Site menu:

Recent Comments

Follow on Twitter

twitter-bird.gif

RSS Updates on Twitter

RSS neweurasia

Links:

Tags

Academia Afghanistan air strikes aitmatov Andijon Announcements Aral Armenia Azerbaijan Balkhash Belarus blogosphere Bolashak Books Borat Business Cartoons Caspian Caucasus Central Asia central asia china east turkestan Central Asian Union China CIS Corruption Cotton Counternarcotics CSTO Culture Democracy Diplomacy draft East Turkestan Economics Education Elections Energy Environment EU Europe Events FOBistan Food Crisis Football Fundamentals Gas Geography Georgia Germany great game History Human Rights Humanities India Internet Iran Islam Islamism Japan Journalism Karimov Kaz Kazakhstan Korea Kyrgyzstan Language Law Maps Media Military Affairs Mongolia Movies Music nationalism NATO Nazarbayev NGO North Caucasus North Turkestan obituary Oil Organizations OSCE Pakistan Peace Corps Pictures Policy Politics Propagandists Recipes Religion Reviews Roundup Russia Saakashvili SCO Site Announcements Skylarkings Society South Asia Sports Tajikistan Tamerlane Tatarstan TEFL The Great Game The War Travel Tulip Revolution Turkestan Turkey Turkmenbashi Turkmenistan Ukraine Untagged Uranium US USSR Uzbek Music Uzbekistan Video Water Management Wikipedia Women

Meta

Site search




blog advertising





Global Voices Online - The world is talking. Are you listening?


Add to Google





Central Asia’s Seaport: Gwadar or Chabahar?

Both Iran and Pakistan have developed strategies to create strong economic and transport ties with Central Asia and beyond. Anchoring these strategies are two new seaports: Gwadar in Pakistan and Chabahar in Iran. Spreading out from these ports are existing or planned transportation infrastructure that leads into their respective country’s economic center and importantly for Central Asia, northwards. Both ports are well towards becoming fully operable and are offering generous incentives for companies and governments to do business in their ports. However, serious political, economic and logistical problems remain. For Central Asia one of these two ports, or indeed both, will likely become important links to world markets.

Tip: look way down into the bottom left-hand corner to see the ports.
Chabahar and Gwadar

The problems with Karachi and Bandar Abbas

Karachi is already overburdened with severe congestion from commercial, fishing and military shipping. And from a strategic vantage point it is quite problematic. The Indian Navy targeted the port in 1971 and any blockade in the future would devastate Pakistan since that country has an overreliance on the port of Karachi. The port of Qasim, built in the 1970s was to relive some of that burden and the port of Gwadar is expected to further reduce the reliance on Karachi.

Bandar Abbas is of enormous strategic significance to Iran as it is located on the Strait of Hormuz leading into the Persian Gulf. But that is also a problem for Iran. The area is already burdened with high traffic and of course, the U.S. Navy. Iran wishes to have another port that is more conducive to trade and further growth.

Gwadar

Gwadar, being much further away from India than Karachi, makes obvious strategic sense. But it is its commercial potential that will provide the most benefits. Gwadar is not some long-term project. Its first phase, with 75% of the costs covered by the Chinese government, is already completed. The existing docks, built by the Chinese Harbor Engineering Company, are now being operated by Port of Singapore. Port of Singapore won the contract over Dubai Ports World, the company that was forced out of America by opportunistic xenophobes in both political parties there. Phase two will be completed by 2010, adding even more capacity. Ziad Haider, a researcher at the South Asia Program at the Henry L. Stimson Center, noted that Pakistan can make the project succeed if it maintains the financial and political support of China for the project and if it makes some concessions to the Baluchis near Gwadar, who have already carried out deadly attacks on Chinese engineers.

The problem with Gwadar, wrote Ammad Hassan in his thesis for the US Naval Postgraduate School, is that while the port has been built, “the supporting infrastructure of railroad link, industrial capacity, and civic structures at Gwadar is almost non-existent.” And of course, all analysts mention Pakistan’s extremely problematic relations with the ethnic Baluch in the area who, in addition to having been in a low-grade insurgency for some time, are not at all supportive of the port. And to understate another issue, southern Afghanistan is not quite ready to be a reliable transport corridor for Pakistan to access Central Asia, despite the Afghan government’s voiced support for the project. Nevertheless, the idea of further integrating Central Asian and Russian resources southward with the Asian and Middle Eastern market has others optimistic about the long-term prospects. The Asian Development Bank is somewhat cautious though, noting that initially the port will be significant only to Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan.

Chabahar

Gwadar’s competition for trade and transport will come from Chabahar, the new Indian-financed port in Iran. A port outside of the Persian Gulf makes sense from a strategic and logistical viewpoint for Iran. The port of Chabahar was part of a plan to develop transportation infrastructure in Iran’s east for many years. Initially put in hold in 1984 it was revived in 2002 with Indian help. And the financing and engineering assistance from India is not limited to the port. India, wishing to bypass Pakistan, is also cooperating on a highway system that leads from the port into Afghanistan as well as a planned railroad to Afghanistan. Iranian officials state that they wish to have Bandar Abbas remain as the port for Russian and European trade and have Chabahar become the port for trade with Afghanistan and Central Asia. Iran already has good relations with everybody along the route leading north (including the local “warlords”) into Tajikistan. And significantly, it is in Tajikistan where Iran has already been financing several transport projects including the Anzob tunnel. And luckily for the Iranians, the U.S. constructed a bridge over the Amu Darya that fits in nicely with the Chabahar to Khojent route.

Prospects for economic integration of Central Asia with the South

For energy and mineral resources to be sent south from Central Asia a much more expensive transport infrastructure will be required than what is being built at the moment. Another limitation is the lack of a business friendly environment in most Central Asian states. And consumer goods are already entering Central Asia from Russia and China. What more is there a demand for? Furthermore, many Central Asian leaders are obsessed over local issues and haven’t been overly enthusiastic about regional integration (with Uzbekistan being the worst offender).

What is a long-term prospect is Central Asia being a transport route from the ports to Xinjiang, Russia and Kazakhstan, all of them important markets. The routes to Gwadar and Chabahar cut off thousands of kilometers for certain trade routes.

Strategic considerations

Any transportation or military problems in the Straits of Malacca, the Straits of Hormuz, the Suez or anywhere along Asia’s southern coastline will further boost the importance of Central Asia as a transport and trade corridor. Beyond Pakistan and Iran, both China and India are seeking closer relations with Afghanistan and Central Asia. The planned transport and trade routes will have the obvious effect of building solid ties. Iran’s considerations are boosting trade, having secure borders, and avoiding “encirclement” by American proxies (no matter how much a figment of the Iranian government’s imagination). As for Pakistan, the governments there has hoped for better relations with Central Asia. However, their Afghanistan policy always got in the way. Now they hope to move away from that era.

Conclusion

The countries of Central Asia will likely benefit from both Chabahar and Gwadar. Diversifying its import and export routes is a logical economic and political step. Although one should not exaggerate the economic benefits to be reaped. As for the competition between the two ports, it will not be a “winner take all” outcome but rather one port earning the greater share of trade. And the “winner” in this respect will likely be Chabahar, at least in the short term. Iran is more stable than Pakistan, it has better relations with Afghanistan and the Central Asian states, and unlike the Gwadar route its proposed route goes through relatively stable parts of Afghanistan. As long as Iran avoids outright conflict with the United States or any sort of domestic turmoil it should come out of this competition with an advantage.

Primary sources:
Ahmed Rashid
Ammad Hassan (pdf)
Asia Times
Asia Times #2
Gwadar Corner
Jamestown Foundation
Rizwan Zeb
Iran Daily
Daily Times
Ziad Haider (pdf)

Stumble it! |

Comments

Comment from Assad
Time: 8/21/2007, 4:06 am

A very interesting comparison, a very well written, brief yet informative. The learned writer deserves a “HOLA”
In my opinion Gwadar Port enjoys a lot better location than Chahbahar Port. Gwadar Port is situated at Main Cargo Route whereas Chahbahar Port is 175+ KM away from Gwadar towards a dead end…
It makes Gwadar Port a preffered choice for any Ship because you know time and distance cost in hundreds of thousands of dollars to ships.
India is dying for a trade corridor from Pakistan to trade with Afghanistan and Iran, just because of Pakistan’s Strategic Location.

Irani Policy: Politically Alone, Only India is helping Iran but India is helping not as a friend but as an enemy of Pakistan. India will never help Iran for Iran rather India will work against Pakistan.

Initially, Gwadar port is expected to face competition from Iran. But after completion of the Phase-II by 2010, it is likely to become one of the busiest ports in the region, providing warehousing, trans-shipment and industrial facilities for trade.

Comment from Kayumars Turkistani
Time: 8/21/2007, 10:58 am

Assad,
I agree that Gwadar will be successful and will likely have higher cargo rates than Chabahar. Would it be fair to say that Gwadar will have more trade but that Chabahar will initially (for 10-15 years) have a higher percentage of the Central Asia trade?

And with stability in the region I can see both ports as winners, just as there are competing ports in Europe that all do well. Keep in mind that I am not an economist or a business strategist. I’m just trying to take a guess at what political and economic effects these ports may have in Central Asia. And consider my conclusion mostly speculation rather than the result of some in depth study. The experts often get it wrong and I’m not even an expert in the area of international trade routes.

Comment from Deirdre
Time: 8/21/2007, 12:40 pm

That was a very interesting article. I sincerely mean that, I really do. I’ve been reading Registan for years, always top-notch.
But y’know who and what I miss? Nathan and his links to Central Asian popular culture. Could we have some more of that and less Iran/Taleban please? Nathan where are you? Come back!
I’m off to listen to Cherniy Boomer, whilst also thinking hard about Uzbekistan…beep beep.

Comment from Nathan
Time: 8/21/2007, 2:28 pm

I’m around, but work is occupying a lot of my time. And unlike previous jobs where I’ve blogged on the clock, I feel it would be a bit improprietous for me to do so at this place.

However, I can try to do more pop culture posts. Those don’t take much time, and if there’s a demand for them to come back (I’ve received complaints about them in the past), I can do so.

Comment from Lawrence
Time: 8/21/2007, 6:45 pm

Chinese support will make or break this contest. Though I agree that both can be successful and still compete. If China is willing to pay higher shipping costs for their oil to go through Pakistan instead of Myanmar, then Gwadar will be successful with or without the Central Asian countries.

Comment from Mohammad
Time: 12/3/2007, 3:56 am

Some part of information about Chabahar is not accurate, for instance it is not as has been mentioned ” the new Indian-financed port “, Chabahar is operational for more than 30 years, due to its geostrategic position, has attracted many international investors to invest there like Indian companies. Capable of handling 45000 DWT ships and equipped with different specific and modern equipment now is able to handle all type of cargo such as container, liquid bulk, general cargo and solid bulk. Increasing Chabahar geographical advanatge in maritime transport contest , goverment has allocated considerable amount of money to expand it so its development plan has started this year, meanwhile some international shipping lines and companies like Indians are negotiating to take participate in such excellent situation.

|