Name Prateek Mishra

School L.S.M.
Section S1003
R. ID. 11006259
Roll No. A-16
Course Title Business Environment
Allotment Date
Su
bmission Date:
- November10,20
10

Submitted By Prateek Mishra

Su
bmitted To:
-“Sanjay”, Sir
Term Paper Based On:

TO DO AN ANALYSIS OF

IRAN -
PAKISTAN

INDIAN

PIPELINE AND
ITS
 FUTURE ASPECTS

CMPILED BY-

PRATEEK MISHRA
TABLE OF CONTENTS:-
(1) Relationship Among Countries

(2) Introduction

(3) Energy Consumption In India and Pakistan

(4) Issue Of Pipe Line And Its Future Prospects

(5) Description:

 PEACE PIPELINE

 Implication for Conflict Resolution, Foreign

Policy, and Regionalism

 Negotiating the Pipe Line

(6) Analysis

 Legal Clusters

 Economic Challenges

 Ecological Challenges

 Political Challenges

(7) Talk on Indian Suppliers

(8) Literature Review

(9) Research Methodology

(10) Findings

(11) Recommendation
(12) Conclusion
RELATIONSHIP AMONG COUNTRIES:
Before keeping the figure on my research that is based on Iran-
Pakistan and Indian pipe-line and its future aspect, I would to tell
something about the relationship among these three Asian
countries. They are as follows:

Iran-India Relation: (changing the tone)

Without going to much flashback I would like to focus about
today’s relationship. Iran and India talks continue between Indian
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Iran President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad on different areas like pipe-line, economic
resources, and nuclear weapon. There is a significant trade ties,
particularly in crude oil imports into India and diesel exports to
Iran. India has welcomed already to Iran as an observer state in
the SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation)
regional organization.

Apart from this other point is that, there is a small Indian

community in Iran. There is a Sikh temple located in Tehran, as
well as small Hindu temple located in Bandar Abbas and Zahidan.
Ana another issue that a small number of students

have already been enrolled at universities in India. At last we can

say, the relationships between these two countries are improving.

Pakistan-India Relation:
Here if we don’t see the matter of devidation in between these
two nations, so there is ups and downs but perhaps the lowest
point in their relations were the recent border stand offs after the
Indian parliament attacked and Mumbai blast. There is great
attempt for attaining these relationships like SHIMLA SUMMIT, the
AGRA SUMMIT and the LAHORE SUMMIT.
Ultimately, I can say that the relation in between these two
nations is also increasing, of course there is still a much of
conflict but it might happen that with increasing of time it may
finish.

INTRODUCTION:-

Before starting my project, I would like to introduce something

that, this pipe line called IPI (Iran-Pakistan and India) pipe
line. According to its name, implies that the pipe line will start
from Iran then it would be passing through Pakistan and will be
finally in India.

Some special data about IPI pipe line has depicted here, which
describe that what the necessary data is required for this pipe
line. So the following data is mandatory for this project:

Location

Country Iran, Pakistan, India

From Asalouyeh

Passes through Bandar-Abbas, Iranshahr, Khuzdar, Sui,

Multan

To Delhi

General information

Type Natural Gas

Partners National Iranian Oil Company, Sui

Northern Gas Pipeline

Limited, Sui Southern Gas Company

Limited

Expected 2015

Technical information

Length 2,775 kilometres (1,724 mi)

Maximum discharge 55 billion cubic meters per year

Diameter 48 in (1,219 mn)

In 2008-09, Iranian oil accounted for nearly 16.5% of India's crude oil imports.
Indian oil imports from Iran increased by 9.5% in 2008-09 due to which Iran
emerged as India's second largest oil supplier. About 40% of the refined oil
consumed by Iran is imported from India.

In June 2009, Indian oil companies announced their plan to invest US$5 billion in
developing an Iranian gas field in the Persian Gulf.

In September 2009, the Mehr news agency reported a Pakistani

diplomat as saying "India definitely quitted the IPI (India-Pakistan-
Iran) gas pipeline deal, in favor of Indo-US civilian nuclear
agreement for energy security. Iranian officials however said
India is yet to make an official declaration.
Energy security, meaning the sustainable and uninterrupted
supply of energy at all times at an affordable price is in one way
or another interlinked with a number of other global issues such
as climate change, development, and most importantly armed
conflict. Energy security not only affects the economic and foreign
policies of countries but shapes regional geopolitics. No matter
what alternative energy sources are developed in times to come,
hydrocarbons (especially oil and gas) are likely to remain the bulk
of energy sources for the foreseeable future. The uneven
distribution of supply and demand of hydrocarbons in the world1,
along with an unprecedented increase in demand from China,
India and Pakistan’s rising economies, will have repercussion, not
only for the hydrocarbon markets but also for the geopolitics of
South Asian region and the wider world.

The IPI Proposed Pipeline Map

Major hindrances coming in the way of the IPI project include

security issues, especially the instability in Baluchistan and the
barrier politics played by the United States. However despite all
issues, trilateral talks are underway, and all three countries
remain confident enough to go ahead with the project. Prime
Minister Shaukat Aziz has termed the pipeline as “a win-
win proposition for Iran, Pakistan and India,”49 that could
serve as a durable confidence building measure, creating strong
economic business links among the three countries.
• But this win-win situation could soon be in jeopardy if the
situation in Baluchistan does not stabilize. In fact, a few days
after Iran’s oil minister Bijan Namdar Zanganeh arrived in
New Delhi in January 2006 to discuss the future of the
pipeline, two gas pipelines were blown up in Baluchistan
sending tremors through both Iran and India, that this
“pipeline of peace” might be anything but peaceful.

India will have to import much of its natural gas either via pipeline or as liquefied
natural gas. It has been building LNG facilities both on the west coast and in the
south of the country. There have also been extensive discussions of pipelines to
bring natural gas to India via Pakistan, from either Turkmenistan or Iran. The route
from Iran’s South Pars fields is shorter and more economical, with an estimated
cost of $4.5 billion, according to various press reports.
Indian observers also wonder whether India’s IAEA vote sand its new partnership
with the United States will undermine its energy relations with Iran, including the
prospects of the pipeline. India has taken somewhat of a rhetorical beating from
Ahmadinejad’s government, but the negotiations have continued, and it appears
that pragmatism is winning out in the battle for Iran’s oil policy.

ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN:

Both India and Pakistan consume more energy than they produce.
The production of natural gas in both countries cannot meet the
countries’ demands for energy and natural gas consumption.
Approximately 8 percent of energy consumption in India is
accounted for by natural gas and 27 percent in Pakistan. Table 1
(see below) shows the natural gas reserves, production, and
consumption of India, Iran, and Pakistan.
Iran's 812 trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserves and low levels
of natural gas consumption make it a natural potential distributor
of natural gas resources to India and Pakistan.

TABLE 1: NATURAL GAS STATISTICS - COUNTRY SPECIFIC (CIA 2000)

Country Natural Gas Reserves Natural Gas Natural Gas

 Production Consumption

22.9 trillion cubic feet

India 761 Bcf 761 Bcf
(Tcf)

812 trillion cubic feet

Iran 1.9 Bcf 1.8 Bcf
(Tcf)

Pakista 21.6 trillion cubic feet

0.7 Tcf 0.7 Tcf
n (Tcf)

The current demand in India for natural gas is nearly 96 million cubic metres per
day (mcmd) and only 67 mcmd is available. Pakistan’s demand also exceeds its
current supply. “Pakistan's demand for natural gas is expected
to rise substantially in the next few years, with an
increase of roughly 50% by 2006.” Furthermore, the output of 0.7
trillion cubic feet meets only 39% of Pakistan's energy needs. Pakistan has only
21.6 Tcf of natural gas reserves, resulting in the production of 0.7 Tcf of natural
gas, which is exactly the same as the level of natural gas consumption in the
country. India also has this problem with both production and consumption of
natural gas at 761 billion cubic feet.

Nearly 70 percent of India's natural gas reserves are in the state of Gujarat and the
Bombay High Basin. The Indian government has encouraged further exploration of
gas rich areas but it will be unable to meet the increasing demand for natural gas
and energy in India's near future due to cost and industrialization factors.

Pakistan, as well, attempted to cultivate its natural gas resources in the southern
province of Sindh in a natural wildlife preserve, where the “dry and hilly
terrain supports many endangered species and a quarter
million pastoral people who refuse to give up their way of
life” (Forests.Org 1999). When the Sharif government in 1997 invited British
Premier Oil to cultivate the land into natural gas fields in hopes of discovering the
predicted three million cubic feet of gas, the quarter million pastoral people living
there protested, refusing to give up their way of life. Presently, the Pakistani
government still hopes the development of new natural gas fields would serve to
prevent the future energy crisis predicted in the next four years. However, this
hope falls short of the reality, considering the environmental concerns expressed
by pastoral peoples as well as lack of industrial facilities to implement cultivation
efforts.
THE ISSUE OF PIPE LINE AND ITS FUTURE PROSPECTS:-
The pipe line w’ld be start from Iran to India through Pakistan, of
course there is a security point is concern. Since the discovery of
natural gas reserves in Iran's South Pars fields in 1988, the
Iranian government began increasing efforts to promote higher
gas exports abroad. The prospects for profit are especially high in
South Asian countries like India and Pakistan, where natural gas
reserves are low and energy demand exceeds energy supply.

In 1995, Pakistan and Iran signed a preliminary

agreement for construction of a natural gas pipeline linking the
Iranian South Pars natural gas field in the Persian Gulf with
Karachi, Pakistan's main industrial port located at the Arabian
Sea. Iran later proposed an extension of the pipeline from
Pakistan into India. Not only would Pakistan benefit from Iranian
natural gas exports, but Pakistani territory would be used as a
transit route to export natural gas to India. Initially, the Indian
government was reluctant to enter into any agreement with
Pakistan due to the historically tense relationship between the
two neighbors. As an alternative, India suggested the
development of a deep sea pipeline where no threat to security of
resources could exist.

At present, in 2000, Indian, Iranian, and Pakistani

government officials continue to negotiate the possible routes,
modes of transport, and geopolitics of the Iran to India natural gas
pipeline. These negotiations indicate a significant shift in inter
and intra-regional politics between the states. The potential for
economic and developmental gain from natural gas will force
India, Iran, and Pakistan to reassess their roles and policies in
regional conflicts, like Kashmir, Afghanistan, and national security
issues. Furthermore, potential economic collaboration and gain
will also lead to a possible transformation of social and political
discourse between the countries, perhaps even leading to
mediation and resolution of regional conflicts.
For this pipe line, Iran and Afghanistan can be an anther issue
so I am also focusing on these two countries as follows:

Resolution of the Afghanistan conflict within Afghanistan itself as well as between

Iran and Pakistan would lead to overall economic benefit in the region. Given the
large amounts of natural gas resources in Central Asia and the need to use
Afghanistan as a route to transport these resources to other markets like South
Asia, oil companies are extremely eager to invest in economic development and
collaboration with Afghanistan, Iran, and Pakistan. In the past, however, the issue
of Afghanistan has prevented such development.
“The U.S. bombing of Bin Laden’s camps in August 1998
forced Unocal to pull out its staff from Pakistan and
Kandahar and finally, in December 1998, it formally
withdrew from the Cent Gas consortium, which it had
struggled so hard to set up. The plunge in world oil
prices which had hit the world's oil industry also hit
Unocal hard. Unocal withdrew from a pipeline project in
Turkey, closed its offices in Pakistan, Turkmenistan,”
and withdrew financing due to civil war among the
Afghans”.

The example of the Afghanistan conflict introduces the issue of national security
and its importance in the context of regional cooperation. Initially, both Pakistan
and India were skeptical and rejected the pipeline proposal because of security
concerns. Both the Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif governments halted the
projects because of reservations in the army on the type of impact this project
would have on the regional issues of Kashmir and the government's position on
bilateral trade with India. (Zehra 2000). For the Indian government, concerns
pertained to “Pakistani fundamentalists disrupting supplies” (Bagchi 2000). India
also believes the pipeline places Islamabad at a strategic advantage where it can
“shut of the tap” in times of crisis or conflict.
If am doing research on this project so there is a need to give views on India and Pakistan.
Because, without Pakistan pipe line cannot come in India. So I am also giving it on here as:

The Pakistan controlled part of Kashmir is known as Azad ("free")

Kashmir. The part which is under Indian control is called
Occupied Kashmir by Pakistan and known as Jammu and Kashmir
in India. They are divided by the "Line of Control" (see Map A).
Note the use of language by the Pakistani state to form national
discourse and opinion on the Kashmir conflict. The portion under
Pakistani control is considered free while the portion under Indian
control is termed "occupied." India is viewed as an occupier, the
outsider who has come in and usurped land which belongs to
another nation. However, which nation does this refer to? Does it
refer to the Pakistani nation-state or to the Kashmiri nation as a
people not defined by the boundaries between India and
Pakistan? In these questions it is evident that the political
discourse of Indian occupation of Kashmir has lead to further
questions of nationhood and nationality. These questions have
affected social discourse between the Indian, Pakistani, and
Kashmiri people. A new generation of Pakistani and Indian youth
who did not experience the horror of partition of the birth of the
Kashmir conflict is well versed in the rhetoric of the respective
Indian and Pakistani enemy. Furthermore, Kashmir is living in
both Indian and Pakistani Kashmir have found themselves
increasingly discontent with both countries policies towards
Kashmir and have started calling for more political autonomy
from India and Pakistan.

India and Pakistan have never been successful in negotiating

Kashmir. In recent years, the pattern has been that one side says
it will negotiate through bilateral talks with the other. The other
side rejects the proposal for bilateral talks, stating the Kashmiri
people must be included in the peace process. Additionally, the
political parties of Kashmir also seek a role in the peace process
and state their own positions often independently of both India
and Pakistan. The hostile political and social discourse and lack of
conflict resolution between India and Pakistan over Kashmir is
challenged by the emergence of the pipeline project. The project
forces the two countries to reconsider their political discourse and
interdependence, especially in light of their energy crises and
desperate need for natural gas resources.

Description:
THE PEACE PIPELINE:
IMPLICATIONS FOR CONFLICT RESOLUTION, FOREIGN
POLICY, AND REGIONALISM

The exportation of natural gas from Iran to India through Pakistan is a venture
which may change the face of regional politics in South Asia. It is a study in how
economic collaboration possesses the power to engender as well as transform
social and political discourse between countries. The Indian government
speculated whether Pakistan could guarantee security for the flow of natural gas in
the pipeline. Furthermore, Pakistan's collaboration with Iran may foster conflict
resolution as well. In the past, Iranian and Pakistani foreign policies have
disagreed on the issues of Afghanistan and Shi'a-Sunni conflicts in the region.
Thus, trade and the larger experience of economic globalization possesses the
ability to exist as mediators in conflicts in the region and between regions.

Natural gas trade between India, Iran, and Pakistan challenges the geopolitical,
historical, and strategic realities of the three countries and the general regions of
the Mideast and Asia. In this way, the relationship between the pipeline venture
and globalization is multidisciplinary. It is not characterized solely by economic
factors, even though the current economic realities in Iran, India, and Pakistan do
foreshadow the future necessity of economic collaboration. The realities of this
case study are representative of the notion that multidisciplinary globalization is
changing the face of regional politics and altering the social and political landscape
of regions.

NEGOTIATING THE PIPELINE

Holding approximately 9 percent of the world's total reserves, Iran is OPEC's

second largest producer of oil (Iran background information). Along with oil
reserves, Iran contains the world's second largest natural gas reserves "at an
estimated 812 trillion cubic feet (Tcf)" (Ibid). While Iranian natural gas
consumption is high, the country desperately needs to promote export markets for
gas due to its faltering economy and to meet the demands of modernization. To
meet these demands, Iran has targeted emerging regional markets like South Asia
for natural gas exports.

Iran has proposed the export of natural gas from Iran to India since 1993.
Alongside this proposal was the plan to export natural gas to Pakistan as well. The
Iranian government proposed the construction of a pipeline from its South Pars
fields in the Persian Gulf to Pakistan's major cities of Karachi and Multan and then
further onto Delhi, India.

The following map shows the pipeline's main route. Starting from the left side of
the map, the pipeline originates in Asaluyeh, Iran on the coast of the Persian Gulf
near the Iranian South Pars fields. It travels to Pakistan through Khuzdar, with one
section of it going on to Karachi on the Arabian Sea coast, and the main section
traveling on to Multan, Pakistan. From Multan, the pipeline travels to Delhi,
where it ends. At this point, India is free to consider and negotiate further
domestic routing of the pipeline.
ANALYSIS (Iran-Pakistan-India Gas Pipeline Imperiled):-
It can be better describe by the help of different issues were in a
motion and still being in a motion. Means different matters are
liable for this pipe line. Because there is not only a one matter is
concern but also there is a matter of three countries so all the
countries must be agreed to each other and mutual
understanding is very necessary. So the different points are under
consideration regarding to this project as follows:

 It is a well known truth as the owner of the world's second-

largest natural gas reserves. Iran is keen to exploit this
resource as a source of revenue. It is therefore pursuing gas
export deals with a number of countries.

One of the biggest and developing country and customer is India.

negotiations for a pipeline stretching across Pakistan have been
going on since the mid-1990s. A recent flurry of diplomatic visits
suggested that the deal was about to be concluded, but U.S.
security concerns and Indian anger over Iranian business
practices are putting this in doubt.

 Iran and India signed an agreement for an overland natural

gas pipeline in 1993, and in 2002 Iran and Pakistan signed
an agreement on a deep study for such a pipeline. India-
Pakistan tensions over Kashmir and related security
concerns have delayed the project. In late-February and
early-March diplomats from all three countries said a deal
would be signed soon and Iranian Foreign Minister
Kamal Kharrazi said the pipeline would be 2,700 kilometers
long, and India would buy 7.5 million tons of LNG [liquefied
natural gas] a year for 25 years.

 On 16 March, however, Indian Petroleum Minister Mani

Shankar Aiyar announced that India might withdraw from the
gas deal. "We will not buy gas from Iran if we cannot
sell it in India,” Press Trust of India reported him as saying.
Aiyar explained that Iran wants to charge as much for natural
gas as it does for LNG (about $4 per million British
thermal unit [MBTU]), , whereas the main Indian
consumers -- the fertilizer and power sectors -- are unwilling
to pay more than $3 per MBTU. With the addition of
transportation and transit charges to the Iranian price, Aiyar
said, the gas would end up costing $4.50 per MBTU. Aiyar
added that India and Pakistan will need approximately 200
million standard cubic meters of gas daily, and Iran should
offer a special price for such a large order.

 Tehran, furthermore, is insisting on a "take-or-pay"

agreement, in which India must pay for the agreed amount of
gas even if it does not take delivery of it, Press Trust of India
reported on 9 March. India reportedly prefers a "supply-or-pay"
 contract, in which Iran must deliver gas to the Indian border or
pay for the contracted quantity. Tehran also rejected India's
request for natural gas.

 It could be a coincidence, but Aiyar's suggestion that the deal

could fall through comes at the same time that U.S.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is visiting India and
Pakistan. In fact, she referred to the proposed pipeline during a
16 March press conference in New Delhi, RFE/RL reported. She
said, "We have communicated to the Indian
government our concerns about gas pipeline
cooperation between Iran and India. I think our
ambassador has made statements in that regard and
so those concerns are well known to the Indian
government.”

Analysis dose not finish on this particular talk only, there

should be some extra point regarding to legal, economical
impact and all, they are as follows:

Legal Clusters:
India, Iran, and Pakistan have verbally agreed to collaborate on
the India to Iran natural gas pipeline. Timeline for construction is
pending because feasibility issues such as security, cost and
length of production are currently being negotiated between the
three countries.

PROTECTIONISM & THE NATURAL GAS INDUSTRY IN INDIA

In the case of the Iran to India natural gas pipeline, India proposed the
transportation of natural gas in liquid form (LNG), using the coastline along the
Arabian Sea. The pipeline would begin in Iran and travel from the South Pars Oil
Field in the Persian Gulf through the Arabian Sea, just outside the territorial waters
of Pakistan and onto Delhi by way of ports on India's western coast. Pakistan has
refused to allow a feasibility study to be conducted by India near its waters on the
exclusive economic zone (EEZ). The issue of importance here is the suggestion
and development of LNG transportation by the Indian government. The most
visible World Trade Organization trade issue pertains to the Indian government's
policy proposals towards the importation of natural gas. In its policies dealing with
natural gas, India implemented certain restrictions on trade which discriminated
against foreign oil companies and foreign natural gas.

It is evident that these changes in India's governmental policies show greater

economic liberalization and cooperation. Nevertheless, the country still remains
politically cautious to economic liberalization policies. In the case of natural gas
imports, and their transportation by either pipeline or LNG tanker, India is at a
crossroads. It must

• decide which steps to take to augment the condition of its

shipping industry and economy,
• decide how best to reap the benefits of this form of economic
globalization, and
• Consider the best option for its citizens, all of whom will
experience severe energy shortages in the coming decade.

ECONOMIC CHALLENGES:

The economic challenges in natural gas trade involve locating

direct investment and securing financial arrangements for the
construction of the pipeline. According to the World Bank,
securing financial arrangements for projects in Asia should not be
difficult. The real challenges lie in resolving commercial and
political conflicts (World Bank 2000). This is exactly the case in
the Iran to India natural gas pipeline. While numerous oil
companies are interested in constructing and investing in the
pipeline, commercial and political conflicts like sanctions and
regional politics have proven to be strong challenges.

The main environmental benefit of using natural gas is that in

switching from high-carbon coal to low-carbon natural gas, the
output of carbon dioxide is reduced. This in effect contributes to
reducing the effect of global warming since carbon dioxide is a
major source of global warming (World Bank 2000). This
environmental reality affects India directly, where coal is 70.3
percent of the major fuel utilized for power generation. This high
dependence on coal creates adverse environmental effects for
India.

GDP
Countr Economic External Inflation GDP GDP Per
Growth
y Aid Debt Rate Nominal Capita
Rate

$2.9 billion $98 billion 6.7% $1.805 trillion $1,800

India 5.5% (1999)
(1999) (1999) (1999) (1999) (1999)

$116.5 million $21.9 billion 30% (1 $347.6 billion $5,300

Iran 1% (1999)
(1995) (1996) 999) (1999) (1999)

Pakist $2 billion $32 billion $282 billion $2,000

6% (1999) 3.1% (1999)
an (1998) (1999) (1999) (1999)

Economic Data
Table 1(see above) shows the main economic indicators for India,
Iran and Pakistan. By looking just at these indicators, it is obvious
that all three countries would seek to benefit from a collaborated
effort in developing the pipeline. Iran, which has the highest rate
of inflation, at 30 percent, amongst the three countries, also has
the lowest GDP growth rate. It is second to India in its level of
GDP nominal, which is $347.6 billion. The development of the
pipeline and other projects like it by the Iranian government
would help to increase the GDP growth rate as well as the GDP
nominal rate. Domestic labor and resources would be utilized in
these projects and would greatly contribute to the development of
these economic indicators. India and Pakistan could also fare well
in the pipeline project, which would bring in employment for
skilled and unskilled workers. This is important considering India
and Pakistan receive substantially lower levels of economic aid
than Iran receives.
ECOLOGICAL CHALLENGES:

The main environmental benefit of using natural gas is that in switching from high-
carbon coal to low-carbon natural gas, the output of carbon dioxide is reduced.
This in effect contributes to reducing the effect of global warming since carbon
dioxide is a major source of global warming (World Bank 2000). This
environmental reality affects India directly, where coal is 70.3 percent of the major
fuel utilized for power generation (Ibid). This high dependence on coal creates
adverse environmental effects for India.

Knowing India's high dependency on coal and the potential adverse environmental
effects makes the necessity for natural gas trade in the region even more
significant. Not only that, but evaluation of clean energy and environmental issues
is needed. Both India and the United States have been involved in forming better
collaboration with each another on such issues.

In March 2000, India and the United States signed the "U.S.-India Joint Statement
on Energy and Environment Cooperation" which directly addressed issues of
global warming, renewable energy sources, and the energy power sector. This
statement speaks to the argument made in this paper that India must reevaluate its
energy and environmental agenda. The statement focuses on the development of
multilateral cooperation between India and the United States in

• addressing climate change issues

• reducing greenhouse gas emissions
• identifying, initiating, and monitoring "public and private collaborative
projects in research, development, transfer, demonstration, and deployment
of appropriate technologies, and review policies in the area of clean energy,
renewable energy, energy efficiency, and power sector reform" (World Bank
2000)

POLITCAL IMPACT:
For years, India was reluctant to support the pipeline because of the political risk
involved in importing a strategic commodity through Pakistan. Two years ago, the
government of India decided to support the pipeline and has been working steadily
with the Iranian and Pakistani governments to lay the legal groundwork for it.

The United States publicly opposed it in March 2005, when Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice visited New Delhi. President Bush’s March 2006
press conference statement in Pakistan, “Our beef with
Iran is not the pipe line, our beef with Iran is in fact they
want to develop a nuclear weapon,” has raised questions as to
whether U.S. opposition to the pipeline had softened a bit. Such a conclusion is
probably premature. In any case, the more fundamental problems with the pipeline
lie elsewhere. Mutual suspicion between Pakistan and India and the threat of
terrorists or insurgents damaging the pipeline are still serious obstacles. And if
those are resolved, the normal commercial issues still remain, including the
difficult one of agreeing on a gas price acceptable to all three countries.

OTHER INDIAN’SUPPLIERS ………….

India is a huge and growing natural-gas market. According to the

Energy Information Administration, natural gas use was nearly 25
billion cubic meters in 2002 and is projected to reach 34 billion cubic
meters in 2010 and 45.3 billion cubic meters in 2015. India produces
gas and has worked with outside partners -- including Bechtel, Gaz
de France, General Electric, Total, and Unocal -- to increase
production, but it is looking to other countries to fulfill its
requirements.

One idea is to connect Bangladesh's natural gas reserves with the

Indian gas grid. Burma could be a source of natural gas, too. Two
Indian companies -- Oil and Natural Gas Corporation
(ONGC) and Erstwhile Gas Authority of India, Ltd (GAIL) -- own
equity in Burmese natural gas reserves, and Burmese officials have
indicated an interest in running a pipeline to West Bengal in India.

Indian Petroleum Minister Aiyar visited Moscow and Kazakhstan in

late February to discuss energy issues. He reportedly said that India
is willing to pay $2 billion for a 15 percent stake in Yuganskneftegaz,
"The Financial Express" reported on 12 March. He also said India
could invest $25 billion in the entire Russian energy sector.
India's cabinet recently authorized discussion of the Turkmenistan-
Afghanistan-Pakistan Natural-Gas Pipeline Project (Afghanistan
Report, 25 February 2005).

Means Iran does not, therefore, have a

stranglehold on the Indian market.

LITRETURE REVIEW:
Litreture is what, when we some show actual research on same
topic that is done by some magines, news paper, an organization
survey or other expert. So I am going to demonsatrate such a
research as:

According to Oil and Gas Journal, as of January 2010 Iran’s

estimated proven natural gas reserves stand at 1,045 trillion cubic feet
(TCF), second only to Russia Over two-thirds of Iranian natural gas reserves are
located in non-associated fields, and have not been developed. Major natural gas fields include:
South and North Pars, Kish, and Kangan-Nar. In 2008, Iran produced an estimated 4.1 Tcf of
natural gas and consumed an estimated 4.2 Tcf; the difference made up by imports
from Turkmenistan (see below). Natural gas consumption is expected to grow around 7 percent
annually for the next decade.

Both production and consumption have grown rapidly over the past 20 years, and natural gas is
often used for re-injection into mature oilfields in Iran. According to FACTS Global Energy, Iran’s
natural gas exports will be minimal due to rising domestic demand even with future expansion
and production from the massive South Pars project. In 2008, roughly 70 percent of Iranian
natural gas was marketed production, approximately 16 percent was for enhanced oil recovery
gas re-injection, and shrinkage, loss, and flaring accounted for about 14 percent. As with the oil
industry, natural gas.

After meeting with Iranian President Muhammad Khatami in New

York in September 2000, Musharraf expressed Pakistan's
willingness to participate in the pipeline venture and promoted
the idea as an example of regional cooperation. Musharraf stated
that the development of the pipeline and natural gas resources in
Pakistan is “the country's economic salvation” and will “break an
age old dependence on cotton and textiles as Pakistan's main
export earners”(times of India, 11 September 200) Also
discussed was the need for evolving a joint strategy towards the
resolution of the Afghanistan conflict. Khatami stressed on the
need for two things. First, "for removing any existing
misunderstandings between Tehran and Islamabad” on the
Afghanistan conflict. Second, to evolve a joint strategy towards
resolution of the Afghanistan conflict. (Times of India, 10
September 200)

..

REEARCH METHODOLOGY:-
Of course, this is the topic of primary research but I am taking it
as a “secondary research”. Because after studying each and
every factor I have to give my own views except to some charts,
diagrams, numeric data and such real survey conduct by other.
 As far as my opinion and my views is concern so I have
tried to do my best for this project. Whatever the appropriate
conclusion, recommendation, and findings I have tried to given
each and everything.

FINDINGS:-
Energy crisis in India and Pakistan:

RECOMMENDATION:-
As far as my opinion is concern, so I recommended that there
must be an important and strong relationship among these
countries. Without better participation of these, we cannot get
much as we want from Iran. And I think that we should listen the
talk of America on this matter but not consider it as much as
possible. Of course, it is an open truth that on every matter
America’s intervention at higher degree. But we are going
establish a pipe line as a front-end and relationship as a
back-end.

Pakistan relationship with India must be strong with increasing

of time. There is no any matter of J&K, regional consideration and
other matter. Undoubtly, if we all are work in collaboration so
there will be no matter of recommendation that it should be much
better than before.

CONCLUSION:
India will take further steps on the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas
pipeline after considering the economic feasibility and security aspect of the
project.

The economic aspect will be the key in taking a decision on going ahead
with the IPI pipeline, negotiations on which have not seen much progress
over the last few years.

Also, in the context of IPI, relations with Pakistan come to fore, they said,
hinting at the uneasy relations that India
and Pakistan have.
"Energy security is an aspect. If we seek reliable energy
sources. Various aspects are to be considered," the sources
said suggesting that it was not sure about the guarantee of assured
supplies if the project takes off.

The sources said India has not closed doors on IPI project but it will take
time to decide on the matter given the complexities involved. "So, the
dialogue is going on".

Gas exploration will not only damage the natural environment of the park but may impact the
lifestyles of indigenous peoples. The cultivation of natural gas reserves could transform and
displace the agricultural economy of rural communities, replacing it with a situation where cheap
labor is required for construction of the pipeline and other industrial purposes. The call for
cheap labor will inevitably result in the migration of workers from other rural communities to
places where pipeline construction and industrialization are occurring. This, in effect, will result
in dramatic shifts in the local economies of rural communities. They may no longer be able to
depend on agricultural production and labor if there is a shift in the employment prospects in
nearby locales. Construction and industrialization are not negative forces in the context of
development, especially in poor countries. It is important, however, for governments and
companies to accurately and fairly assess the cost of such activity on indigenous rural
communities.

The pipeline will provide much needed natural gas to rural

communities in both India and Pakistan. Families living in villages who used animal waste for
fuel purposes will be able to use natural gas on small portable stoves. For developing rural areas,
households can shift from using expensive forms of energy, like coal, oil, and wood, to natural
gas which is more economical and environment friendly.