On December 14, Iran announced that it had suspended a 250-million-dollar loan to Pakistan to build a part of the Iran-Pipeline project, which will allow Pakistan to import 21.5 million cubic meters (mcm) per day of Iranian natural gas to satisfy its growing energy needs.

Deputy Oil Minister Ali Majedi told Pakistani officials that, due to sanctions, Iran was not in a position to finance the construction of a pipeline in another country. He advised the Pakistanis to get help from third-party companies, especially European firms.

The Iranian official complained that Islamabad had done little to construct its own section of the pipeline.

“If a contractor is chosen today and pipeline construction begins today, it will take four years to complete it,” said Majedi, adding that if Pakistan fails to import the gas by the end of 2014, Iran will demand compensation under the terms of the contract.

Majedi dismissed the Pakistani allegation that the anti-Iran sanctions were causing hindrances in the construction.

“Such remarks are unacceptable and Pakistan is expected to meet its obligations in this contract,” Majedi said.

Iran has already built more than 900 km of the pipeline on its territory but Islamabad has so far failed to look for the required funding for the project, due to the threat of sanctions from the US, even though the pipeline agreement stipulates that Pakistan must finish its side of the facility by December 2014.

Washington has tried to persuade Islamabad to accept to take part in a project to build a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan and on to South Asia, including Pakistan. It has also been promoting the Central Asia South Asia Electricity Trade and Transmission Project (CASA-1000), which would allow Pakistan and Afghanistan to buy electricity from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.

Some Pakistani experts have criticized the Pakistani government by claiming that actually the US depends on Pakistan on many issues: from the successful withdrawal from Afghanistan to the fight against international terrorism, and it is unlikely that Washington will put these links at risk by passing sanctions against Islamabad. In this way, by submitting to US pressure, Pakistan is showing that it is an unreliable partner. With this attitude, the Pakistani government is undermining its country’s interests.

The pipeline is considered vital to Pakistan’s economy and has been designed to help the nation overcome its growing energy needs at a time when it faces extreme power shortages and blackouts in rural areas and cities, severely damaging its industrial development. To make matters worse, Pakistan was reported last month to have built nuclear weapons for Saudi Arabia, which would be a threat for Iran, and to be ready to ship them. However, it would not be so easy to ship them across the Arabian Sea. Moreover, Riyadh, as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, would risk world condemnation, probable sanctions and the launch of a regional arms race.

However, the publication of this news has highlighted the close links between the Pakistani government and the Saudi monarchy, which gave Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaf Sharif political asylum for several years following the 1999 military coup that overthrew him.

In November, a new mysterious Salafi group calling itself the “Jaishul al Adl” (Army of the Justice) carried out an attack in the Iranian province of Sistan-and-Baluchestan. It was the first terrorist action in the region after the arrest of Abdul Malik Rigi by the Iranian authorities. Rigi was the leader of the Jundollah terrorist group, which attacked Iran militarily from the Pakistani territory before being destroyed by Iranian forces in 2010.

The November attack resulted in the death of 16 Iranian soldiers. French sources, well-informed about the dossier of the terrorist Salafi groups that are supported by Saudi Arabia, told Lebanese channel Al-Manar that Saudi Arabia had ordered the attack, and that this new group was only the fruit of the Saudi violent approach toward Iran and the regional axis allied with it, that is, Syria, Iraq and Hezbollah. These sources also accused the Pakistani intelligence, in conjunction with the Saudi intelligence, of creating and activating this group.

The French sources told Al-Manar that the Saudi intelligence had recently spent huge amounts of money to fund the Jaishul al Adl group, but the weak human Saudi resources do not allow the Saudi intelligence to take direct care of this group. This might have led the Saudis to employ the Pakistani intelligence to do so.
Due to all these factors, Pakistan is now not in a good position to take advantage of the new position of Iran in the region after the signature of the nuclear deal. The Pakistani government’s doubts about the pipeline contract and its submission to the US and Saudi Arabia are damaging its links with its neighbor and prevent it from collecting the accompanying benefits of Iran’s future development.
For its part, India, Pakistan’s rival, has welcomed the nuclear deal struck by Iran and the world’s six major powers in November 2013, which it hopes will eventually lead to the lifting of anti-Iranian sanctions.

India imported 11.6 billion dollars of Iranian oil in fiscal year 2012-2013 and it is Iran’s second-largest oil customer. Some of this trade is conducted in Indian rupees. For years, India has pursued a policy of studied neutrality between the US and Iran. Under US pressure, India has kept buying oil from Iran but has diminished its acquisitions. However, Finance Minister P. Chidambaram indicated in August that India wanted to buy more Iranian crude to offset the hit that oil imports impose on India’s international balance of payments.

Iranian imports also help the Indian rupee to keep its value. Indian businessmen and politicians are now optimistic. Over the last year, India had tried to boost exports such as rice, automobile parts and pharmaceuticals to Iran to use up the rupees lying in Indian banks. Businessmen were also looking at making investments in the country. The head of the Federation of Indian Export Organizations, Rafique Ahmed, said, “That can be possible now, going from trade to investment.”

“The nuclear deal has also created a new atmosphere for the Peace Pipeline via Pakistan,” said Chintamani Mahapatra of the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University.

Although India walked away from talks on the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) Peace Pipeline citing security concerns, Iranian Deputy Minister for International and Commercial affairs Ali Majedi, said that he hopes that New Delhi will overcome its doubts and join the project. India may consider a modified version of the plan to pump Iranian natural gas through an under-sea pipeline in order to avoid the Pakistani territory.
Strategically aspect, it is important for India to maintain a close relationship with Teheran. India and Iran oppose a Taliban government in Kabul and could coordinate their political positions to prevent it. Iran is India’s only corridor for land access to Afghanistan through which most of Indian assistance to Afghanistan could be transported.
India, Iran and Afghanistan have reached an agreement to develop Iran’s Chabahar port, on the Gulf of Oman, aimed at giving India access not only to Afghanistan but also to the resource-rich landlocked countries of Central Asia. The agreement is ready and could be signed soon. India and Iran had agreed to develop the port in southeastern Iran in 2003, during a visit to India by then Iranian President Mohammad Khatami, but the venture did not make much progress.

Nevertheless, New Delhi has recently allotted 100 million dollars for the port’s development and is now looking for a trilateral arrangement with Iran and Afghanistan for a customs and transit agreement. At the same time, India, which has the second Shia population in the world, has been the target of Takfiri extremist groups in Mumbai and other places. Despite numerous problems, the country has an exemplary record of intra-communal harmony and can work with Iran in order to prevent the blight of Takfirism from expanding eastward.

Some Indian analysts fear that if a final deal between Iran and the West is reached on the nuclear issue, the sanctions are lifted and the country completely returns to the global oil market, India’s appeal as trade partner might diminish and Iran might stop accepting Indian rupees as a payment for its crude, an aspect being favorable to India. However, in the immediate run, India would benefit from a possible solution to the problem of the insurance of the Iranian oil.

Israel will also try to hinder the pace of India’s anticipated expansion of ties with Iran by using its bilateral military and intelligence cooperation with New Delhi. Israel has served as a key source of high technology for India’s military modernization, often with US approval. Israeli influence will be undermined, however, by the fact that the US is now looking to engage India directly in a military relationship, which includes the co-development of weapons systems.

Indeed, the US’s plan to expand its defense cooperation with India - as another step to contain and encircle China - is already starting to impact New Delhi’s military relationship with Israel. For instance, India has put off a decision on buying Israeli-made Spike anti-tank missiles because of an American offer to co-develop the next generation of the Javelin missiles.

Moreover, Israel has also been losing Indian contracts in recent years due to frequent delays and cost rises. In this way, an Indian decision to buy two additional AWACS Phalcons from Israel has been delayed because of cost considerations.

In short, despite being a Muslim-majority country, the illogical Pakistani foreign policy has been preventing a rapprochement with Iran. Pakistan’s close relationship with Saudi Arabia, its submission to US policies and its support for Taliban and other extremist groups have made India a more attractive choice for Iran in the economic and strategic fields. This situation will also undermine the future position of Pakistan in Afghanistan and Central Asia.

This article war written by Yusuf Fernandez for Press TV on December 25,2013.Yusuf Fernandez is a journalist and the secretary of the Muslim Federation of Spain. He started to work for Radio Prague.

 

The Iran Project is not responsible for the content of quoted articles.