One minute Russia is talking about the potential for cooperation in mutual interests to help Washington discourage nuclear proliferation in Iran, while the next minute they are selling missile systems and assisting with nuclear technology. From the energy perspective, this blog has long argued that the most important strategy for Moscow is the maintainence of tensions between the United States and Iran in order to prevent the awakening of a sleeping gas giant. Further complicating the plot, today the Financial Times is reporting on Gazprom getting involved with Iran to help build a pipeline to Pakistan. Moral of the story: if Iran is going to increase its gas exports, then they had better go through Russian built pipes and away from their sphere of energy influence.
“Both we and Pakistan are talking with Gazprom and we have agreed that Gazprom can be a partner [to construct] the pipeline inside Pakistan,” Hojatollah Ghanimifard, vice-president for investment affairs at the National Iranian Oil Company, told the Financial Times.
The proposed 2,600km gas pipeline would transport gas from Iran to Pakistan and India, providing them with 60m cubic metres of gas a day initially, eventually rising to 150m cu m a day.
The project, valued at$7.6bn, has been under discussion since 1994 but has been bedevilled bydelays, most recently because of disagreements between India andPakistan over transit fees. India has now walked away from the deal.But Mr Ghanimifard said the project was making progress.
“I wasin Russia, I had the pleasure of talking to high authorities in Gazpromand I proposed to them that this was in the interest of Pakistan andinvited them to become involved,” he said. He added the Pakistaniportion of the pipeline would stretch about 900 km.
Subscribe by Email
10 Comments
please specify what binding international obligation Russia has undertaken not to conduct these activities in Iran.And as to nuclear proliferation, the accusation comes mainly from organizations that made false accusations about the Iraqi NBC weapons programs as they laid the propaganda foundations for the disasterous Iraq war. Credibility
Well thıs ıs nothıng more than the usual BS that gets posted on thıs sıte by self-proclaımed ”Russıa experts” (I could just as easıly proclaım myself to be a ”movıe crıtıc”).Fırst, Russıa’s nuclear cooperatıon wıth Iran ıs fully complıant wıth the NPT Treaty as Bushehr ıs under complete IAEA monıtorıng and does not present any Non-Prolıferatıon rısk whatsover. Nothıng wrong here.Second of all, the lınk you post relatıng to mıssıle systems refers to the S-300, whıch has not been delıvered to Iran and ıs by the way a defensıve system as ıt can only be used to protect one’s aırspace (concern about thıs ımplıes you have aggressıve and offensıve ambıtıons to attack Iran). The TOR M1 system that Iran receıved ıs just a toy wıth an operatıonal range of 12km and cannot be used ın any offensıve capacıty as such. Eıther way, there are no ınternatıonal oblıgatıons that Russıa has not to provıde such mıssıle systems to Iran.Thus your ınıtıal premıses are dead. Anymore BS?
Right, so you both are arguing that Russia is playing a leading, constructive role in the international community in dealing with Iran’s nuclear ambitions? Time for you boys to call a spade a spade – Russia is manipulating and using Iran, and doing everything possible to keep them in conflict with the United States and strangle their energy economy. Within a decade the Ayatollahs may recall they care nothing for Moscow anymore than they do for the U.S. or Israel.
There ıs nothıng ıllegal about Iran’s nuclear program as ıt falls completely wıthın the NPT agreement and there ıs no evıdence whatsover to suggest otherwıse. Iran ıs exercısıng ıts rıght to develop alternatıve sources of energy as oıl/gas wıll not last for ever (thıs nuclear program was started ın the 60s/70s durıng Pahlavı dynasty and contracted to western companıes). It ıs the west that ıs manıpulatıng the nuclear ıssue for ıts fantasy of reınstallıng a Pahlavı-lıke puppet government ın Iran that exısted under the Shah untıl 1979. Iran’s troublesome relatıonshıp wıth the USA has absolutely nothıng to do wıth Russıa, but everythıng to do wıth how relatıons between both countrıes unfolded from 1953 to 1979 under Mossadeg and Shah Pahlavı. Russıa ıs engaged ın commercıal-lıke relatıons wıth Iran, whıch are not prohıbıted and all countrıes ın the world engage ın such relatıons wıth each other.If you thınk Russıa ıs manıpulatıng Iran, you are a complete fool who ıs ıgnorant of Iranıan hıstory. Iranıans mıstrust Russıa as much as they mıstrust the west… the loss of the caucasus to the Romanovs under the Qajar Persıan dynasty under the 1813 Gulıstan Treaty ıs somethıng not forgotten. The Russo-Iranıan relatıonshıp ıs one of convenıence as there ıs no open hostılıty lıke the US-Iranıan relatıonshıp.
I don’t have any specific problem with Bushehr or the S-300 and other military sales, and at no point did I say that this is illegal (as though that would matter to these people). However it is entirely inconsistent and dishonest with Russia’s public statements about its willingness to assist the international effort to persuade Iran to drop the weapons program.Whose side are you on here? Iran has been totally screwed with and played with by the Russians – countless delays on the Bushehr, and ridiculous back and forth on its promises to deliver the missiles. Moscow sees Tehran as a pawn.
@James “Whose side are you on here?”This simple question of yours sums up nicely how you view each and every issue concerning Russia as a zero sum game between Russia and some other counter-party (Ukraine, Georgia, US, NATO, Europe, America, fill-in-the-blank).To suggest that Russia is playing with Iran in order to thwart America’s option for an alternate gas supplier is a bit on the nutty conspiratorial side of the aisle, even for you. The relationship is bad between the two countries because of blowback within Iran as a result of undemocratic activities by the United States as detailed by ATW12N above.
What’s really hilarious here is how Jimmy, turning on a dime, goes from “Russia, you’re not being a responsible member of the International Community by selling Iran defensive arms and aiding their civilian nuclear program!” to pointing out to an Iranian audience “See how the Russians have jerked you around by delaying Bushehr!” (somehow not mentioning that many of those delays came at the request of the US government…)Yup, there’s an agenda at work here, and it’s “denigrate and isolate Russia at every opportunity.”But we knew that.
James, your use of the sophomoric frat-boy euphemism “lay pipe” to imply that Gazprom wants to “screw” Iran is a bit juvenile don’t you think.Just use the f-word next time. We’re all grown-ups here.
I’ll ignore both of the personal provocations – I got used that a long time ago, and I’m sure that if either of you sat down for a coffee with me, you’d probably find out I’m not so crazy.Where were you guys in my defense when I was getting slammed in the comments for praising Medvedev’s comments? Silence. If I tried to just make everybody happy, I’m sure this blog would be a lot more boring.I don’t have an agenda and I’m not aware of these euphemisms – I just voice criticism of government policy (there’s no shortage of other blogs and state media for you to read for choir preaching). Back to the issue – both of you are arguing either that 1) Russia indeed has good intentions in its policy toward Iran, and will assist the international effort to stop the weapons program, or 2) that quite to the opposite, Iran should be free to acquire nuclear weapons and represents no threat to the region.If that’s the case you’re making, just argue it, instead of attacking me – it contributes more to the debate. There just too much that doesn’t add up in this situation. Take the ridiculous (yes, I am saying it is ridiculous – gasp!) missile shield proposal for Eastern Europe, argued on the premise that it is needed because of concerns over future missile attacks from Iran. If Russia is determined to get this project canceled, wouldn’t the most direct solution be to work with the United States and others to diminish the sense of threat from Iran?I don’t think I’m the only one who is pro-Iran in some respects – look up author Ali Ansari’s arguments about Iran and the United States being natural allies in the region.
Please read what I wrote. Russia has been aiding Iran’s civilian nuclear program. It is not at all clear that Iran even has a nuclear weapons program. The organizations making that accusation also made fact-free accusations that Iraq had an active nuclear weapons program in the run-up to the disasterous Iraq war.Hence, they have little credibility with me.