The Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project (IPI) may jeopardize the India-US nuclear deal. Top US officials are worried that IPI will prop up the regime in Iran which is suspected of pursuing a secret nuclear weapons program and accused of sponsoring international terrorism. The letter sent by senior members of the US Congress to the Indian Prime Minister was the latest attempt to influence the Indian leadership to drop the IPI project.

It is safe to assume that in the near future there is no chance of normalization in relations between Iran and US given the problems of Iran's nuclear program; Iran's sponsoring of the Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine, and Iran's support for Shiite militias in Iraq. Therefore, it is erroneous to consider the current tense relations between Iran and US as temporary, even if the Democratic Party candidate comes to power in the White House after the 2008 presidential elections. There still will not be any significant change in US stance towards Iran. The fact that Iran remains a sworn enemy of Israel rules out any chance of detente in US-Iran relations.

The US-India nuclear deal is highly lucrative for the US companies and therefore, the US may choose not to scuttle it even if India moves ahead with the IPI. There are many other ways to kill the IPI project, however. For instance, the US might persuade Pakistan to opt out of the IPI project. Recently World Bank vice-president Praful Patel told reporters that the Bank may extend financial support to Pakistani government in building the IPI pipeline; he also said that the Bank supported the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan (TAP) gas pipeline project.

Iran and Pakistan have never been good neighbors; Shiite pogroms that took place in Pakistan in the past have been a destabilizing factor in bilateral relations. Pakistan and Iran were in opposing camps in the civil war in Afghanistan. While Iran increasingly feels encircled by pro-American regimes in its vicinity - Iraq, Azerbaijan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and NATO member Turkey - it is not certain though that any of Iran's neighbors will join hands with the US in any military endeavor against Iran.

The US government is interested in opening up Central Asian energy resources to world markets provided it is done under the leadership of US energy companies. It aims to weaken the Russian position in Central Asia and put an end to the Russian stranglehold on Central Asian energy resources.

It is interesting to note that Gazprom, the Russian gas giant, has shown interest in the IPI project with the Gazprom representative in Tehran saying that the company was keen to participate in the 'peace pipeline.' He noted that Gazprom was one of the few energy companies in the world that had the necessary experience in building such pipeline projects and added that the IPI pipeline should carry on to China.

Recently China has been trying to clinch deals with gas-rich Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan to build a gas pipeline to China, which can again weaken Russian stranglehold on the Central Asian countries. Therefore, Russia wants the IPI to be extended to China in order to dissuade China from disrupting the Russian monopoly in Central Asia.

The TAP pipeline meanwhile is also beset by numerous problems such as the unfriendly relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan, and security issues - the pipeline will run through "the most dangerous part of the world." It is a well known fact that the Pakistani government is very weak and there is a risk that it might not be able to provide necessary security to the pipeline. This factor is equally relevant for both the IPI and TAP projects.

Finally, the US may persuade Pakistan to opt for TAP and drop IPI. First, TAP is more beneficial for Pakistan because it would not have to rely on Iran given the latter's bad reputation for its unreliable business practices. For example, last winter Turkey was not happy with the disruption of gas supplies from Iran during the winter. Iranians responded to Turkish complaints by pointing to the unusually harsh winter conditions. Second, Pakistan appears not really interested in playing a positive role in the economic development of India, as it still perceives India to be the major threat to its security. The transit fees that India is offering to Pakistan in the IPI are likely to come down very substantially; moreover the main beneficiary of the IPI is not Pakistan but India.

The US may not press the Indian government hard to give up the IPI or condition successful conclusion of the Indo-US nuclear deal on India dropping the IPI; the IPI may simply never come to fruition because of the inability of Iran, Pakistan and India to come to an agreement on financial aspects of the project. The US may also try to sabotage it by persuading Pakistan to opt out of it in exchange for help with the TAP project.