Saud- United Arab Emirates split; Saudi Arabia's intransigence; battle for Aleppo

The article reprinted here is especially interesting for this quotation:

 "It's the only game in town," says Yousef Al Otaiba, the United Arab Emirates' ambassador to Washington, of Kerry's diplomatic effort. "I don't see any other strategy for now."

The quotation suggests a split in the Gulf Cooperation Council ranks. I doubt hat Saudi Arabia agrees with a Kerry's cease fire efforts.

Will the United Arab Emirates use United States' mercenaries to train Syrian Sunni fighters in its name? The United Arab Emirates likely does't have the capability to train anyone on anything without the United States' mercenary help.

The article could do without the neoconic carping on the president’s “past mistakes in Syria.”  No sensible alternatives have been proposed, given Congressional Republicans’ recalcitrance. But blaming congressional Republicans isn’t a neoconic thing to do and the article's author is neoconic.

The basic problem in Syria is that the Saudi will not give up their billion dollar support for Salafi Jihadist fighters, their main hope of establishing a Wahhabist state in Syria (a horror for the Syrian people); nor their determination to keep Iran from transporting oil to Europe through Syria. 

The United States Congress is also unwilling to give up its decades-long effort to bottle up Iranian oil, at Saud bidding.  The president does not share that fading illusion and still must block the IP Pipeline in spite of  harming relations with Pakistan more.

A Pivotal Moment in a Tangled War

By David Ignatius

February 19, 2016

WASHINGTON -- Blaming President Obama for his past mistakes in Syria may be satisfying, and is largely deserved, but it's not a policy. This is the most complicated battlefield the world has seen in decades, and the next moves by the U.S. and its allies have to be deliberate, and carefully considered.

     The U.S. should move forward with the cease-fire process begun by Secretary of State John Kerry a week ago in Munich. Yes, it's a long shot, and woefully dependent on Russian "goodwill." But it offers a chance to reduce the suffering of the Syrian people and save lives, and it should be pursued awhile longer. If diplomacy fails, what comes next will be much worse for everyone.

     "It's the only game in town," says Yousef Al Otaiba, the United Arab Emirates' ambassador to Washington, of Kerry's diplomatic effort. "I don't see any other strategy for now."

     If Russia is sabotaging cease-fire hopes by continuing to bomb Syrian civilians, then the U.S. and its allies should focus international indignation on Moscow. Yes, Kerry may have been overly optimistic in making the Munich deal, but the Russians signed it -- and they should be held accountable if it fails.

     In the Syrian nightmare, even small steps forward are notable. So this week's move to send relief to five besieged areas around Damascus shouldn't be dismissed. This humanitarian assistance was part of the Munich agreement, and U.S. officials say the aid convoys moved into some of the towns on Wednesday. It's a fragile, first step toward de-escalation, but it's a positive sign.

     The "cessation of hostilities" that Kerry negotiated on paper was supposed to begin Friday, but it won't. That's partly because the Russians have continued their assaults on rebel areas. It's also partly because the opposition hasn't yet signaled clearly that it's willing to stand down. Given the opposition's weakness, this reluctance to embrace a truce is understandable, but it's wrong. Any chance to reduce violence and create space for political discussion should be seized.

     The battlefield around Aleppo is a mess -- a crosshatch of different combatants and foreign forces. Within a small area are Syrian regime forces backed by Russia and Iran; Kurdish rebel forces backed by the U.S.; Turkish forces that are shelling the U.S.-backed Kurds; Arab rebel fighters supported by the CIA and Saudi intelligence; Jabhat al-Nusra fighters allied with al-Qaeda; and Islamic State fighters, who want to kill all of the above.

     A full cease-fire in this landscape is impossible right now -- and not just because Kerry has been too trusting of the Russians. The combatants have to sort themselves out. Rebels will vote with their feet whether to ally with Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State. Saudi Arabia and other Arab patrons will have to lean hard on "moderate" rebels to pull them toward the cease-fire group and away from the terrorists.

     If the Russians keep bombing the rebels around Aleppo, willy-nilly, that will sabotage any hope of a truce. Here again, blame Moscow if it blocks de-escalation.

     Going forward, the U.S. needs more military leverage to match Russia. That may be coming, with Saudi Arabia and the UAE offering to send special forces into Syria, under overall U.S. command. Details are still being discussed, but the UAE appears willing to train Sunni fighters inside Syria -- helping to fill a hole in U.S. strategy. These forces might be part of an eventual strike against Raqqa, the Islamic State's self-proclaimed capital in eastern Syria.

     The U.S. campaign against the Islamic State continues, mostly invisibly. The key U.S. allies have been fighters from the Syrian Kurdish group known as the YPG, which has now been rebranded as the "Syrian Democratic Forces." This week, about 6,000 fighters moved to attack al-Shaddadi, a town about 50 miles east of Raqqa. This force included about 2,500 Arabs. Overall, the SDF umbrella group now numbers about 40,000, of which 7,000 are Arabs.

     The Syrian Kurds have been the toughest and most effective fighters in this conflict. Their success seems to have panicked Turkey, which claims the Syrian Kurds are terrorists. The Turks have been shelling YPG positions in northwest Syria -- even as these fighters (with quiet U.S. support) have been attacking Islamic State positions near Aleppo. What a crazy war -- with a NATO member (Turkey) attacking America's best allies in Syria (the Kurds)!

     The Syrian conflict is at a critical, delicate moment. A miscalculation by Russia or Turkey could be catastrophic. It's never too late for the U.S. to do the right thing -- which is to build, carefully, the political and military framework for a new Syria.

(c) 2016, Washington Post Writers Group

IP Pipeline so far stopped by US: the latest contradictory news

In The last month there has seen a string of contradictory news stories abbot whether the Iran-Pakistan Pipeline (dubbed by some "the Peace Pipeline") would be built.

In the story below, Minister for Petroleum and Natural Resources Shahid Khaqan Abbasi told the Pakistan House of Parliament flatly that the Pipeline would not be completed until the US lifts sanctions on doing business with Iran.

The IP Pipeline is vital to Pakistan's economy and important to both India and China, so the US sanctions against Iran are hurting more folks that Iranians.


How long will Pakistan defer to the US?  How long can the sanctions last?  Which nation are they mainly aimed at?

Iran is merely a pawn in the continuation of the Great Game for control of Central Asia, which in the 19 Century occupied England and Russia.

In this round of competitions, the competitors are the US and China, with Russia and the Turkic-Speaking nations playing a secondary role.

Being The Imperial Power of the World, as the US is, ain't easy.  China would oust the US and has the advantage Russia had in the 19th Century of being on the ground in Central Asia.  The US, like England in the 19th Century, controls the sea and also, so far, controls the sky. Control of the sky is where the battle will be won, by whom I cannot say.

Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline after lifting of sanctions: NA told
Monday, 24 February 2014 21:05
Posted by Imaduddin

ISLAMABAD: The National Assembly was informed on Monday that Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline would be completed after lifting of international sanctions against Iran.
Answering a question during Question-Hour, Minister for Petroleum and Natural Resources Shahid Khaqan Abbasi told the House that the pipeline could not be completed until the sanctions against Iran were lifted. 

He said the agreement for Iran-Pakistan pipeline was signed in 2009, but the work on the project inside Pakistan could not be started. The design for the project was complete and bids were also floated but nobody participated. 

"The main reason for the delay in executing the project is imposition of sanctions against Iran and since the situation continues, purchase of gas from Iran was not possible," he explained in response to a supplementary question.
He said the matter was directly linked to the sanctions and once the same were lifted the project would be completed within 30 to 36 months. [Emphasis added.]

Copyright APP (Associated Press of Pakistan), 2014

Pakistan House of Parliament:

The US,Chevron,China,and Central Asia

Busy, busy, busy, our State Department is, to keep Iran’s natural gas bottled up.  

I wonder how the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India Pipeline (TAPI), as opposed to the Iran-Pakistan Pipeline (IP Pipeline) which will also feed India and China, figures into our negotiations for Peace in Iran.  US oil interests will not be involved in the IP Pipeline; and the US promotes TAPI vigorously  and threatens Pakistan with sanctions if it fulfills ins contract with iran to construct the IP  Pipeline.     

How much weight do the oil companies' interest figure into our negotiations with Iran?  The US has done its best to block Iranian oil exports since the Islamic Republic overthrew the Sash and nationalized natural resources.  Opening the flow of oil and gas from Iran to the world  should be a major part of our negotiations with Iran over it’s suspected but not proved desire to develop the Bomb.  Is it?

Liberals did their best to discover Cheney’s conversations with energy companies when he met in secret with them as Bushco’s energy policies were developed, even applying to the federal courts for aid.  Shouldn’t Liberals make the same demands of the Obama administration?  I Shouldn't we know of conversations with oil interests about matters that concern Peace with Iran?think we should. I’m not a powerful lobbying entity, but this is a subject I will address to my congresspersons.  Will you, too?

If the report in the PakTribune, below, is accurate, why is it that a private company is able to pay 10 Billion Dollars to develop the TTAPI Pipeline, when Pakistan and India seem unable to do it themselves?  I favor modifying our tax code.  Radical Republicans claim we don't have enough money to support our poor, and an oil company has, if the report is accurate, money to burn.  Something is wrong here.  Are we concerned that oil companies will move to Dubai to avoid US taxation, as Cheney has done with his companies?  Does the UN need taxing power, just as the US developed the power to regulate powerful railroads when the individual States lacked the power?  Is the analogy good?

The TAPI pipeline is good news for the Taliban and the Balochistan Resistance Movement, since security of the pipeline is a major concern and their power to disrupt it is great.  I’m pleased with prospect of the Balochistan Resistance Movement’s possible gain in power, since the Balochi are treated unfairly by Pakistan and Iran.  I’m not pleased with the Taliban’s.

Roadblocks remain to TAPI pipeline construction - Oil & Gas Journal

Note:  Wikipedia, which frequently reports on the trustworthiness of news outlets, has no report on the PakTribune's trustworthiness, so I’m cautious about the authenticity of the report below.  Stay tuned.  I’ll see if the story is picked up by other news outlets.

US pushes Chevron's bid for TAPI pipeline project12 November, 2013

ISLAMABAD: The United States may press Pakistan to award the multi-billion-dollar contract for the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan and India (TAPI) gas pipeline project to pipeline to US energy giant Chevron. 

"During the energy group meeting, the issue relating to awarding TAPI gas pipeline contract to Chevron will come under discussion," sources said, adding that representatives of the US State Department and Chevron had also visited India for the same purpose. 

Chevron and Exxon Mobil, renowned oil and gas companies with vast experience in the energy sector, have expressed interest to be the consortium leaders for the project, sources say. All participating countries have signed Gas Sales Purchase Agreement (GSPA) with Turkmenistan to import gas under TAPI gas pipeline project. 

Pakistan is keen to see Chevron undertake work on the pipeline and sources stress there is a strong possibility that the US energy giant will be selected as consortium leader to finance, design and build the pipeline. 

On its part, Chevron has sought exploration rights in Turkmenistan as well as contracts in response to financing and running the project. However, Turkmenistan has offered exploration rights for offshore fields and asked Chevron to swap gas found in these fields for onshore ones and export it to Afghanistan, Pakistan and India under the TAPI project. Turkmenistan does not allow foreign companies to search for hydrocarbons on onshore fields. 

The Asian Development Bank (ADB), hired as an advisor to help generate funds for the project, has already warned that the TAPI gas pipeline project cost may exceed $10 billion against earlier estimates of $7.5 billion due to delays in implementation of the project. 

The pipeline will pass through war-torn Afghanistan, which has assured Pakistan and other participating countries of providing adequate security for the pipeline. 

Under the TAPI project, Pakistan and India will get 1.365 billion cubic feet of gas per day (bcfd) each from Turkmenistan, and Afghanistan will get 0.5 bcfd. 

Turkmenistan will export natural gas through the 1,800 kilometer pipeline that will reach India after passing through Afghanistan and Pakistan.

TAPI and Turkmenistan’s Natural Gas | GeoCurrents

 Note that TAPI has no proposal for supplying gas to China, while he IP Pipeline passes right by Gwadar, the deep water port China is spending millions to develop right on the Iranian Iranian border with Pakistan.

China Strings Pearls While US Kills Terrorists | Culture of Life News

Business Recorder

巴基斯坦将瓜德尔港经营权转交中国公司-观察者网

Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline | emptywheel

Chinese workers in Gwadar

For more on the IP Pipeline, see this blog here and here.

For more on Balochistan see Mansouled Fiery Islands, here and here.

A new wrinkle in exporting Iran's Pars gas fied

Iran's Pars natural gas field is the largest in the world.


International sanctions and the U.S. Fifth Fleet, stationed in the Persian Gulf  has blocked export of gas from the Pars field.

Iran and Pakistan signed a accord for a pipeline through Pakistan through which to sell the gas.  The pipeline could reach Indian markets and even China.

Wikipedia, Chinese Guandar Port in Pakistan.

The U.S. has threatened sanctions agains Pakistan if it participates in the pipeline  and conflicting stories appear in Pakistani and Iranian news papers about the progress of the pipeline.  It's future seems in doubt.

Todays's news account in Fars, an Iranian news outlet, describes an alternate way for Iran to get it's gas out.

We'll see how this one develops.

Sat Nov 02, 2013 3:33

Iran, Oman in Talks over Gas Deal

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian and Omani experts are discussing the contents of a deal on the supply of Iran’s gas to Oman, an official announced on Saturday, stressing that Tehran is already prepared to ink the final contract. 

“Exporting gas to Oman is being pursued seriously and experts of the two sides are discussing contents of the deal,” Managing-Director of the National Iranian Gas Company (NIGC) Hamid Reza Araqi told FNA. 

“Yet, we are right now ready to sign the contract," he said, and added, "As prescribed by the Iranian oil minister, the deal will be endorsed by the Iranian and Omani oil ministers, and we hope this to happen soon.” 

Araqi explained that once the deal is signed, Tehran and Masqat will need 2.5 to 3 years to build the infrastructures needed for the supply of Iran’s gas to Oman. 

In relevant remarks in September, Araqi said that the preliminary studies are underway to finalize a gas contract with Oman. 

He said that the NIGC was studying different aspects of the issue, including economic assessment of the contract and a report on the possible routes. 

He stated implementation of gas contracts requires preliminary expert studies which takes time. 

After several years, reaching agreement on gas price is a breakthrough, NIGC managing director said, adding the two countries have many common grounds for boosting cooperation, including feeding Oman’s LNG units with gas.  

Iran’s Oil Minister Bijan Namdar Zanganeh and his Omani counterpart signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in August to accelerate finalizing a gas contract between the two sides. 

The Islamic Republic of Iran as the largest owner of gas reserves in the world is the most secure and most economic source of gas exports to the neighboring countries.

For a report from Port Technology International on Oman's ports, see

$645 million Omani port expansions making progress
09 Mar 2011 - Port Planning

The Port of Salalah is to be developed within the $645 million expansion plan Omani ports.
US$645 million Omani port expansion projects progressing
Ports of Salalah, Sohar and Sultanate of Oman under development 

Omani port expansions are seeing significant progress, as multi-billion dollar investment in port operations across the Middle East continue to highlight the key role of the shipping industry for regional trade. 

The US$645 million invested in Oman's port expansion projects include the strategically positioned Sultanate of Oman, and the Ports of Salalah and Sohar

“The billion-dollar expansion plan for Oman’s seaports, particularly in Salalah and Sohar, is continuing unabated as part of its strategy to further develop a competitive and efficient industrial sector and also ensure the security of its essential food commodities,” said Chris Hayman, Chairman of Seatrade.
Up to a billion dollars has been committed to the development of Oman’s new maritime ports and the expansion of existing gateways. 

Construction work on the Port of Salalah is expected to begin by the end of March, with the first phase of the project estimated to cost around $196 million, part of the overall $645-million expansion plan. This will increase its capacity to 40 million tonnes of dry-bulk commodities and five million tonnes of liquid products each year. 

Expansion work on the Port of Sohar is also progressing, with two key projects including the development of a major deepwater jetty and a dry bulk terminal. 

Construction of the new $250-million jetty is already well underway, with completion set for the second half of 2011. Once finished, Sohar will be one of just a handful of ports worldwide with such deepwater capability, allowing for the docking of new generation super-scale ore carriers. 

The second project, the new dry bulk and aggregates terminal, is scheduled for completion in the first quarter of 2012. It is expected to encourage the growth of quarrying and mining activities in Oman’s Batinah region, further opening it up as a platform for foreign commodities traders to access the markets of the Gulf and wider Middle East. 

An upgrade project is also underway for Oman’s Duqm Port, with new smaller-scale ports planned for Shinas in the north and Hallaniyat Islands in the south.

For an Indian view of Oman's ports, see here.

Omaan's deep wager ports:

It seems seems likely that the IP Pipeline will be built, and US drone strikes in Pakistan will end

It seems more and more likely that the natural gas pipeline from the Iranian Pars natural gas field will by completed on time by the end of 1014.  The Pars natural gas field is the largest in the world.

Proposed IP Pipeline

Iranian processing plan on the Persian Gulf

The South Pars field

It also seems more and pore likely that the US drone strikes on Pakistan territory will end, and that the US will not impose throated sanctions on Pakistan for cooperating with Iran on the pipeline.

Imagine a drone over Aina Haina

The news story below also appears in the Wall Street Journal.

From The Associated Press of Pakistan

Latest News

Pakistan to proceed with Iran gas pipeline: Nawaz Sharif NEW YORK, Sept 26 (APP): Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has said that Pakistan will proceed with a plan to build a gas pipeline from Iran, despite objections from the United States, and that he plans to raise the issue of American drone strikes in his speech to the United Nations General Assembly. In an interview in New York with The Wall Street Journal, Nawaz Sharif  also spelled out the conditions that Pakistani Taliban would have to accept if his government proceeded with a peace deal with the militant group, demanding that they lay down arms and recognize Pakistan’s constitution. At the same time, he voiced fears that continued US drone attacks would wreck his policy to negotiate with the Pakistani Taliban. Nawaz Sharif hoped to use his visit to the U.N. headquarters in New York for a meeting with Manmohan Singh, the prime minister of India. He said he hoped to restart the peace process with India that he had pursued when he was last in office, in the late 1990s. In the interview Wednesday, Nawaz Sharif acknowledged frictions with the US but said he believed that the issues could be overcome. “President Obama was very kind to call me up immediately after my election and express his desire to work with Pakistan. I also want to work with the United States of America,” he said.

The White House said Thursday that President Barack Obama and Nawaz Sharif will meet on October 23 at the White House, part of what officials said was a broader effort to deepen ties.

Pakistan, the newspaper noted,  has said it wants the US to open its markets to Pakistani products, among other things, while the Obama administration has urged Pakistan to do more to police border territory where Afghan Taliban and al Qaeda militants flourish.  Nawaz Sharif met Iranian President Hasan Rouhani on the sidelines of  the UN General Assembly on Tuesday, where the issue of the pipeline was discussed, in a meeting described as warm by the Pakistani side.  “Pakistan needs gas very badly,” said Nawaz Sharif,” was quoted as saying in the Journal. “We have to run our power plants. We need gas for them. There is an acute shortage of gas in Pakistan, so we have to import gas from somewhere.”

An inadequate supply of gas, used to produce electricity, is one of  the main reasons for the crippling shortage of power in Pakistan.

Nawaz Sharif said Pakistan had a contractual obligation to go ahead with the agreement, or face penalties from Iran of $3 million a day if it is not completed by the end of next year. He said that in Islamabad’s legal opinion, the pipeline wouldn’t trigger the sanctions.

He said that Pakistan would proceed “unless you [the US] give us the gas, or the $3 million a day.”

In his speech on Friday at the U.N., Sharif said he planned to say that American drone strikes in his country were illegal, as they breached Pakistan’s territorial sovereignty. He said that weapon was also counterproductive as it was producing more “terrorists.”

“The more the drones, the more the terrorists get multiplied. You kill one man, his sons, his father, his brothers, they become terrorists. So this is something that is not helpful.”

Nawaz Sharif said he was particularly concerned that drone strikes now could derail his offer of peace talks to the Pakistani Taliban, who operate separately from the Afghan Taliban. The militant group has demanded that Islamabad stop the drone strikes before negotiations begin.

“Once the talks start, then of course, we consider them [drones] as something that has the ability to break the talks, which must be avoided at all costs,” he added. Islamabad offered to open dialogue with the Pakistani Taliban following a conference with all the other parliamentary parties earlier this month.

“They will have to renounce terrorism,” said Nawaz Sharif. “They [Pakistani Taliban] will have to abide by the Constitution of Pakistan.”

“It’s been often said by them that they don’t recognize the constitution of the country,” he said. “But the constitution has to be recognized. If we agree on addressing this terrorism, they will have to be disarmed, lay down their arms.”

Bomb Iran? And, Pakistan and Germany, too. The list grows.

The ostensible US interest is that the pipeline relieves economic pressure on Iran at a time when we are trying to compel it to give up the construction of an Atomic Bomb.

Another possible interest is that such a pipeline permits the transfer of significane amounts of energy from the Middle East to the Far East free from the supervision of any U.S.Warship.  

The IP Pipeline (Iran-Pakistan Pipeline), or sometimes IPI, if India is included, originates in the South Iranian Pars Gas field, together with the Qatar North Field the largest in the world.

The general area.  

Detail, showing the gas field, and

how it is divided between

Iran and Qatar.

As every Texan knows, oil and gas, in English Common Law, is treated as if it were a wild deer.  It belongs to whomever captures it first.  Don't know how Muslim law deals with that, and don't know how Iran and Qatar decide how much of the fungible gas each gets to take.  There's lots of it down thar, so perhaps the issue hasn't arisen.

Iran pipes it over to Assaluyeh in Iran,

where it is proposed to be piped to goNawabshah, in the Sindh province in southern Pakistan, according to NPR.

Random images of Nawabshah:

Sinndh, the southern province of Pakistan, and where Nawabshah is located.

It is a civilized city:  it has football teams:

Thee pipeline is sold as a job-creator for Sindh  and Baluchistan, where work is badly needed. . . .

This young man posted under his facebook picture:  "i wanted a job sir plz give me i want to need a job".  

More on much-abused Balochi and their potential threat to the IP Pipeline an also to Turkmenistan's proposed pipeline to India, both of which must cross Balochi territory, in a later post.

For information on the history of the U.S. efforts to keep Iran from developing its natural gas resources on South Pars, see The Energy Library.  The history will give you some idea of Obama's task as he tries to negotiate a reasonable agreement with Iran.

The modern history of the relationship between the United States and Iran began in 1953, when President Dwight Eisenhower's CIA organized a coup to depose the duly-elected prime minister of Iran.  The US has tried to destroy Iran's independence ever since.  Obama is bucking a long history.  It is a disgraceful history.  It is one that should be bucked.  I wish our President well.  See here, for example.

For an image of a half-nude male Sindhi -- very rare. . .

Present status of the Iran-Pakistan Pipeline

On March 5, 2012, I wrote a post on US efforts to prevent Iran and Pakistan from constructing the Iran-Pakistan Pipeline.  The effort focused on blocking sources of money for financing the pipeline.

The pipeline would start in he Pars natural gas field in Iran -- the largest in the world and currently blocked by US Warships -- and would bring a new energy source to Pakistan, which Pakistan desperately needs.  It would also provide Iran with cash, which it desperately needs because of Western efforts to starve it into agreeing not to construct an Atomic Bomb.  Such as Israel has.

The Western effort, now joined by Russia and China, has so far been a success:  there is no pipeline and there is no Bomb, and Iran has not been Bombed by anyone.  The effort is also wasteful and unstable, not nearly as good as working out an agreement with iran.

Here is a report on the current sate of developments:

From  The Express Tribune with the International Herald ATribune

Zardari visit delay raises questions over Iran-Pakistan project

By AFP

Published: December 11, 2012

ISLAMABAD: 

President Asif Ali Zardari has delayed a visit to Iran to discuss a huge gas deal despite Tehran’s offer of a loan to help finance a project which the US opposes, officials said Tuesday.

The $7.5 billion pipeline project has run into repeated difficulties – over US opposition because of Iran’s nuclear activities and Pakistan’s difficulty in finding funds.

It was originally reported that Zardari would visit Iran last Friday and that the final agreement would be likely signed during the visit.

Pakistani officials denied that the visit had been cancelled, claiming it had never been officially scheduled due to Zardari’s engagements in London and Paris.

“The visit may materialise on his way back from the ongoing foreign tour or he may visit Tehran after coming back home,” a petroleum ministry official told AFP.

Iranian officials said that the visit had been postponed at Pakistan’s request and would happen “soon”.

“It has been agreed that the visit would take place with a bit of change. Iranian assistance to build the peace pipeline in Pakistan will be one of the issues on the visit’s agenda,” said Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman Ramin Mahmanparast.

Negotiations are reaching a critical point, the Financial Times said, because it will take two years to build Pakistan’s sections of the pipeline and Islamabad would have to start paying Tehran for the gas two years from now.

The newspaper said an increasingly desperate Pakistan is struggling to overcome strong opposition to the project from the United States, which has clamped economic sanctions on Iran because of its nuclear programme.

In 2010 Iran and Pakistan agreed that Iran would supply between 750 million cubic feet and one billion cubic feet per day of natural gas by mid-2015.

Islamabad has said that it will pursue the project regardless of US pressure, calling it vital to overcome the country’s energy crisis that has led to debilitating blackouts and suffocated industry.

But in March, it was forced to review sources of funding after newspapers said a Chinese bank pulled out over fears that firms involved will face sanctions.

Pakistani officials said Tuesday that Iran had promised a $500 million loan and that Islamabad would meet the rest of its $1.6 billion share.

“There are impediments in view of the US opposition to the project but we are determined to complete it to meet our fast-growing energy requirements,” said one government official on condition of anonymity.

But the Iranian foreign ministry spokesman said Iran has confirmed it can finance at least $250 million, despite Pakistan asking for $500 million.

“This is a technical issue,” Mahmanparast said.

Analyst Imtiaz Gul said the deal would probably be signed only if the United States backs down over its opposition to the deal, possibly in exchange for Pakistani cooperation on Afghan peace efforts. [Emphasis added.]

So Pakistan has something we want and we have something Pakistan wants.  An agreement might lead to a broader agreement with Iran that would end the present stalemate.  That larger agreement might make all nations but Israel, currently controlled by mad hawks, happy.  A change in the Israeli government might result in a two-state solution, which would make Palestinians happy; which would mak Egypt happy.

"Hope springs eternal in the human breast."  Alexander Pope.

Happy Palestinians:

Bomb Iran? And Pakistan and Germany, too (addendum)

This editorial in The Nation, (pk) today is important and timely.  The world seems to be polarizing, and Pakistan is one of the focal points.   The editorial relates directly to last night's blot post.

 I sincerely hope for good relations with Iran in the near future, and an end to our sanctions against it.   

Think how unthinkable were good relations, in my lifetime, with Germany, Japan,  Russia, China, and North Vietnam.  Remember how we hated the Krauts, the Japs (spellcheck won't even recognize "Jap", now), the Ditrty Commie Pinko Rats, the Chicago Seven, Hippies, Yippies -- all the Not-Us.  Now the Ragheads, the Muslims of all stripes.   Think how our views of those countries and people have changed.  Views of Iran can change, too, with our sensible President.

By: Javid Husain | March 06, 2012 |

The US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, was quite explicit in her warning before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on State and Foreign Operations last week that the implementation of the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project would trigger the US sanctions under the Iran Sanctions Act. This Act imposes certain specified sanctions against any foreign (non-US) company, which invests more than $20 million in the oil and gas sector in Iran. This warning must be seen in the context of the current animosity between Iran and the US, and Washington’s growing pressure on Tehran because of its nuclear programme. The root causes of the current tensions between the US and Iran can be traced to a number of factors.

First and foremost, Washington views Iran as a major obstacle, indeed a threat, to the realisation of its strategic objectives in the Middle East, especially the Persian Gulf region. The control over the oil and gas resources of the Persian Gulf region is a major US strategic objective, the other being the security of Israel as an ally and an outpost of the West in the region. Obviously, the US wants pliant states in the Persian Gulf region for safeguarding its interests. The attitude of defiance exhibited by Iran towards the US, since the advent of the Islamic Revolution, set in motion a process that has resulted in the prevailing enmity between the two countries. The Islamic Republic of Iran’s steadfast support to the Palestinian cause and its opposition to Israel are seen by Washington and Tel Aviv as serious threats to the Jewish state’s existence. In essence, Washington considers the Islamic Revolution as a threat to the US-friendly order in the Middle East. Therefore, it has imposed unilateral sanctions and taken a number of other steps to contain Iran and to bring about a change of regime in the country.

The US-Iran tensions have been aggravated by the serious differences between them on Iran’s nuclear programme. The US and other Western countries have essentially demanded of Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment programme because they consider it as a precursor to the development of nuclear weapons. Iran, while insisting on its right to carry out uranium enrichment under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to which it is a party, has categorically stated that its nuclear programme is peaceful in character and that it has no intention of developing nuclear weapons. However, these declarations have not satisfied the Western countries. Consequently, the UN Security Council with the Western backing has imposed a number of sanctions on Iran which were weakened considerably thanks to the efforts of Russia and China.

Additionally, the US has imposed its own sanctions because of its concerns over Iran’s nuclear programme, the latest ones barring financial dealings with the Central Bank of Iran to curtail Tehran’s oil and gas exports. It is the US hope that these economic sanctions would persuade Iran to reconsider its nuclear programme to bring it in line with the Western demands. But the US and Israel have not ruled out the possibility of air strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities to prevent it from the acquisition of nuclear weapons.

As a demonstration of the US seriousness on the subject, President Barack Obama stated categorically on March 4 in a meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) that he would not hesitate to use force to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. However, despite the Israeli pressure for an early air strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, the US believes that diplomacy backed by sanctions still has a chance to overcome the current impasse on the Iranian nuclear issue. It is also cognisant of the dangerous strategic, political and economic consequences of air strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities, especially in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Persian Gulf and Palestine. The US economy that is registering a fragile recovery may relapse into a severe recession or even a depression if the oil prices shoot up as a result of the air strikes on Iran. Therefore, Obama in his speech at the meeting of AIPAC also cautioned against “loose talk of war” with Iran. The Economist magazine in its issue of February 25-March 2 concluded that just now the change in Iran’s nuclear programme “is more likely to come about through sanctions and diplomacy than war.” It is also interesting to note that despite the concerns of the Arab countries about Iran’s nuclear programme, the Jordanian Prime Minister has warned that any military action against Iran because of its nuclear activities would be “disastrous” for the whole of the Middle East. Earlier, the Russian Foreign Minister had voiced similar views.

The US pressure on Pakistan to forego the Iran-Pakistan (IP) gas pipeline project must be viewed in the context of the foregoing. Its real purpose is to ratchet up pressure on Iran more than anything else. But if we concede the US demand, it would have serious negative consequences for Pakistan, which is facing a virtual energy crisis because of electricity and gas shortages. The alternative project that would bring gas through pipeline from Turkmenistan (TAPI) would not be feasible in the near future because of the continuing armed conflict in Afghanistan.

Pakistan and Iran signed the Gas Sale and Purchase Agreement (GSPA) in June 2009. The Government of Pakistan has already determined that the imported natural gas from Iran would provide the cheapest and most suitable fuel for power generation. It has been estimated that 750 mmcfd gas would help generate around 4,000MW of electricity, besides providing job opportunities in the backward areas of Balochistan and Sindh. Iran has already laid the 56-inch diameter pipeline for a distance of 900 km from Assaluyeh to Iran Shehr. The remaining 200 km to bring the pipeline to the Pakistani border are likely to be completed in the next two years. Pakistan, on its part, is planning to complete its segment of the pipeline by the end of 2014.

From the economic point of view, it makes eminent sense for Pakistan to complete the Iran-Pakistan pipeline project as early as possible to meet its fast-growing energy requirements. The government’s decision to stand firm on this project despite the US pressure is commendable and must be welcomed. While we must make a sincere effort to reconcile our differences with the US on different issues with a view to developing friendly relations with it, we cannot allow Washington to dictate to us, especially on issues of vital strategic and economic importance. The Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project is too important for us strategically, politically and economically to be discarded at the behest of the US. We must, therefore, use different diplomatic channels to convey our point of view on the issue appropriately to the US. It is ironical that while the US is pushing us to strengthen our economic and commercial links with India, it should be pressurising us to distance ourselves from our important neighbour to the west for the sake of its own perceived interests!

Pakistan’s long-term interests lie in strengthening its friendly ties and cooperation with Iran rather than otherwise. In view of the past US practice of subjecting us to sanctions and pressures for its own designs, it would be prudent on our part to reduce our economic and military dependence on it. The situation also calls for intensified efforts on our part to enhance self-reliance and strengthen relations with China and Russia both of which may be interested in financing the IP gas pipeline.

    The writer is a retired ambassador.

    Email: javid.husain@gamil.com