THE Asian Development Bank (ADB) is currently understood to be in the final stages of revising the framework agreement and inter-state agreements to include India in the $7-bn Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan gas pipeline project. The revisions in the framework agreement would allow the ADB to incorporate an extension of the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan (TAP) gas pipeline to India in the pre-feasibility study including routes, pipeline capacity, design, and security aspects. The agreement would also define in clear terms the right of the participating states to inject or draw gas from the pipeline in case of additional gas quantities.
The Indian government is seeking to incorporate in the agreement special clauses that could guarantee that the gas volumes contracted to India would in no circumstances be disturbed at any stage if Pakistan required higher quantities than originally planned for its Gwadar port that opened recently in Balochistan. However, this would not restrict Pakistan’s maximum supplies subject to pipeline capacity. An official spokesman said that the “assessment of the consultant will not be binding”.
According to Pakistan’s petroleum ministry, the project is currently faced with seven major bottlenecks. These include non-confirmation of uncommitted gas volume by Turkmenistan regarding the Daulatabad gasfield, uncertainties or lack of clarity with regard to price of the gas to be demanded by Turkmenistan, and the security situation in Afghanistan.
Originally planned 10 years ago, the project has been baulked by the changing political and security scenario in Afghanistan. Pakistan is pursuing a two-pronged strategy on a bilateral as well as trilateral basis. In order to facilitate discussion on gas pricing parameters, the three countries have engaged a mutually-acceptable consultant to provide input. The spokesman described the project as a commercial deal, and recent high-level discussions between Pakistan and Iran were meant to accelerate the progress. The Pakistan spokesman continued by saying that the discussions on financial, commercial, technical, and legal aspects were being held in a parallel rather than a sequential manner, and he claimed that the gas price quoted in a news report was misleading, as discussions at this stage were on the gas pricing mechanism rather than absolute numbers.
