According to some statement and information provided by the promoter, Mohana Holdings Limited (MHL), the MBI project will be completed under the Build-Own and Operate (BOO) concept. The project completion would take about five years or less. Admittedly the most fundamental energy issues are political in nature and international in scope, but this issue (proposed pipeline) has received little critical analysis so far from a detached perspective. Therefore, there is a need to examine the proposal of MHL in a levelheaded manner, however based on available data, information of analogous schemes.

We do appreciate that political process operating within and among nations will largely determine the extent to which economic efficiency and technological possibilities will control the future execution of MBI, and the extent to which other factors such as national security will come into play. Moreover, politics and economics are the means for making key tradeoffs for transit of energy, nationally and internationally, between, for instance, cheap energy (natural gas) and secured supplies or between self-sufficiency and environmental quality.

We find it interesting that an analogy can be drawn between the proposed TAP project the MBI project. There are some similarities and dissimilarities as well between the two. However, the proven reserve of gas in Turkmenistan is 101 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) or about 2.4 percent of the total gas reserves in the world. The security of the pipeline within Afghanistan and from Afghanistan to Pakistan remains uncertain. Essentially, the major players in the TAP pipeline are the Turkmen government (the seller), Pakistan government (the buyer) and Afgan Government (the transit). ADB is acting as a facilitator and perhaps part financier. When TAP turns into TAPI with a probable extension to India, the project would have another beneficiary India (as the second buyer), the fourth player in the game. What however is not clear is that the border prices for gas has not been made public. Nevertheless, the whisper is that the price might range between US $ 3.50 to US $ 4.0 / Mcf in India. In comparison we find in the case of MBI pipeline, the security concerns in Myanmar part has not been addressed -- we only know that the pipeline passes through some areas where the Rohynga rebels are operating and the TNV is operating in the Tripura part. No indication or estimate of border price for gas in India nor even the well-head price in Myanmar has been disclosed by MHL. Why such a secrecy in an international business deal?

Though an almost analogues situation as the TAP pipeline proposal, the MBI project brief offers a vague story. Reportedly, the MBI pipeline is to be constructed from Myanmar (the seller), to India (the buyer) and Bangladesh is expected to play the role of transit (as well as wheeler within Bangladesh). Perhaps the most important and controversial aspect of the proposed project is that the game plan is unclear. The tentative route is contentious and above all the reserve of gas in the designated gas fields located in the offshore not far from Sittwe (former Akyab) perhaps at Sawoo has not yet been fully appraised and certified by any internationally reputed independent appraiser as a standard practice for any commercial project. Taken together, the very thought of crossing the long mountainous route (in Myanmar and Tripura) say with a 30-inch diameter gas pipeline may create convulsion in the implementation programme.

Nevertheless, the publicly known promoters of the Dhaka based Mohona Holding Limited (MHL) appeared to be confident when they organised a meet the press session. Curiously no one asked them about the proposed routes, nor anyone thought it necessary to discuss such a mundane issue! However, from other relevant information it revealed that the proposed pipeline starts at Sittwe (former Akyab) in Myanmar, then goes north and enters Mizoram in India, from there it takes a western turn to enter Tripura in India. From Agartala it enters into Bangladesh and travels through Brahmanbaria-Ashuganj and then swings toward Jamuna Multipurpose Bridge. We apprehend that this route may pose security hazard for Bangladesh in general. We understand that the first Cabinet Committee Meeting carefully evaluated this issue and did not find it acceptable. Reportedly, the higher authorities overruled this. The people and the government of Bangladesh cannot ignore such a phenomenon.

We also read in the news media that the energy ministers of Bangladesh, India and Myanmar met at Yangoon on 12-13 January, 2003 and agreed in principle to consider the proposal of M/s MHL, which is claimed to have been originated in late 2002. Later, the Chairman, Petrobangla and GM of the Gas Transmission Co. Ltd., representing a technical committee met at Yangoon to work out the technical details with a view to support the proposal. It also transpired that the three involved players from Myanmar, Bangladesh and India are planning to sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on the proposed project. Meanwhile, also reportedly, the Horn'ble Prime Minister has formed an inter-ministerial committee to examine the proposed tri-nation gas pipeline in the context of Bangladesh interest. We, very humbly, appreciate the gesture.

Bangladesh government however, sought a land corridor for bilateral trade with Nepal and Bhutan. Unexpectedly, the government proposal for import of electricity from Bhutan and Nepal is also very vague. From mid nineties discussions on this point shuttled around using the Indian National Grid to carry electricity from Bhutan or Nepal to northern Bangladesh. But this faced difficulties because of technical grounds, particularly transmission line voltage differences between the two countries. We humbly propose that an independent company or consortium should build dedicated transmission lines from Bhutan/ Nepal to Bangladesh. But these up front negotiating issues seem to have gone into a quandary. On the MBI pipeline proposal, the promoters said they have already started negotiation with public and private investors to form an international consortium i.e., to set up a company based on build-own-operate (BOO) principle (like the IPP projects in the power sector in Bangladesh). But the MHL declined to offer any details, a typical characteristic of some wheeler-dealer.

In fact the MHL and the consortium's role in implementing the project have not been explained adequately. The viability, security and modus operandi etc for constructing the proposed pipeline through these three sovereign countries remained an untold story.

It may also be noted that the route proposed by MHL starts from Sittwe (former Akyab) in Myanmar, goes north along the Kaladan River Valley somewhere south of Mizoram in India, then turns west and crosses at least six hill ranges to reach Agartala in Tripura. From there it plans to enter Bangladesh at Brahmanbaria and via Ashuganj goes west to the Jamuna Multipurpose Bridge. After crossing the Jamuna River (?) it enters West Bengal, India via Jessore. But the most critical point i.e. crossing of the river Jamuna have deliberately remained a secret. Why so? Are the promoters, by any chance, envisages using the existing 30-inch diameter gas pipeline at the belly of the Jamuna Multipurpose Bridge? We would like the promoters of MBH to appreciate that this gas pipeline (with a capacity of 750 to 800 MMcf/day) is dedicated for the development of the western zone of Bangladesh and not for making out of the way provision for external business interest (as was attempted by UNOCAL to export 3.5 Tcf gas to India in 20 years, but failed). Crossing the Jamuna River by a river bed pipeline has also been found not feasible in two studies -- the latest being in the beginning of the 1980s because of the very high downward scouring in the Jamuna River. We wish to remind the government and ourselves that world's two deepest piling is in Bangladesh. These were accomplished on the Jamuna riverbed between 110-130 meters during the 1980s and 1990s between Nagarbai-Aricha (East-West inter connector) and Elenga-Sirajgonj (JMB), respectively.

There is another relevant issue. The Myanmar-India-Bnagladesh-India route appears to be analogous to ESCAP proposed Asian Highway route to Yangoon via Sylhet and Imphal in Manipur of India. Like the present government's rational decision for the Asian Highway to Rangoon via Cox' Bazar-Gundumm-former Akyab to Rangoon we propose a similar route for the MBI pipeline.

It is not unlikely that there are other options for the pipeline of which two are mentioned below. Option I is the offshore route from Sittwe (former Akyab) via Teknaf taking a western turn at Bhola (for a compressor-booster station and then onward to Calcutta in West Bengal along the near shore. We earnestly request the government to think of this alternative option for the pipeline via the shorter, cheaper and easier offshore route like the shorter Asian Highway to Yangoon. Option II is a less controversial route from Agartala in Tripura to Comilla in Bangladesh to Shatnol on the Bank of Meghna, crossing the river (which has no downward scouring) to Muladi in Barisal and then onward to Calcutta via Khulna-Satkhira. We may recall that a feasibility study of the route from Comilla to Khulna was done in the eighties by Petrobangla to take gas to southern districts. However, this may not be less hazardous. The elements of security will still be there.

One other interesting part of the story is that the consortium is proposed to be located in a neutral country in the Far East. This consortium will buy gas from Myanmar to sell it to India. The promoter (MHL) has carefully avoided naming the neutral country. Nevertheless, in this case the great operation will be conducted perhaps through a remote control by MHL. What a technological advancement even in the business atmosphere ? We have a hunch that one fine morning like the Occidental operation in the gas sector or the AES operation in the power sector, the would-be consortium, with or without the concurrence of the government of Bangladesh, will evaporate into the thin air by selling out MBI interest to an unknown operator located in Timbaktu(?).

The government should take adequate precaution prior to agreeing on the proposal of M/s MHL. Thanks to the Almighty, now that the bad omen in the energy sector is gone, rational decisions can be made. However, very interestingly there are also talks about an open excess in the transmission pipeline capacity, which can be partially utilised by Bangladesh to transport its own gas to hungry northwest and south eastern region. It is a fallacy. The vineyard story about open access in transmission line is like the Trojan horse legend. The government should be very cautious about such leak-spots in a project, and rightaway reject the present proposal of MHL to save the country from future disaster.

We also suggest that GTCL should not get involved in the pipeline at all. Their involvement may create serious problems in future. We are afraid that if the supply is disrupted from Myanmar for any reason GTCL may be forced to supply the needed amount from the reserves of Bangladesh. This point has not been made clear as far as we saw in the news media. The pipeline should be an express line and also an exclusive affair of the consortium. They will pay the negotiated royalty, ROW charges, etc. for the route within Bangladesh like any other pipeline in the world across countries.

Otherwise, social protest may begin soon to crystallise on both the professional and citizen levels -- in political and industrial arena. There can even be a mounting dissatisfaction on the non-disclosure of facts by MHL on many relevant issues. One thing is clear -- that an increasing public suspicion and distrust about the fishy business proposal of MHL would soon become more puzzling to the public. We suggest that alternative routes be discussed and made public, and a consensus is built to protect Bangladesh's national interest. Any and all suspicion and controversies be avoided by MHL so that the Bangladesh government can optimise the benefit of the proposed Myanmar-Bangladesh-India pipeline.

Nuruddin M. Kamal is a former Additional Secretary to the Government, S. K. M. Abdullah is former Chairman, Petrobangla and Dr. Badrul Imam is Professor, Dhaka University.