Geopolitics

Games Nations Play: The Middle East Conflict — A Game of Gas Pipelines
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
Issue Net Edition | Date : 01 Aug , 2015

Within these broad rules of the game, the commercial exploitation of the gigantic Pars Gas field in the Persian Gulf (2/3rd with Iran and 1/3rd with Qatar) for supply to the lucrative market in Europe is a major factor for the conflict. By keeping the conflict alive in Iraq and Syria, Iran is unable to route her gas supplies through their territories and this has forced her to consider linking her supplies to the pipeline planned from the Central Asian Republics through Turkey. On the other hand, Qatar supported by Saudi Arabia want to pipe gas to Europe through Jordan, and by so doing, prevent Iran from tapping this lucrative market directly. Either way, Iran is being hemmed in and she cannot exploit the situation as instability in her immediate neighbourhood forces her to look for alternatives.

Terrorism remains a serious threat, but the threat has been partially contained and new measures are needed.

The lucrative markets of China and India hold great prospects for Iran. Gas from Iran to China can be conduited through Pakistan along the ambitious Gwader-Kashgar Highway, while the same can be piped to India through the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline; the success of which will have a major impact on Indo-Pak relations. In either case, this requires stability in Pakistan, especially in Baluchistan.

Global Strategic Interests in the Region

The USA. Bruce W. Jentleson of the Sanford School, Duke University[4], has extrapolated five principal interests the USA has in the Middle East. Since they are self-explanatory, these are being reproduced, the additions (italics), however are the implications as viewed by other nations:

  • “Deterring, containing and defending against regional threats. With the Iraq war ended and troops being drawn down in Afghanistan, the main focus is on limiting and channelling Iran’s ambitions.(Very little seems to have changed).
  • Supporting Arab regimes that have legitimacy in the eyes of their own people. For decades, America placed a priority on security cooperation with authoritarian regimes in order to fight terrorism and stabilize oil prices. Democracy and human rights took a back seat. Today, however, the United States cannot ignore social upheavals and democratic reform movements spreading across the region. (The inference to Syria is evident).
  • Fighting terrorism. Efforts to defeat al Qaeda pushed the U.S. into close ties to sclerotic regimes (such as those in Yemen and Egypt) that later proved unstable. Terrorism remains a serious threat, but the threat has been partially contained and new measures are needed. (The US has now added the ISIS/ISIL to this list of (self-created)terror organisations).

Russia is attempting to play the same game as the USA is attempting, both wooing Turkey for their own reasons, however, in Iraq-Syria and even Iran, she is at odds with the USA.

  • Enhancing Israeli security and pursuing Arab-Israeli peace. The United States remains committed to enhancing Israeli security through military aid, intelligence collaboration and other means. Progress toward Arab-Israeli peace, long a prominent part of support for Israel, has become even more in the U.S. interest today. (This remains true even today).
  • Ensuring stable access to affordable oil. While Gulf oil remains important to the global economy, increased domestic natural gas production and progress on alternative fuels and energy conservation have made the U.S. economy less dependent on Gulf supplies.”(By inverse logic, denial/controlling of energy supplies to potential adversaries becomes more important).

Russia

The informal understanding between the United States and Islamist organizations which was evident during the Cold War, continues and they remain willing partners in the effort to undermine Russia and concurrently limit Shia progression in the region. This not only lies at the root of the conflict, but is the main reason for its continuation.

On the other hand, despite Russia’s diminished strategic signature, it is vital for her to retain control of access from the Black to the Mediterranean Sea. Thus, not only does this require a significant presence in the Black Sea, but also in the Mediterranean; the strategically located Russian Tartus Naval Base off the Syrian coast opposite Crete remaining important. This strategic requirement not only dictates that Russian support for President Bashar Al Assad to continue, but the option to pipe Russian Gas through Turkey to reduce the geographical importance of Ukraine, which also remains in turmoil, is important. In a way, Russia is attempting to play the same game as the USA is attempting, both wooing Turkey for their own reasons, however, in Iraq-Syria and even Iran, she is at odds with the USA.

India cannot afford not to have an alternative. She needs to seriously consider the undersea pipeline option from Iran to India, ideally linked with the proposed pipeline from Turkmenistan to the Chabahar Port.

China

The Chinese angle in this energy game is different. Being a large importer of energy resources, she is trying to diversify its sources beyond Russia and the Central Asian Republics, and trying to expand her options in the Middle East. Thus, on one side, her requirement to maintain status quo is in convergence with that of Russia, on the other hand, she is constrained to do so, since she has made significant economic investments in Iran, Iraq and Syria. At the same time, she would attempt to facilitate gas supplies from Iran through Pakistan at the cost of cutting out India from the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline. With promises of massive economic assistance to Pakistan for developing the multi-modal Gwadar-Kashgar Karakoram Highway, this needs to be factored in India’s strategic calculations.

Regional Actors

Israel and Turkey have vested interests in stalling the proposed pipeline through Iraq and Syria. For Turkey, it means her strategic relevance in providing a conduit goes up exponentially. On the other hand, this enhances the scope for Israel to provide gas directly to Europe from her finds in the promising off-shore Leviathan Gas fields. Either way it is viewed, the prospects of peace returning to Iraq and Syria seem to be bleak in the near future. The commercial interests of Saudi Arabia and Qatar are evident, while their brand of religion is well aligned with other Anti-Shia forces in the region. The interest of both Sunni nations is clear – retard Iran’s strategic progression at all costs and for that they, at least till the time ISIS/ISIL menace became ominous, they would continue to support the policies of the USA. How this plays out in the long term remains unsure, and though a change could be expected with a thaw in the US-Iranian relations, it is unlikely to have an immediate effect on the ongoing conflict in Iraq and/or Syria.

India

Apart from expediting the proposed Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) pipeline, India also needs to expedite the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline. However, despite rounds of talks, the proposals have not seen the light of the day due to the nature of the India-Pakistan relations and the turbulence in Pakistan, especially in Baluchistan and on both sides of the Durand Line in Khyber-Pakhtoonistan. While it is in the interest of Pakistan to set her house in order, even if not to help India, it makes sense for her to do so to establish the economic veracity of the Gwader-Kashgar Highway which runs through the same areas.

At the same time, India cannot afford not to have an alternative. She needs to seriously consider the undersea pipeline option from Iran to India, ideally linked with the proposed pipeline from Turkmenistan to the Chabahar Port. The recent lifting of western sanctions on Iran and the fact that Iran herself is promoting the Middle East to India Deepwater Pipeline (MEIDP) initiative, needs to be taken advantage of. This would not only have the advantage of keeping Pakistan out of the equation, but also offer diversified supplies. India’s friendly relations with Iran, even when sanctions had been imposed on her, as also with Turkmenistan need to be made use, making it a win-win situation for the three nations, as also providing an alternative link to the energy rich nations in the north.



End Notes

[1]George W. Bush, The National Security Strategy of the United States of America, March 2006, Washington, p.1 of the Opening Statement

[2]The term ‘Palestine’is associated with the geographical area that currently covers the State of Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, Wikipedia

[3] Kurdish Population, Wikipedia

[4]Bruce W. Jentleson, Sanford School, Duke University, Toward a New U.S. Strategy in the Middle East as available at www.scholarsstrategynetwork.org, September 2012

1 2
Rate this Article
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of the Indian Defence Review.

About the Author

More by the same author

Post your Comment

2000characters left

One thought on “Games Nations Play: The Middle East Conflict — A Game of Gas Pipelines

More Comments Loader Loading Comments