Pipelines Politics

The recent announcement by members of both the Indian and Iranian governments of the possible completion of the gas pipeline from Iran to India via Pakistan has brought many interesting questions to the fore. As discussed in the article “Iranian leader upbeat on pipeline”, the creation of such a pipeline “could contribute to regional security as Iran, Pakistan and India would depend on each other more and benefit from mutual co-operation.” Given United States’ historical relations with Pakistan, and the growing ties with India, such a move would allow the United States, in keeping with the realist idea of offshore balancing, to keep a greater check on Iran, the regional heavyweight and adversary in the Middle East.

Offshore balancing ideas, as espoused by Christopher Layne in the reading entitled “Offshore Balancing Revisited,” suggest that it is not in the interest of any hegemonic power to attempt to resolve all of its conflicts and beefs with other powers single-handedly – instead they should encourage other regional powers, especially allies, to take a greater responsibility in checking the growth of power of the threatening power. The energy demands of a burgeoning Indian economy which has necessitated the need for India to turn to natural gas rich Iran for support, and the subsequent desire for Iran to supply to this large market has created a mutual need for both nations to carry out this agreement. Geographical constraints have required that the pipeline be passed through Pakistan, a major rival of India in issues spanning control of Kashmir to regional influence, who in the light of the increased co-operation between the two rival nations as well as the economic incentives arising from this agreement, will likely accept their role in this pipeline deal soon. In the light of the involvement of two nations friendly to the United States, theoretically it would appear that offshore balancing ideas would prevail, giving the United States leverage over Iran through their allies.

However, the reaction of India to the U.S’s attempted involvement in the agreement has suggested otherwise. India’s support of Iran’s “right to fulfil a peaceful nuclear programme within the constraints of international law” has meant a rejection of the American suggestion that India use the deal to “put pressure on Iran over its controversial uranium enrichment programme.” The obvious disregard for U.S suggestions that India has shown reflects weaknesses in the offshore balancing argument that suggest that the hegemonic power is not able to compel its opponents. However the basic idea, that the hegemonic power keep its rivals in check by having its allies have a greater stake in the affairs of the rival, allows the United States to know that such ties between allies and rivals reduces the risk of engaging in direct conflict with Iran because of the economic and other considerations of India that Iran would be wont to compromise for fear of losing the economic benefits of the relations between them and India.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7372646.stm