If security so demands

THE shifting of Pakistani troops from the western border to the eastern “front” has not yet been confirmed. However, at his press conference on Thursday, President Pervez Musharraf made it known that Pakistan was “seriously considering” moving troops to the Indian border, stressing that the priority for Pakistan was obviously its own security which “nobody should grudge.” However, he made it clear that if the tension with India continued, Pakistan might be forced to shift the troops from the western to the eastern border. Reiterating Pakistan’s desire for a dialogue with India, he addressed himself to the Indian prime minister on the question of war and peace, saying that war would destroy the two countries and that the only way out was a resolution of the disputes through political talks. He also appealed to his guests present on the occasion, Chairman Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan and President Sepermurat Niyazov of Turkmenistan, to use their influence with India to help start a dialogue.

Diplomatic efforts at the highest level have been going on since New Delhi used the pretext of a terrorist attack on the Indian parliament building last December to mass troops on Pakistan’s border. This deployment has been on an unprecedented scale, with the Indian army, armour, air force and navy poised for offensive action. This war-like act left no option for Pakistan but to respond in kind and adopt all measures necessary to safeguard its security. All along this period, world leaders have been urging the two countries to exercise restraint and to initiate a dialogue. To all these pleas, Pakistan’s response has invariably been positive. The latest in the series of diplomatic efforts has been Russian president Vladimir Putin’s invitation to President Musharraf and Prime Minister Vajpayee for face-to-face talks in Almaty on the sidelines of a regional security summit there next week. While Islamabad has responded positively to the idea, New Delhi’s response has been characteristically negative. Now two more American diplomats — Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld are to visit South Asia to continue peace efforts. It is a foregone conclusion that Pakistan will accept — as it has done in the past — any attempt by a third party to help start a dialogue. With equal certainty, one can be sure that India will say “no” to this one, too. That would mean a continuation of the stand-off along the border, with all the possibility of an accidental war.

As President Musharraf made clear at his press conference, the decision to start a war rests with India; Pakistan on its own will never launch a war. India’s intransigent and diplomatically untenable position has been noted all around. To avoid any aggravation of the prevailing tense situation, world powers may urge Pakistan “to do more” to defuse tensions while asking both to negotiate, but the fact that it is New Delhi which is obdurately opposed to the very idea of talks has not been lost on the rest of the world. Let New Delhi note one thing: this war, if it comes about, will be far more destructive than those of 1965 and 1971. Even without nuclear weapons coming into play — which one hopes both sides will have the good sense not even to think of resorting to — the war will cause extensive damage to life, property and economic life and throw the two countries back socially by several decades

Trilateral gas project

THE signing of a trilateral agreement between Pakistan, Afghanistan and Turkmenistan in Islamabad on Thursday is aimed at reviving the much delayed trans-Afghanistan gas pipeline project. The $ 2 billion, 1,464 kilometre pipeline will start from Turkmenistan’s Daulatabad gas field having a proven reserve of 23 trillion cubic feet of gas and reach up to Multan in Pakistan in the first phase. In phase two, it will be extended to Gwadar for export of liquefied gas to Japan and other far Eastern countries. In the third phase, the pipeline is planned to be extended to India. The economic benefit accruing to the three countries is considerable. Turkmenistan stands to gain enormously from an outlet to world markets for its abundant gas reserves, while both Afghanistan and Pakistan will benefit considerably in terms of royalties that the transnational project will yield for them annually. An additional factor of interest for Pakistan is a steady supply of gas from the Central Asian sources to meet the country’s growing energy needs. Pakistan is expected to face a gas supply shortfall of around 500 MMCFD in the next five years because of the inefficiency of its transmission network, whereas if the proposed gas pipeline project is taken in hand immediately, it will be completed in two years. Pakistan’s own remaining proven gas reserves are estimated at around 21 trillion cubic feet (TFC) but the capital cost required for its development may not be easy to afford under the present and foreseeable circumstances. The current domestic production of gas at over 2,000 MMCFD is contributing about 38 per cent to the commercial energy mix and serving a total of 2.8 million customers.

The apparent benefits of the proposed project for the three countries had prompted Afghanistan, Turkmenistan and Pakistan to constitute a working group in 1998 providing for quarterly expert meetings to pursue the pipeline project being handled at that time by a multinational consortium, (CENTGAS) led by UNOCAL of the US. But these meetings were discontinued in late 2000 in view of the widening gap between the then Taliban government and the US authorities. UNOCAL then pulled out, citing continued unrest in Afghanistan as the reason for its departure. There are indications that UNOCAL may not be averse, in the changed circumstances as peace seems to be returning to Afghanistan, to reconsider its earlier decision to quit and resume work on the pipeline project. Besides, now that there are no US sanctions against Pakistan, the revived project can expect to get the required support from both the OPIC and EXIM Bank.

Pakistan for some time has been pursuing four gas supply projects, one each originating from Iran, Qatar, Turkmenistan and the UAE. Though the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project was the front-runner for some years, the supply is primarily meant for India. Also, as long as uncertainties continue to cloud Pakistan-India relations, this project is not likely to be taken up with any degree of confidence by the parties concerned. The Qatar and UAE projects, being essentially undersea pipelines, are likely to take a longer time to construct and be commissioned and would, therefore, cost more than the one from Turkmenistan. So, for the time being the Turkmenistan pipeline appears to have commended itself for immediate consideration and, therefore, the decision of the three countries to go ahead with it without delay or dithering.