Pipeline politics and unreliable partners

My word, are we showcasing some guts in the Iran-Pakistan pipeline episode! Hina Rabbani Khar’s riposte to Hillary Clinton’s ‘threats’ over the IP project was not only valiant she even made it sound realistic. Last week the US hierarchy – in a class ROFL moment – labeled the IP pipeline as a “bad idea”. And this week they are touting Iran as an “unreliable partner”…the sheer irony is painfully amusing. The US lecturing about the reliability of partners is like Lucas Papademos giving a tutorial on controlling debt crises or Veena Malik giving instructions on wearing hijaabs.
So what is your idea of a reliable partner Mrs Clinton? Someone who doesn’t give a rabbit about your energy shortage? One who can’t stop meddling in your internal affairs and wants you to align yourself dutifully to its policies even if it’s bound to be detrimental for your own self? Or someone who kills innocent soldiers and civilians and then doesn’t bother to do as much as apologise, for courtesy’s sake? Of the intriguing (read comical) verbiage served up by the US Secretary of State one particular statement stood out. “As we are ratcheting up pressure on Iran, it seems somewhat inexplicable that Pakistan would be trying to negotiate a pipeline,” Hillary Clinton said. With Pakistan finding itself in a deep hole as far as the energy predicament is concerned, fulfilling half of its energy needs via gas and running out of channels to quench the need of the aforementioned gas, is it really that ‘inexplicable’ Mrs Clinton that Pakistan would want to negotiate a pipeline with a neighbouring country that it has friendly terms with? Plus, the alternative that you’ve been giving us, the TAPI (Turkmenistan Afghanistan Pakistan India) pipeline has taken a nosedive into oblivion, primarily because a certain country has ensured that the A in TAPI borders on a war-torn fragile zone and definitely no way near the periphery of safety.
The US has also been apparently mulling over throwing in sanctions over the IP project. This looks clearly an act of frustration, especially after other Asian countries – including chums India and South Korea – have paid no heed to the Iranian sanctions. Although the American media is touting the rebuttal on sanctions as merely ‘tough talk’ meant for the respective publics, and that in reality the countries are taking a more conciliatory path. They flaunt the fact that India has ostensibly begun to look for alternative oil from Saudi Arabia and Iraq as the vindication. Either way what is unquestionable is that barring the European Union that would begin its embargo in July, not many are paying much heed to the US threats. And hence, gradually all their policies that are customarily touted by Washington as in the ‘best interest of the world’, are gradually falling within the ‘because I

say so’ jurisdiction. All the noise that the US has been making over the past couple of months, especially with regards to Iran, both on the IP front and globally smacks of the aggravation of that bully who just can’t stand the fact that he is not being listened to, and that his ‘subordinates’ have the audacity to choose logic and self-interest in lieu of following the guidelines. And when one comes to think of the debate of the reliability of partners; the most important façade is the fact that if you have your own bases covered and give the national interests their due priority and do not compromise on sovereignty, the reliability of partners becomes a moot question.

The writer is Sub-Editor, Pakistan Today. He can be reached at [email protected]