The pipeline policy

There was never any question of the government abandoning the Iran gas pipeline project. There was just the matter of conveying it to the Americans. And the foreign office’s snub, coupled with the prime minister’s firm stand on national television, further aggravates Washington’s mideast and AfPak dilemma. With regard to Arabia and the Gulf, does it materialise some of it more potent threats, or should it bear more frustration, after Russia and China’s veto on Syria, and India and Pakistan continuing business with Iran. With regard to Pakistan, with the Salala spillover still hanging, is it wise to flex financial muscles, or is it best to stay quiet and invite greater insignificance?
It seems Pakistan’s decision, and Iran’s for that matter, does not concern just the pipeline. Recent events have betrayed high level attempts at greater regional integration. And few better ways of constructive engagement between neighbours than binding the two together through long term economic projects. Already the Indians have done themselves, as well as the region, a great disservice by de-linking from the initiative some years ago. The fruits of compromising on local interest to cater to foreign designs ought to be obvious to New Delhi, hence the no to cutting oil imports from Iran this time around. But with the recent trilateral summit, and Iranian energy for Balochistan, and clear signals from Islamabad, Kabul and Tehran that regional interests must take precedence at this crucial juncture, it seems the US will have to quietly remove itself to the back seat.
We must have energy. The TAPI project, though obviously doubtful, must also be considered. For far too long we have let political pressures – both internal and external – destroy energy policy. Imposing sanctions on Pakistan from here will erode what little credibility Washington has not already blundered away in this region.