The Iran Imbroglio

WASHINGTON

The Bush Administration is making every effort to show that it means businesswith India. It is trying to dispel the notion that India got only "words"from America in the Good Friday package, not a change of heart. Foreign MinisterNatwar Singh’s visit this week will hopefully clear some of the fog when hemeets his counterpart, Condoleezza Rice.

But what the meeting is unlikely to resolve is the disagreement overIndia’s plans to build a natural gas pipeline from Iran via Pakistan. The$4.16 billion pipeline threatens to become a major irritant in bilateral tiesbecause of Washington’s deeply ideological and strident stand against Iran,one of the two standing members of the "Axis of Evil," the other being NorthKorea. During her visit to India last month Rice clarified that India could comeunder the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act or ILSA which calls for sanctions against anycountry or company that invests $20 million or more in Iran’s energy sector.She then offered an "energy dialogue" to India to help take care of thecountry’s crying needs.

The Bush brigade considers Iran a nuclear weapons wannabe and a gatheringplace for terrorists. It wants none of its friends to help Iran gain legitimacy,however strong the compulsions. But India is going ahead with its plan andhoping the maturity of Indo-US relations will take care of the rest. Indeed,Washington could look at engagement with Iran as a real option. Both India andPakistan need to maintain relations with Iran, albeit for different reasons. Thenascent stirrings of democracy and the student demonstrations in Iran a fewyears ago were a good sign but the Bush Administration squelched all hope byignoring them and looking the other way. Regime change might have been in themaking but the harsh line taken by the White House helped the hardliners.

The Clinton Administration had begun a tentative process of rapprochement,sparking hope among American diplomats that they may reopen their embassy inTeheran sometime in the future. Today, that thought today seems far away andforeign. Not only is the Bush Administration determined to squeeze and sidelineIran, it wants to warn and punish anyone else that deals with it.

But its opposition to the India-Iran pipeline is short-sighted. Because thepipeline will run through Pakistan, it will give Islamabad a booty of $600 ayear in transit fees for simply being there and guarding it. It is a CBM worthpromoting. After the Americans have been urging India and Pakistan for years tobecome friends, it seems odd, at the very least, that Washington should opposethe biggest CBM on the anvil almost automatically. In its place, Rice offered anenergy dialogue the details and scope of which are still being decided. Why notdo both -- let the pipeline through and conduct a dialogue? India’s need forenergy is desperate and it can surely absorb both.

India imports nearly 70% of its annual energy requirements, and is forced toferry gas from Iran by ship. Iran, the site of the world’s second largest gasreserves after Russia, needs to sell. The pipeline will also help Iran gain ameasure of legitimacy and acceptance in the world community which can work as anincentive to moderate its behaviour. To humiliate an ancient civilization isnever a good idea. The people may hate their leaders and the mullahs who divinethe lengths of their hair and skirts, but they hate foreign occupation evenmore.

Additionally, the pipeline will help India and Pakistan develop real stakesin each other’s economy, creating additional momentum for peace. Twonuclear-armed neighbours building real bridges instead of being on the brink ofwar -- the most favourite nightmare of Washington types. The pipeline projectcould be extended to China via Myanmar, says Mani Shankar Aiyar, India’sirrepressible petroleum minister, opening possibilities and ideas unimaginedeven a year ago. India would gain immensely if China is amenable, earning heftytransit fees in return.

Perhaps, the idea of an increasingly trading, confident and inter-connectedAsia makes the Americans a tad uncomfortable. Trade between India and China isalready growing at a faster clip than Indo-US trade, a fact that rankles many inWashington. But why try to manage a new world with old ideas and old laws?

It is time for a radical new paradigm on every front, one that looks atcountries and possibilities in the future, not the past.