Whither energy security?

WHILE power outages and gas shortages are becoming a routine, our energy managers do not seem to have any sense of urgency to grapple with the current situation. At this situation, it would be too much to expect them to ensure uninterrupted supplies in the future. As a Recorder Report has pointed out, the government has missed all key targets for the energy security it had set for itself two years ago. The report notes that in 2005 top leaders had approved a comprehensive plan to ensure energy security, but not much on the ground progress is yet visible. As a matter of fact, those concerned have been issuing warnings that electricity and gas shortages are going to worsen in the coming years. The 17-point action plan for energy security contained a number of important proposals, though it included some harebrained schemes as well such as that OGDC should explore the possibility of getting/running a developed oil field in Iraq. That unfortunate country remains mired in a brutal war to which there is no end in sight. It would be nothing but a huge blunder to invest in an Iraqi oil project. The energy security plan places major emphasis on establishing more nuclear powered plants with the help of Canada, Germany, France and the US, which is an unrealistic expectation given that these countries do not trust Pakistan much in nuclear matters. China may be willing to go along with our desire to match India’s US-assisted civilian nuclear power programme, but so far that too is a pie-in-the-sky kind of idea. We must have a well thought-out, integrated plan to explore diverse sources of power and gas.
Noting that contrary to the general practice in other countries, the prices of natural gas in Pakistan were higher for the industrial consumers than that for the domestic users, the plan underlined the need to expedite import of gas to ensure supply to the industrial sector at competitive rates since imported gas is cheaper than what is produced locally. It also said that prospective investors should be assured of gas availability since additional supplies would be brought in through new pipelines. Where are those pipelines? The one tangible project, Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline, seems to have run into trouble, despite the strong resolve the government leaders have been expressing to carry it through with or without India’s participation. According to a press report about the proceedings of a recent Economic Coordination Committee (ECC) meeting, it is uncertain when the project would be implemented. Some ECC members cited lame excuses such as high price and the possibility of US sanctions against Iran, to urge adoption of a wait-and-see policy. As it is, there is a huge amount of spadework that needs to be done to pave the way for the Turkmen and Qatar gas pipeline projects. Clearly, it is not in our interest to delay the IPI when it is just about ready to take off and the country is in the midst of an energy crunch. The future looks even bleaker in view of the fact that our own reserves are only 40 percent of the present requirements. Instead of wasting more time in ‘wait-and-see’ mode, the government must try and speed up work on the IPI project. And considering that in the past Pakistan has defied the US when it came to protecting its core interests, it should not be so difficult to do the same in the present instance, especially when Washington is being offered all-out help for what it regards as its crucial security issue. We must learn to secure our own longer term economic interests rather than to find solace in transient benefits.


 

A damaging showdown

FRENCH President Nicolas Sarkozy, now seven months in office, may be busy trying to make his mark with a fresh foreign policy, including a rapprochement with the United States, but for the moment he has troubles closer home to worry about. Yesterday French rail and energy workers began an open-ended strike to protest planned radical changes to their generous pension plans. Next week teachers, students, civil servants, magistrates and even opera singers are due also go on strike. Last month there was travel chaos when Air France workers struck. The precise nature of the grievances varies but all are underpinned by the consequences of Sarkozy’s determination to balance France’s budget by cutting out what he characterizes as over generous pay and conditions to the large state sector. The last time a French government attempted to slash its costs this way was in 1995 and three weeks of industrial action by transport and public workers forced the withdrawal of the plans. Sarkozy no doubt feels he is on stronger political ground since long overdue reforms were a key plank of his election platform. Indeed polls last week suggest that more than 60 percent of the French approve of the changes he wants to make. The government has homed in on the case of train drivers who under present arrangements retire aged 50 with a full salary pension for the rest of their lives. These terms stem from the 1940s when the work was seen to be both dangerous and tiring. The view of most Frenchmen used to be that anyone who could land such a job was fortunate. But attitudes have changed as it has become apparent that France along with other European countries such as Germany and Italy can no longer afford such open-handedness.
This is, therefore, a naked test between the will of the voters as expressed in the mandate they gave Sarkozy this spring and the street power that has for so long characterized French politics. Sarkozy is too smart a politician to have embarked on this serious confrontation without a game plan. Maybe by threatening substantial change, he can win by careful compromises that spread the changes out over a longer period but still in the end have the same budgetary effects. What Sarkozy cannot do without destroying his presidency in its early days, is to abandon his plans. Yet that is what union leaders are demanding. They know they won in 1995 and might reasonably expect to win again. They are not worried if Sarkozy is fatally wounded politically since they do not like his right-wing views anyway. They also know that if they themselves lose this fight, they may sustain the sort of damage that Britain’s Mrs. Thatcher inflicted on the UK unions 30 years ago, from which they are only now showing signs of recovery. They may indeed even refuse to accept any carefully planned compromises Sarkozy has up his sleeve. France, therefore, may be set for a damaging showdown to decide if power lies in the ballot box or on the streets. There can only be one winner.

—Arab News