"From the time it was first proposed in the early 1990s, after the fall of the Soviet Union, the 1,000-mile-long Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan pipeline project, or TAP, has always had a certain unrealistic aura to it. Clearly Pakistan has a growing need for energy. Just as clearly, Turkmenistan has a lot of natural gas. The dilemma has always been Afghanistan: Would you put a gas pipeline through a country with a raging civil war?"
This is the infamous pipeline that was meant to be built by UNOCAL and a consortium named CENTGAS. The politics of it kept the issues of Osama and the Taliban separate in US foreign policy prior to 9/11. We were ready to pay the Taliban millions a year for the deal, in addition to millions in foreign aid we gave them anyway. Clinton had to mess the whole thing up and bomb some tents and sand trying to hit Osama. Afghan President Karzai was a consultant for UNOCAL then. So was Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, formerly to Afghanistan and now to Iraq. Funny how that works. Almost two years ago now, someone I know made an attempt at writing about it. Amazingly, the page is still there (http://www.worldwisenews.com/articles/Bigoil.html) even though he closed the hosting account long ago. The effort is somewhat incoherent, but the links still work (most anyway) and there are lots of interesting tidbits to peruse if you're interested. Oh, this too: A link to the Enron pipeline connection to 9/11 is there. (http://www.john-loftus.com/enron3.asp#pipeline). However, the signing may be a bit premature as the Taliban is increasing the tempo of attacks and using tactics suited to blowing up a pipeline. What that means, given the fledgling status of the Afghan armed forces, is building and protecting the pipeline is going to require one thing: foreign troops...lots of them. Pakistani? Not likely given the growing hostility between non-Pashto Afghans and Pakistanis. Indian? Hindu troops in a Muslim nation...impossible. NATO? Since none of the EU nations would profit, it is unlikely. Russian or Chinese? CICBush43 would explode! Whose then? Yup, most likely us. So some of the grunts and leathernecks may have a minor detour on their way home from the phaseout of U.S. troops in Iraq. Back to where they should have gone in 2002 to finish the pacification of Afghanistan and kill off Osama and the Taliban. Better late than never...but more risky now that the Taliban is augmented by al Qaeda veterans of Iraq, skilled in IED tactics and use of suicide bombers. David Bier http://abcnews.go.com/International/CSM/story?id=1619370 Afghan gas pipeline nears reality After years of waiting, the project could be a welcome source of jobs and income. By Scott Baldauf KABUL, AFGHANISTAN - If all goes well this week, Afghanistan may soon be on its way to having a gas pipeline going through its territory. The ninth meeting of oil ministers for Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan started Tuesday in Ashkabad, Turkmenistan's capital. And according to Afghan officials, the three countries are closer than ever to a deal. "When I met with the Turkmenistan vice president, and with [Afghan President Hamid] Karzai, and with President Pervez Musharraf, they all said this is a very good project, and it will have a good effect on the regional economy," says Mir Sediq, Afghanistan's minister for mines and industry. Even India is interested in the project, and Indian officials will be attending the Ashkabad meeting as observers. "Manmohan Singh told me, 'We have a population of 1.3 billion people, and we cannot continue to grow without power," says Mr. Sediq. "One or two pipelines are not enough. We'll need three or four.' " >From the time it was first proposed in the early 1990s, after the fall of the Soviet Union, the 1,000-mile-long Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan pipeline project, or TAP, has always had a certain unrealistic aura to it. Clearly Pakistan has a growing need for energy. Just as clearly, Turkmenistan has a lot of natural gas. The dilemma has always been Afghanistan: Would you put a gas pipeline through a country with a raging civil war? For much of the 1990s, American oil company Unocal answered "yes," and hired Afghan consultants - such as the soon-to-be president Hamid Karzai; soon-to-be US ambassador to Kabul, Zalmay Khalilzad; and soon-to-be minister of Mines and Industry Sediq - to help negotiate with tribal chiefs and militia warlords. Eventually, Unocal shelved the project, in part because of the Taliban's intransigence, and in part because of pressure from human rights groups for trying to do business with them. But with the fall of the Taliban in late 2001, and the support of foreign forces to keep relative peace, Afghanistan has suddenly turned into a "safe" investment choice, at least from the perspective of the oil industry. That is the assessment of the Asian Development Bank, which recently commissioned a study that gave its support to the TAP. Security is an issue, the ADB report says, but an issue that can be resolved with a few protective measures. Then there's Pakistan: Will it be able to consume enough of Turkmenistan's gas for the project to be viable? At the time the TAP was first proposed, Pakistan's economy was growing at 4.5 percent a year. Today, its growth rate is estimated at 8.5 percent. Pakistani energy officials estimate that they will run out of domestic gas supplies in 2010. The final cost of the project is currently estimated at $3.7 billion, up from the $2.5 billion price tag estimated in the 1990s. Unocal is now out of the picture, replaced by Argentine energy company Bridas. For Afghanistan, this project could be a welcome source of jobs and income. After the three-year construction period, annual revenue for the Afghan government would reach around $350 million to $450 million. This is less than the $2.2 billion in Afghanistan's illicit opium economy, but it has the advantage of being clean. -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
