Pipeline Deniers

One of the more curious aspects of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has been the tendency of politicians and journalists, incapable or unwilling to do their jobs, to deny the fact that both have been fought as resource wars. In Iraq it has been taken for granted that it was an oil grab. Yet in Afghanistan liberal illusions are harder to shake.

The routine procedure is either to mechanically write off those who claim that the Afghanistan War is crucially concerned with the construction of a pipeline as "conspiracy theorists" without there being any conspiracy in reality to either affirm or to deny. That rationale behind the TAPI pipeline is simply an agenda that has not been publicised.

One pipeline denier states that the notion that the central objective is to get TAPI pipeline built is "all complete and utter rubbish" without providing any counter evidence to that given. Simply stating that because the pipeline has not been built it must be a fiction is Alice in Wonderland logic.

Obviously is has not been built yet precisely because NATO is still there trying to provide enough security on the ground for it to go ahead. The TAPI pipeline is funded by the Asian Development Bank which itself has been invested in heaviliy by US and British concerns and agreed to get it built in 2008.

It is not a "prospective project" : merely a delayed one and seen by Zbigniew Brzezinski as a key to the USA's geopolitical strategy for the region-for good or ill. He is Obama's foreign policy mentor and sees the control of Afghanistan as a key client for maintaining US hegemony over Central Asian oil and gas.

The case denying the TAPI pipeline's centrality follows as possible according to such routine objections,

1.If the building of this pipeline is so significant to US strategy in the region, the driving force behind US policy, can you tell me how much of this pipeline, that is intended to bring natural gas from from fields in south-east Turkmenistan to Pakistan and India, has been constructed? I mean there is absolutely nothing to stop work progressing in Turkmenistan is there?

No, there isn't as you correctly say. Which is precisely why Turkmenistan has already agreed in the last few days to try and start work as soon as possible. As The India Express reports,( Work on TAPI gas pipeline put on fast track September 11 2010 )

Turkmenistan has drafted an aggressive agenda to finalise the Gas Sale and Purchase Agreements by end-December so that technical and financial appraisals for the TAPI natural gas pipeline could start by next year.

This includes meetings of Turkmenistan president with heads of Afghanistan, Pakistan and India on the margins of UN General Assembly's 65th session during September 19-23.

This is not mere "talk": it is an immediate statement of intent.

2. What advantage is it to the United States of America is a pipeline that transports natural gas to Pakistan and India?

Firstly, it diversifies the gas supply out of the hands of Russia, links together Turmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India in a regional community of shared interest and thus blocks off Iran's rival PIP pipeline which would involve bypassing Afghanistan entirely.

Secondly, the TAPI pipeline is considered by think tank experts and diplomats in Washington and in NATO to provide a colossal source of revenue and that this, once the Taliban have been vanquished, provide the means to integrate people into accepting the benefits of Western hegemony in Afghanistan.

John Foster puts it like this,

Afghanistan occupies a strategic piece of real estate: It shares borders with Iran and Turkmenistan, two countries with immense petroleum reserves. George Krol, U.S. deputy assistant secretary of state, told Congress last year that one U.S. priority in Central Asia is “to increase development and diversification of the region’s energy resources and supply routes.”

At the donors’ conference in Kabul in July, participants agreed to promote “integrated regional infrastructure projects.” Within the Afghanistan National Development Strategy, that includes plans for a natural gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Pakistan and India (TAPI). This pipeline has been promoted by the U.S. since the mid-1990s.

Pipelines are more than commercial ventures. They are geopolitically important because they connect trading partners, and influence the regional balance of power.

The next part of the denial case runs like this,

3. What interest exists in this project in any US Company? The record shows that UNOCAL were only interested in building it with the possibility of operating it as a transport system - peanuts in other words. They certainly would not control the pipeline the only people who would, or could, control the pipleine would the nation putting product into it i.e. Turkmenistan.

It is not strictly about profiteering, the charge made by many on the left as some kind of "trump card". Geopolitical advantage is what's really at stake. TAPI is concerned from the US perspective with multiple objectives, a clear one is sidelining Iran and preventing the IPI excluding US and Western Interests.

4. The main beneficiary of this pipeline would be India, who needs the gas NOW. In order to obtain gas the Indian Government have been negotiating with the Iranians to provide an alternative route. This is the IPI pipeline which unlike TAPI .... is actually being built so far over 1000 kilometers of it have already been built.

This spectacularly misses the point that the exact reason for the surge was to secure Afganistan as soon as possible and for the release of information with regards Afghanistan's copious mineral wealth is designed to assuage India's temptation to pull out of the TAPI project or drag their heels on it.

The fact that the IPI pipeline is a serious rival to the TAPI project is precisely the reason why the US and NATO have been so desperate to finish off the Taliban and secure Helmand, at the expense of the lives of so many Canadian and British troops.

The pipeline deniers only trump card is the lame non-argument that because TAPI pipeline has not yet built and despite all the evidence that its backers, including the US and other Western states, that it cannot be a real design. On the basis that if TAPI pipeline project existed, our governments would tell us.

Obviously, having sold the war as a war against Jihadists, a "War on Terror", a War for Women's Liberation, a Humanitarian War or a Liberal Intervention, or as a War on Drugs, the idea it now only remains a war to get a pipeline built as central to the possible realisation of other objectives is now clearer.

The media in Pakistan and India continually mentions it in the news. Increasingly it has started to make it into the mainstream news in the West at least on the WWW. Yet it is hardly edifying for the public to be told that soldiers have died not to protect Britain but to get a pipeline constructed.

5. In December last year a pipeline carrying natural gas from Turkmenistan to Western China was opened. China has promised the Government of Turkmenistan assistance both financial and technical in building further transport pipelines inside Turkmenistan, and for further development of natural gas resources, China already has purchased the gas, an essential component of any gas field development.

Precisely. Hence the need to get the TAPI pipeline constructed. Otherwise the West will miss out or have to depend upon Russia.

6. TAPI is currently the orphan owned by the Asia Development Bank, while the Governments of the countries concerned may talk about the desirability of such a project, in actual fact it remains still-born. No US company has shown any interest in the project at all.

The Asian Development Bank is the project sponsor and is, in actual fact, an international development bank with members including the U.S., Canada and several other NATO countries with troops in Afghanistan without whom the pipeline would not have got the approval it did back in 2008.

But when in doubt , pipeline deniers will nit pick over terminology. Our pipeline denier claimed,

A correction for you - "The TAPI pipeline is funded by the Asian Development Bank" - No it is not - "Finance for the TAPI pipeline project will be arranged and handled through the Asia Development Bank" - There is a whale of a difference.

Actually, no there isn't. The capital comes through the Asian Development Bank which is an international development bank whose members comprise of the US, Canada and other NATO nations. . It cannot be so very difficult to understand, apart from the fact it is entitled an Asian Development Bank.

The latest bulletin from the Asian Development Bank is careful to mention the internationalist aspect of its transactions with regards Afghanistan and mentions CAREC

IADB Vice-President (Operations 2) Lawrence Greenwood said that boosting trade is an important element of private sector-led growth strategies in the region, requiring close cooperation among CAREC members toward reducing the cost of cross border transactions.

CAREC, comprising Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, PRC, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and six multilateral partners, including ADB, was established in 1997. Its work includes improving Central Asia's physical infrastructure, harmonizing customs and other trade facilitation procedures and promoting trade in power. ADB has served as its Secretariat since 2000.

One of its critical goals is to develop a seamless network of six transport corridors which will connect member countries to each other as well as providing links to the fast-growing economies of east and south Asia, and established markets in Europe.....

The ADB is crucially influenced by the USA which accounts for some 12.756 % of the total voting power along with other shareholders who are part of the willing investors, with the US remaining the sole largest investor with 552,210 shares in what is cunningly described as the "non-regional members".

US shares are the largest single proportion in the Asian Development Bank. The next one is Canada. With Japan having a large stake too.

US shares account for about a third of the total proportion which is then primarily made up of German, British, French and Canadian shares, these "non-regional members" making up a total of 34.960% of the voting power. Yet the "regional members" include powers such as Australia with 7.56 % and Japan with 19.612% of the voting power.

Add the proportion of shares of the 'pro-Western' powers within both the regional and non-regional shareholders together and clearly there is a preponderant dominance reflecting the degree of interest shown in putting troops on the ground in Afghanistan. The major players have the most shares.

That's naturally because they are the richest nations. Yet China has a rather small stake and Russia, of course, is not included. The fact is that such a bank would not have committed itself to TAPI unless they believed there was not a great deal of gain to be made. Whether Afghanistan can be stabilised or not remains to be seen. Yet the investors think it is possible.

The finance for TAPI primarily comes not from India ( 8.229 % ) , Pakistan ( 3.132% ) or Turkmenistan ( 0.77% ) but from Western concerns and capital with the endorsement of those powers who have committed most to securing Afghanistan militarily and have most at stake.

The stakes are not just reflected in the allocation of the shares but also in the fact that by opening up an energy corridor from Turkmenistan to India, these nations will retain a permanent stake in the future profits to be made in the region. It's business and geopolitics that determines the TAPI pipeline.

The statistics are here.

The "sceptic" may well reply,

Turkmenistan has sold gas to China and Iran. If Europe wants oil or gas from the Caspian they already have existing pipelines and pipelines under construction to carry it that by-pass Russia (I know this because I have worked on them).

That's irrelevant. Turkmenistan wants to sell gas to India too. It is a very large market and it ties in with NATO's geopolitical interests. No TAPI pipeline, no stake in future developments and the prospect of the rival IPI pipeline gaining prominence and thus the USA and NATO not having crucial leverage over Iran.