US / NATO lose major battle in Pipelineistan

7 posts / 0 new
Last post
DrKrbyLuv's picture
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
US / NATO lose major battle in Pipelineistan

Excerpts; Complete Article Link

First some background

As Barack Obama heads into his second hundred days in office, let's head for the big picture ourselves, the ultimate global plot line, the tumultuous rush towards a new, polycentric world order. In its first hundred days, the Obama presidency introduced us to a brand new acronym, OCO for Overseas Contingency Operations, formerly known as GWOT (as in Global War on Terror). Use either name, or anything else you want, and what you're really talking about is what's happening on the immense energy battlefield that extends from Iran to the Pacific Ocean. It's there that the Liquid War for the control of Eurasia takes place. 

The Real Afghan War

In the ever-shifting New Great Game in Eurasia, a key question -- why Afghanistan matters -- is simply not part of the discussion in the United States. (Hint: It has nothing to do with the liberation of Afghan women.) In part, this is because the idea that energy and Afghanistan might have anything in common is verboten

Afghanistan, as it happens, sits conveniently at the crossroads of any new Silk Road linking the Caucasus to western China, and four nuclear powers (China, Russia, Pakistan, and India) lurk in the vicinity.

On to the article

The earth has been shaking for a few days now all across Pipelineistan - with massive repercussions for all the big players in the New Great Game in Eurasia. United States President Barack Obama's AfPak strategists didn't even see it coming.

A silent, reptilian war had been going on for years between the US-favored Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) pipeline and its rival, the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline, also known as the "peace pipeline". This past weekend, a winner emerged. And it's none of the above: instead, it's the 2,100-kilometer, US$7.5 billion IP (the Iran-Pakistan pipeline), with no India attached. (Please see Pakistan, Iran sign gas pipeline deal, May 27, 2009, Asia Times Online.)

California-based Unocal started floating the idea of building a pipeline crossing Afghanistan. Now, Iran and Pakistan finally signed a deal this week in Tehran , by which Iran will sell gas from its mega South Pars fields to Pakistan for the next 25 years.

The fact that Islamabad has finally decided to move on is pregnant with meaning. For the George W Bush administration IPI was simply anathema; imagine India and Pakistan buying gas from "axis of evil" Iran. The only way to go was TAPI - an extension of the childish neo-conservative belief that the Afghanistan war was winnable.

Now, IP reveals Islamabad's own interests seemed to have prevailed against Washington's (unlike the virtually US-imposed Pakistan army offensive against the Taliban in the Swat Valley).

For Beijing, IP could not be more essential. Iranian gas will flow to the Balochistan province port of Gwadar, in the Arabian Sea (which China itself built, and where it is also building a refinery). And Gwadar is supposed to be connected to a proposed pipeline going north, mostly financed by China, along the Karakoram Highway.

Pakistan is the absolutely ideal transit corridor for China to import oil and gas from Iran and the Persian Gulf. With IP in place and with multi-billion-dollar, overlapping Tehran-Beijing gas deals, China can finally afford to import less energy via the Strait of Malacca, which Beijing considers exceedingly dangerous, and subject to Washington's sphere of influence.

With IP, not only China wins; Russia's Gazprom also wins. And by extension, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) wins. Russian deputy Energy Minister Anatoly Yankovsky told the Kommersant business daily, "We are ready to join the project as soon as we receive an offer."

The reason is so blatant that Gazprom officials have not even bothered to disguise it. For Russia, IP is a gift-from-above tool in rerouting gas from Iran to South Asia, and away from competing with Russian gas. The big prize, in this case, is the Western European market, dependent almost 30% on Gazprom and the source of 80% of Gazprom's export profits.

The European Union is desperately trying to keep the Nabucco pipeline project - which bypasses Russia - afloat, so it may reduce its dependence on Gazprom. But as anyone in Brussels knows, Nabucco can only work if it is provided enough gas by either Iran or Turkmenistan. The Turkmenistan distribution system is controlled by Russia. And a deal with Iran implies no more US sanctions - still a long way away. With IP in place, Gazprom reasons, Nabucco is deprived of a key supply source.

The New Great Game in Eurasia rules that Pakistan is a key pivot to both North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the SCO, of which Pakistan is an observer. Balochistan de facto incorporates Pakistan as a key transit corridor to Iranian gas from the monster South Pars fields, and not to a great deal of the Caspian wealth of "gas republic" Turkmenistan. For the Pentagon, the birth of IP is mega bad news. The ideal Pentagon scenario is the US controlling Gwadar - in yet one more prime confluence of Pipelineistan and the US Empire of Bases.

With Gwadar directly linked to Iran and developed virtually as a Chinese warehouse, the Pentagon also loses the mouth-watering opportunity of a long land route across Balochistan into Helmand, Nimruz, Kandahar or, better yet, all of these three provinces in southwest Afghanistan, where soon, not by accident, there will be another US mega-base in the "desert of death".

Islamabad's paranoia is "foreign involvement" in the different strands of Balochistan's nationalist movements. That would be, in fact, the CIA, MI5 and the Israeli Mossad, all engaged in overlapping agendas which manipulate Balochistan for balkanization of Pakistan purposes and/or as a base for the destabilization of neighboring Iran's southeast. While the Taliban, Afghan or Pakistani, can roam free across Balochistan, Baloch nationalists are intimidated, harassed and killed.

For the moment, Iran, Pakistan, China and Russia win. The SCO wins. Washington and NATO lose, not to mention Afghanistan (no transit fees). But will Balochistan also win? If not, all hell will break loose, from desperate Balochis sabotaging IP to "foreign interference" manipulating them into creating an even greater, regional, ball of fire.

My Opinion:

If lost, the battle for Pipelineistan will be a major energy set-back for the Bilderberg group.  The Bilderbergs are being threatened by China and a rapidly expanding SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization). 

The Bilderberg group has had it's way in running most of the world throughout-out it's 55 year history.  The members of NATO all participate in the annual Bilderberg meeting (they have varying degrees of influence).  The IMF and BIS are controlled by the Bilderbergs as are the US, UK, EU central banks.  Major oil companies, multinational corporations, royalty and other elites attend.

In 1997, in his book, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives, Zbigniew Brzezinski, co-founder of the Tri-Lateral Commission, member of the CFR, Bilderberg regular and Obama's foreign policy adviser, wrote "Eurasia is pivotal because it "accounts for about 60 percent of the world's GNP and about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources."

Earlier I posted an article from Politico entitled "Obama officials gave Bilderberg briefings."  It reported that  "A handful of high-ranking Obama administration officials this month delivered private briefings at the annual invitation-only conference held by an elite international organization known as the Bilderberg group. But a meeting attendee tells POLITICO that Holbrooke, a State Department special envoy, briefed attendees on the Obama administration’s unified approach to dealing with Afghanistan and Pakistan" (translated - the battle for Pipelineistan). 

The SCO has six full members - China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan - and representatives of various ranks from its four observer states - India, Iran, Mongolia and Pakistan.  They are meeting in a couple of weeks and have announced that several other aspiring partner nations will be present but they did not disclose any names. 

A couple of weeks ago, Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi said that one of this years SCO goals is to "broaden economic cooperation and work together to overcome the global financial crisis."  It will be interesting to see if other nations begin to participate in the SCO financial network - which may become a preferred alternative to Bilderberg banks and system.

There has been speculation that "NATO’s protection of Islamic rulers is collapsing and they are already deep in secret negotiations with the Chinese for the Chinese and their allies, to protect shipping and facilities in the Middle East.  The Chinese plan to suck up the ENTIRE Muslim world into their new alliance." 

...interesting times


Farmer Brown's picture
Farmer Brown
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 23 2008
Posts: 1503
Re: US / NATO lose major battle in Pipelineistan

Thanks Larry, very interesting.

I have a brilliant idea:  how about we get off oil-based energy!  Seriously though, this article should remind everyone of the high-stakes chess match being played out on the world stage as everyone angles in on a posture of advantage vis a vis energy.  Not a pretty picture indeed.  Not that it's anything new, but as oil sources continue to dwindle even as population and energy demand increase, the stakes are just going to get higher and higher. 

castlewp's picture
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 7 2008
Posts: 304
Re: US / NATO lose major battle in Pipelineistan


I think we are going to get off of oil based energy whether we like it or not, but as Michael Ruppert says "Energy is depleting faster than it can be replaced and there is no combination of alternative energies that can or will ever sustain an edifice of human civilization built by oil. If energy gets sick, money must be treated simultaneously and vice versa — often in ways that threaten the other. Separating the twins in a way that saves and preserves life cannot take place without killing one or both under the present monetary regime." 

ckessel's picture
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 12 2008
Posts: 486
Re: US / NATO lose major battle in Pipelineistan


Thanks for the very interesting post. This really emphasises the importance of being causative about leaving our dependency on oil behind. I wish it could be done as easily as it is said. If America approached the predcicament as we did with WW II we may pull it off. A status quo approach I'm afraid will bring about nothing short of a hard crash. 

I must say that I really won't shed many tears over the loss of the Bilderberg Empire however.


Ruhh's picture
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 12 2008
Posts: 259
Re: US / NATO lose major battle in Pipelineistan

Thanks Larry for this excellent article and analysis.


Recently noticed more interesting related news if you haven't already read these.

China Stalls on AfPak Road

Pipeline Deal is sweet music for Iran


DrKrbyLuv's picture
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: US / NATO lose major battle in Pipelineistan

Ruhh - thanks for the links, I had not read either of these articles. I agree with you that this is an important story.  One thing for sure, the Pipelineistan struggle continues to take more twists and turns in a potentially dangerous chess match with future energy at stake.

In the first link, Walid Phares tells us "I will review quickly the impact of the AfPak conflict on China's national security and argue that Beijing has a vital interest in joining the US-led efforts in the sub-continent against the threat of jihadi terrorism and should be engaged by Washington from that perspective." Phares goes on to make the point that China should co-operate in the war against terrorism since the "Chinese jihadi" movement is part of the "international movement at the center of which is al-Qaeda and the Taliban."

"Xinjiang province inside China is inhabited by 45% Uyghurs, 40.6% Han Chinese...close to a 60% Muslim majority"

While there is little doubt that China should be worried about jihad in Xinjiang, there are circumstances that may make China more worried about U.S. clandestine and proxy operations stirring the pot than the Taliban and al-Qaeda. I refer to a recent article, Is Washington Playing a Deeper Game with China?

After the tragic events of July 5 in Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region in China, it would be useful to look more closely into the actual role of the US Government’s ”independent“ NGO, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). All indications are that the US Government, once more acting through its “private” Non-Governmental Organization, the NED, is massively intervening into the internal politics of China.

The reasons for Washington’s intervention into Xinjiang affairs seems to have little to do with concerns over alleged human rights abuses by Beijing authorities against Uyghur people. It seems rather to have very much to do with the strategic geopolitical location of Xinjiang on the Eurasian landmass and its strategic importance for China’s future economic and energy cooperation with Russia, Kazakhastan and other Central Asia states of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

The WUC manages to finance a staff, a very fancy website in English, and has a very close relation to the US Congress-funded NED. According to published reports by the NED itself, the World Uyghur Congress receives $215,000.00 annually from the National Endowment for Democracy for “human rights research and advocacy projects.” Rebiya Kadeer, who also serves as president of the Washington D.C.-based Uyghur American Association, another Uyghur human rights organization which receives significant funding from the US Government via the National Endowment for Democracy.

There is another reason for the nations of the SCO, a vital national security element, to having peace and stability in China’s Xinjiang region. Some of China’s most important oil and gas pipeline routes pass directly through Xinjiang province. Energy relations between Kazkhstan and China are of enormous strategic importance for both countries, and allow China to become less dependent on oil supply sources that can be cut off by possible US interdiction should relations deteriorate to such a point.

While they would never say so, growing instability in Xinjiang would be an ideal way for Washington to weaken that growing cohesion of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization nations.


I agree with most in your second link, Pipeline Deal is sweet music for Iran though I'm not sure Iran's future is best served by TAPI. Iran seems to "winner" no matter if Pipelineistan goes TAPI (AfPak) or IPI. TAPI is the western favored Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India route. And it's rival IPI Iran-Pakistan-India, also known as the "peace pipeline" since it it establishes a common interest between India and Pakistan.

Both provide a route to market for Iranian gas and oil. TAPI would move Iranian, and Eurasian, energy to the west while IPI moves it east. I thought IPI would be preferred by Iran as it would partner with Russia and China to gain protection under the SCO. But yet, Iran helped push India out of the deal by changing, by India's account, the terms of the agreement.

India rethinks participation in IPI pipeline project - Five years after reviving talks on a gas pipeline from Iran through Pakistan, India is harbouring second thoughts on continuing with its participation in the proposed project. A status report from the petroleum ministry has sought a review of the 2005 Cabinet approval on the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline, citing the stand-off with Iran on pipeline security and gas pricing as well as the increased domestic availability due to start of Reliance Industries.’

Tehran sprung a new gas pricing formula in January 2008 with a clause that the price from the new formula should not be less than the average price it charges other countries. India contends that the price formula agreed between Iran and Pakistan in January 2007 should be adhered to.

Could it be that Iran, like China, is being threatened by western clandestine and proxy operations? It has been reported that "The CIA has Distributed 400 Million Dollars Inside Iran to Evoke a Revolution."

In a phone interview with the Pashto Radio on Monday, General Beig said that there is undisputed intelligence proving the US interference in Iran. “The documents prove that the CIA spent 400 million dollars inside Iran to prop up a colorful-hollow revolution following the election,” he added. Pakistan’s former army chief of joint staff went on to say that the US wanted to disturb the situation in Iran and bring to power a pro-US government.

Iranian Unrest: Evidence Of Western Intelligence Meddling - On May 23, 2007, Brian Ross and Richard Esposito reported on ABC News: “The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert “black” operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell ABC News.” Recently, Congress voted $120 million for anti-regime media broadcasts into Iran and $60-75 million in funding for opposition, violent underground Marxists and restive ethnic groups such as Azeris, Kurds and Arabs under the “Iran Democracy Program.” For a good historical account of CIA shenanigans in Iran, click this link from the NYT.

And what about the threat of WMDs in Iran?  Scarcely a week goes by without the US, NATO members and Israel alleging that Iran is close to joining the nuclear club.  If this is true, it may be that the CIA is culpable in helping with the effort.

George Bush insists that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. So why, six years ago, did the CIA give the Iranians blueprints to build a bomb? - "The Russian, who had defected to the US years earlier, still couldn't believe the orders he had received from CIA headquarters.  The CIA had given him the nuclear blueprints and then sent him to Vienna to sell them - or simply give them - to the Iranian representatives to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).  With the Russian doing its bidding, the CIA appeared to be about to help Iran leapfrog one of the last remaining engineering hurdles blocking its path to a nuclear weapon.

More recently, Israel has been ratcheting up the threat.

Israeli navy in Suez Canal prepares for potential attack on Iran - Two Israeli missile class warships have sailed through the Suez Canal ten days after a submarine capable of launching a nuclear missile strike, in preparation for a possible attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.  The deployment into the Red Sea, confirmed by Israeli officials, was a clear signal that Israel was able to put its strike force within range of Iran at short notice. It came before long-range exercises by the Israeli air force in America later this month and the test of a missile defense shield at a US missile range in the Pacific Ocean.

Is the west playing a "divide and wedge" game similar to the banking "pump and dump" to de-stabilize the region?

  • United States

What benefits may accrue to the citizens of the U.S through this expensive and dangerous adventure?  If TAPI wins, we will be committing troops and major bases through the foreseeable future at huge costs.  Europe will benefit and the big oil companies, defense contractors and the international banking cartel will get rich but in doing so, we are setting ourselves up for an eternal conflict that may lead to WW3. 

  • Closing Comments

I think it is becoming clear that the interests of the BIS-corporate cartel supersede the interests of "We the People."  Our nation cannot articulate a coherent foreign policy because it no longer has one.  We have become a client state of the Bilderberg group that owns and controls us. 


CB's picture
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 365
Re: US / NATO lose major battle in Pipelineistan

A resource for news in Central Asia:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments