JOURNAL: India's Energy Security

A proposed natural gas pipeline between Iran and India is at the center of controversy.  The main problem?  The pipeline will pass through Pakistan.  Pakistan has been at the epicenter of global guerrilla system attacks over the past several months.  Baloch guerrillas have -- using tactics developed in Iraq -- successfully disrupted major potions of the Pakistan's infrastructure (natural gas, railways, electricity, communications, etc.).  The existence of these global guerrillas put any new venture in region at risk.

The stakes are huge.  The pipeline is key to India's future economic development and long term energy security.  It is also worth up to $500 m a year in transport fees to the Pakistani government (in addition to a portion of the $4.16 billion that will be invested to build it).  Unfortunately, it is likely that if the project is poorly planned, Baloch guerrillas (or any that follow) will be able to control the energy deliveries for hundreds of millions of people India through proven methods of system disruption. 

The time to plan against global guerrilla disruption is now, before a plan is drawn up.  This effort would require a robust analysis of the current state of the art in systems disruption as well as likely future developments (know your enemy).  It will also require new thinking on methods of systems security that will prevent or diminish future disruptions (non-obvious thinking is required).  Will the Indian or Pakistani governments assemble the team to counter this likely scenario or will they put the economic future of the sub-continent at risk?   

Comments

[Valdis]

Hard to believe that anyone would plan a pipeline for country X that passes through country Y when... X and Y are enemies!!!

Duh!

[Oscar]

Well the answer to Valdis' point may be that this gives X and Y incentives to become less like enemies - a very Hamiltonian strategy.

By the way, wouldn't Iran want to be in on the planning as well? Or will India pay Iran FOB Teheran? It would certainly be in India's interest to pay FOB Kolkata...

[William Knight]

In regards to your previous discussion of pipeline sabotage,
http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2005/02/scenario_cechen.html,
I'm just curious about what happened to the promised post 'Chechen Independence Part 3'?

[Valdis]

Unfortunately Oscar, there is no balance of power [network power] between X and Y... now if Pakistan depended on a different pipeline passing through India, then maybe we can discuss Hamilton and mutual dependence.

[WeSaferThemHealthier]

Valdis,

If Pakistan decided to cut off India's oil supply, it likely wouldn't get the $500M/year. The pipeline must be more important to India ( in absolute terms, proportionally, I don't know ) than to Pakistan but it would still hurt Pakistan to hurt India this way.

[Valdis]

You guys are expecting rational business behavior between warring parties... I hope you are right... but I wouldn't do that with my oil.

[WeSaferThemHealthier]

You got a point. Here's to hoping Musharaf stays in power and doesn't feel the need to do something stupid to retain his current unpopularity level.

[Teddy]

Don't you suppose the think tanks in India understand the implications of letting a strategic resource pass through its arch rivals territory, that when a guerilla insurgency is brewing in Balochistan. There will be two separate agreements - one between Iran and Pakistan for the transit fees, and the other between Iran and India for the gas. Iran is guaranteeing ocean liner shipments for any disruptions that may be caused to the pipeline.

[Abhishek Pungliya]

I think PM Singh,on his visit to the US,rightly put a question mark on the project.After all,when Pakistan can't even safeguard its own supply lines in Baluchistan,how can it protect the pipelines meant to reach India?Besides,Pakistan is the biggest threat to India's security.How can you spend billions on a project that your enemy could use against you?

[John Robb]

It can't. However, connectivity between states lessens the potential for interstate war. One reason Pakistan needs this: $500 m a year in fees. There is precendence for this: Europe's reliance on Russia for oil and gas. The project shouldn't even be attempted without provision for a massive development effort focused on Balochistan (which preceeds the construction of the pipeline).

[Greg Burton]

Pakistan also wants significant quantities of LPG from the pipeline - figures I've seen indicate a 56" pipe at a minimum. By allowing the deal, the Pakistani government gets India to pick up part of their own infrastructure costs. Some subcontinent newspapers call it the "peace pipeline". Pakistan and India have jointly asked for guarantees from Iran on field reserves they can expect to tap.

It's not the only energy project they're co-operating on - they're also discussing a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan pipeline project and a Gulf-South Asia pipeline project.

Pakistan is expected to pick their financial advisors soon - India has Ernst & Young. The next stage of negotiations is scheduled to being in less than two weeks, and to focus on transport pricing across Pakistan.

Personally, I suspect Pakistan and Iran will shift more to the emerging BRIC sphere of influence, particularly if Iran continues to explore a euro-based petroleum exchange. Iran's play in this is to strengthen BRIC ties to offset US pressure. Pakistan may decide to do the same. This asumes that BRIC can hold itself together, of course.

If that happens and can sustain for around 30 years or so, then we're in the process of getting our lunch eaten in Central Asia.

[Greg Burton]

Also, re:John's comments on massive development needs, the Pakistani government has allocated 2.1 bil for development in Balochistan this year, and seems to be devoting a greater percentage of resources to it than previously.