, as financial consultants
and initiated action to appoint technical and legal consultants
who would support the financial consultant.
The Pakistani government has also decided to join the Energy
Charter Treaty as an observer while the Indian proposal for the
same is under process of approval by the body concerned.
Pakistani Petroleum Minister Amanullah Jadoon said: "We
welcome India in the project and sincerely hope that the project
would be seen as the most credible CBM [confidence-building measure]
between the two countries."
India has so far been hesitant to join the project because
of its volatile relations with Pakistan, against which it has fought
three wars since 1947.
The pipeline would extend over 2,758 kilometers across southwest
Asia, including 755km of Pakistani territory. The international
community has also shown growing interest in the Iran-Pakistan-India
pipeline, with the World Bank and Japan's Sumitomo Mitsui Banking
Corporation expressing their willingness to finance the project.
It is most likely that the proposed multi-billion-dollar project
will become a reality by 2010.
To this effect, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between
Iran and India in 1993 for a 4-billion-dollar pipeline from Iran's
South Pars field to India, through Pakistani territory.
Subsequently, Pakistan offered security guarantees for the pipeline,
vowing that gas flow will not be "switched off" even during
periods of Indo-Pak tensions or hostilities.
On a very positive note and taking advantage of US isolation in
the project, the Russian firm Gazprom is sending a high-level delegation
to Pakistan early next month, attempting to lead a consortium for
the construction of the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline. Gazprom
Chairman Alexey Miller Borisovich will lead the delegation to Islamabad
on October 6 to hold talks. Gazprom is the world's largest gas company
with an over 20 per cent share in global gas production. The Gazprom
chairman had to cancel his last visit to Pakistan in 2000 at the
eleventh hour owing to strong opposition from India where President
Vladimir Putin was paying an official visit at the time.
Gazprom, along with TotalFinaelf of France and Malaysian Petronas,
is a major shareholder in the Iranian South Pars field, from where
Iran would supply gas to Pakistan and India through the multi-billion
dollar trans-national pipeline.
The Russian energy giant has already held numerous rounds of talks
with authorities in Iran and India to lead or at least become an
active player in the consortium to lay the gas pipeline from Iran
to India through Pakistan. Indian companies like Indian Oil Company
(IOC) and GAIL are also expected to join the consortium.
Besides the pipeline, Pakistan is also interested in involving the
Russian firm in other oil and gas sectors, including petrochemical
and other upstream and downstream activities. Gazprom is part of
at least six of the 12 trans-national pipelines which Pakistan and
India have selected as models for detailed engineering, pricing,
transit fee and legal issues.
Iran and India are also holding talks over awarding Indian companies
exploration rights for the Jofeir oil field and the Yadavaran gas
field in Khuzestan province.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh recently said, "China
is ahead of us in planning for its energy security - India can no
longer be complacent." India, as the world's number six energy
consumer, is in a desperate situation compared to its peers. For
example, oil imports account for two-thirds of India's oil consumption
while China imports one-third of its crude oil consumption. Furthermore,
China's proven oil reserves stand at 18 billion barrels, compared
to five billion barrels in India. The Indian-owned Oil and Natural
Gas Company (ONGC) has invested 3.5 billion dollars in overseas
exploration since 2000 while the Chinese-owned China National Petroleum
Corporation (CNPC) has made overseas investments of an estimated
40 billion dollars. Indian policymakers have initiated numerous
policies to address India's growing energy needs. For example, India
is pushing for the creation of 15-45 days of emergency reserves
in Rajkot, Mangalore and Vishakapatnam. India is also diversifying
beyond oil to access other energy resources such as nuclear power,
coal, natural gas and renewable energy resources as well as stepping
up exploration activities within its borders. Nevertheless, for
the short to medium term, India will have to rely on an increasing
amount of imported oil and gas to meet its energy needs.
At the beginning of 2005, India also completed a 40-billion-dollar
deal with Iran to import 7.5 million tons of liquefied natural gas
annually over a 25-year period as well as obtaining stakes in the
development of Iran's largest onshore oilfield, Yadavaran, as wellas
the Jufeir oilfield. The Yahavaran oilfield is a Sino-Indian-Iranian
collaboration with India holding a 20 per cent stake, China a 50
per cent stake and Iran 30 per cent. In exchange for Iranian gas,
India is investing in Iran's ports and energy infrastructure. Iran
and India have agreed to jointly develop the Iranian port at Chabahar
as well as the road linking the port to Afghanistan and Central
Asia, and grant India exclusive rights to the port.
Cooperation in the energy arena is mirroring relations in other
arenas including trade and military cooperation. Bilateral exchanges
of defence and intelligence officials are routine and in 2003 both
states conducted joint naval exercises. These developments have
not only concerned India's traditional adversaries, China and Pakistan,
but also its newly found allies, Israel and the US, who fear that
military technology supplied to India could be diverted to Iran.
In an interview, Manmohan Singh told the Financial Times that "energy
security is second only in our scheme of things to food security."
Thus India's dependence upon secure oil and gas supplies represents
a vital national interest, as manifested in its energy firms' quest
for equity holdings in Russian, Angolan, Sudanese, Venezuelan, and,
most of all, Iranian energy fields, or for major deals with states
like Iran. Accordingly, in November 2004, India's state-run oil
corporation announced a 3 billion dollar deal with Iran's Petropars.
At the December 3-4, 2004, summit with Russia, India announced a
3 billion dollar Indian investment in the Sakhalin-3 oil field and
the joint Russian-Kazakh Kurmangazy oil field in the Caspian. India's
Energy Minister, Mani Shankar Aiyar has stated that, "what
I am talking about is the strategic alliance with Russia in energy
security, which is becoming for India at least as important as our
national security."
There is no denying the fact that India's quest for energy
is and would become an increasingly more assertive driving factor
in its foreign policy not only in its relations with Pakistan and
Iran but also with the Middle East and Central Asia and Caspian
countries. The influence has mounted to such a degree that India
has agreed to have the national oil and gas company ONGC enter what
was a transparent dummy bid for the remnants of Yukos in Russia.
Presumably, this favour will lead to enhanced access to Russian
energy and heightened cooperation with Russian energy firms.
This strong Indian drive results from the realisation of its heightening
economic vulnerabilities and the inherent dilemmas of the economic
dimension of its ties with the United States. Many policy makers
in India believe that New Delhi should balance its dependence upon
Iranian and Russian energy with its need for US support.
Completion of these oil and gas deals with Iran would also enhance
the already positive ties between New Delhi and Tehran and create
a stronger community of interest between those two governments.
But India's new drive for secure sources of energy in Central Asia
and around the globe is based not only on its own needs but also
on fears that China might be cornering the remaining markets that
are not already captured. This India cannot allow if it is to be
able to compete with China. India and China look to Central Asia
for reasons of internal security against Islamic extremism, energy
access, economic opportunities, and defence against foreign threats.
Stability in the energy market assumes a stable Middle East, a highly
questionable assumption. If problems in the Middle East, in the
bilateral Sino-Indian relationship, or with the United States preclude
the Middle Eastern option, Indo-Chinese rivalry over Central Asia
will grow. To a significant degree, the outcome of their current
policies in Central Asia depends on factors beyond either of these
states' control. In other words, the Indo-Chinese competition for
energy sources that we now see taking shape will interact profoundly
with local developments in Central Asia and no less profoundly shape
the future politics and economics of both Central Asia, and Asia
in general.
Analysts believe that Tehran has embarked on a 'good neighbour'
campaign designed to highlight its role as a potential catalyst
for peace and prosperity in the Caucasus and Central Asia. Even
in nuclear programme-related talks with the European nations, energy
has served as Khatami's calling card.
But on the other hand, as the EU3 (Britain, France, Germany) at
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) push for sending the
case of Iran's covert enrichment of nuclear fuel to the UN Security
Council, Tehran has threatened to get out of the Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT), restart enrichment of uranium, and use its oil to
line up other states behind it.
The EU and its member-states have initiated energy investment and
cooperation with Iran without regard to U.S.-imposed restraints
on trade. There is modest progress, motivated mainly by Teheran
rather than by the EU, in developing the project to take Iranian
natural gas into Pakistan and across Pakistan into India. Of course,
the United States would not allow its companies and banks to participate
and similar conditions would apply to the British multinationals
leaving great room for Russian, Chinese, Brazilian and other competitors
in the world to be part of the consortium.
The pipeline will create a scenario for complex interdependence
in a volatile region with Indian influence extending beyond Iran
on one end and to the Caspian and Qatar on the other. The massive
investment, according to some estimates, may soar to 7.4 billion
dollars, and would surely affect foreign policies of all the primary
players in the project.
However, the big power status cannot come easy. India will have
to sacrifice something to get the best of both worlds. Doubtlessly,
India gave priority to its new strategic relationship with Washington
in the IAEA, voting over the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline anda proposed
LNG import deal, of which it would have been the ultimate beneficiary.
In a knee-jerk reaction, Iran has put India on notice over her controversial
vote at the IAEA governing board meeting, saying that its offer
to supply gas to New Delhi hinged on future behaviour.
Certain circles believe that the political, diplomatic and even
commodity price for LNG import would soar for India to uncomfortable
levels.
Meanwhile, the United States has termed India's vote in favour of
an IAEA resolution on Iran's controversial nuclear programme "very
significant."
The Indian newspapers suggest that her position on the Iranian nuclear
question at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) appears
to have been one of the key conditions to the successful negotiation
of the India-U.S. nuclear deal on July 19.
The detailed transcript of the hearing of the House International
Relations Committee (HIRC) on September 8, eleven days before the
crucial IAEA Board of Governors (BoG) meeting, suggests this.
Notwithstanding the alleged remarks by the Indian External Affairs
Minister, Natwar Singh, in Tehran in early September - which the
Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) proceededto deny - the India-US
nuclear deal seems to have been clinched only after India gave,
inter alia, a "reciprocal" assurance - if not an absolute
commitment - of its support at the IAEA on the Iran issue. The United
States had categorically told India that it would not be willing
to enter into an agreement without a visible and verifiable set
of commitments from the Indian government.
On the other hand, Iran cannot afford to punish the 22 pro-IAEA
countries, as oil accounts for 80 per cent of Iran 's export earnings.
Tehran's threats, therefore, may be a negotiating ploy meant to
force more countries to see things its way in the current fracas
over Iran's apparent violation of NPT provisions.
Islamabad has not bent backwards with regard to the gas pipeline
demand from Washington for a variety of factors, the topmost being
Iran's clear warning of not allowing the Qatar pipeline project
which would pass through its territorial waters if the IPI did not
go ahead smoothly. Moreover, given the scant improvement in Afghanistan's
security situation, the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan pipeline
still remains a distant dream. For Pakistan, the IPI project offers
a rare chance to gain due respect for its sovereignty and importance
in the region. Not only would the Indian economy be greatly dependent
on a peaceful situation in Pakistan but the business lobby would
gain greater influence on New Delhi's approach towards Islamabad.
|