LONDON: At a time when natural resources are becoming ever more precious, the leaders of the EU can be forgiven if they are haunted by a particular nightmare the accidental, or deliberate, disruption to the flow of gas from their single largest supplier, Russia. After all, it was only in January 2006 that Russian pipelines were briefly shut off during a pricing dispute with Ukraine, while western Europe prepared to freeze.

A clue to dealing with this very real threat comes from next week’s centenary of an event of monumental importance. For it is exactly 100 years ago that commercial oil was first discovered in the Middle East. It was in a remote Persian wilderness, in the early hours of May 26, 1908, that a British-led drilling team stood back in awe as the ground rumbled and a black fountain spurted high into the air.

The repercussions of these dramatic events were far reaching, not just for Persia and the wider Middle East to which investors and oil hunters from the world over, their appetites whetted, now turned but also to Britain. Above all, the Persian wells had obvious strategic consequences for London at a time of growing tension with Germany.

Persian oil seemed to offer Britain’s economy and the Royal Navy “security of supply” against price spikes and enemy disruption, prompting the government to buy a majority stake in the Anglo-Persian Oil Company. This was in part because of its sheer quantity, vital in the run-up to the great war, but also because of its proximity to Britain. By 1916, Persia was meeting more than a fifth of the British navy’s overall demand.

A century on, Iran’s natural resources could also play another lead part in western Europe’s quest for energy security but this time against another threat. Russia is the source of about 40 per cent of the EU’s natural gas imports, and the Kremlin is determined to maintain, and even tighten, its grip. The Russian-Ukrainian dispute in 2006 acted as a sharp reminder to EU governments particularly Britain, faced with dwindling North Sea stocks of the need to find different suppliers.

The EU could finance the construction of the proposed Nabucco pipeline, to carry gas from Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan under the Caspian Sea, across Turkey and into southern Europe. But the Russians have worked hard to thwart these plans, not least by piping Turkmen gas through their own trans-Caspian line that feeds into the network run by Russian energy giant Gazprom.

In fact only one supplier could now make Nabucco commercially viable Iran. Iranian natural resources could play just as important a strategic role for the EU as they did for Britain in the wake of the great discovery a century ago. Their size and location remain the key: Iran’s deposits of natural gas are reckoned to be second only to Russia’s, and could be fed into western Europe through an extension of the existing Tabriz-Ankara pipeline.

But massive pressure from Washington makes this unlikely. Iran cannot export gas without massive foreign investment, but only last week Shell and Repsol bowed to this pressure and announced that they would not be pursuing plans to develop Iran’s vast South Pars gas field.

The irony is, of course, obvious, for Iran is the one country that could counter the influence of another of Washington’s great rivals. Scarcely could there be a better reminder that in foreign affairs, it is always dangerous to unnecessarily take too confrontational an approach.

Nor is it just gas that Iran has to offer. It is already Opec’s second largest oil exporter, and could export much more if it had the foreign investment that US sanctions have blocked. How paradoxical that, as the price of a barrel touches $130, George Bush is urging Opec to increase its output at the same time that his hawkish line on Iran is impeding it.

So much will depend on the outcome of two forthcoming electoral contests in quite different parts of the world. It is possible that an Obama presidency may bring new opportunities for a “grand bargain” between Iran and the US. He has made clear his willingness to “talk directly” to Tehran after nearly 30 years of estrangement, perhaps leading to a lifting of US sanctions. Meanwhile, a victory for a pragmatic conservative in next year’s Iranian presidential elections, ousting Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, could also significantly improve the chances of a deal.

In fact, such a scenario would eerily echo the events of a century ago only this time it would be against a resurgent Russia that Iran’s vast natural resources would offer protection.—Dawn/ The Guardian News Service