https://www.agbi.com/ The US-Iran war has upended the Gulf’s oil industry and overturned a decades-long assumption that governments and operators can rely on the Strait of Hormuz for exports.

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have fared better than their peers because they have pipelines that can bypass the strategic waterway.

Even they will struggle, however, if there is long-term disruption that permanently alters traffic through the strait.

Gulf states are now scrambling to extend, expand and lay their own pipelines to protect themselves from this worst-case scenario – but pipelines are huge infrastructure projects that usually take years to come to fruition. They typically cost billions of dollars and, if they cross borders, require close co-operation with one or more foreign governments.

Of 10 proposed projects in the Gulf, experts say the one that will be completed first is the UAE second West-East line running from Habshan to Fujairah.

This is set to run in parallel to an existing pipeline that has a capacity of up to 1.8 million barrels per day (bpd) and has been a lifeline for Emirati exports during the crisis. The new route will roughly double the amount that can be sent to Fujairah.

Crucially, West-East 2 is already under construction. The chief executive of the state-backed Abu Dhabi National Oil Company said in May that it was more than half complete.

“The UAE has said the project is progressing swiftly and is fast-tracking it to be completed by 2027,” says Eric Soosay, Middle East and Africa analyst at research group Welligence.

The advanced buildout of the UAE pipeline puts it in a league of its own, but two others are also likely to be built.

Saudi Arabia is considering plans to expand its existing East-West pipeline that runs to the Red Sea port of Yanbu.

The current route has a capacity of 7 million bpd and the expansion could add an extra 2 million bpd, according to Reuters.

It is unclear what form this would take and whether it will only transport crude. Furthermore, recent attacks by Iran-backed Houthis in the Red Sea have shown that crude exports from Yanbu are vulnerable.

But the fact that the line is set to run alongside or within existing infrastructure makes it more likely, as does the fact that it is a domestic project that does not require coordination with other countries.

Another in-country pipeline is likely to run from Haditha to Basra in Iraq.

The Iraqi government has authorised Basra Oil Company to sign a consultancy services contract with Houston-based KBR to study the feasibility of the project.

The route to Haditha could act as a trunk for other much larger projects that are under consideration by Iraqi prime minister Ali Al Zaidi.

Iraq and Kuwait have been arguably the crude exporters most vulnerable to the Hormuz closures.

While Baghdad has an existing pipeline with Turkey it transports just 200,000 bpd at present – though this may increase to 750,000 bpd in the short term.

State-owned Basra Oil Company has signed a preliminary agreement with a consortium including oil major Chevron to study routes from Basra to Ceyhan in Turkey and Basra to Baniyas in Syria.

Less likely, but still possible, is a plan floated by Iraq’s oil ministry in December last year to build a pipeline to Oman – though this has not been mentioned recently. It seems that Iraq is more likely to turn to Mediterranean export routes.

The stakes are higher for Kuwait, which has no existing cross-border links.

Kuwait Petroleum Corporation’s chief executive Sheikh Nawaf Saud Al-Sabah told an Atlantic Council conference in June the country was “in discussions” with Saudi Arabia, but no further details have emerged. One possibility is that Kuwait joins the East-West pipeline, but this has not been confirmed.

A link to Ceyhan could be more promising, however. Turkish energy minister Alparslan Bayraktar was reported in Ashark Al-Awsat as saying in July that Kuwait could join the Ceyhan-Basra pipeline if it wanted to. Coordinating a scheme this large, however, is likely to complicated.

“Cross-border projects can take considerably longer because bilateral or multilateral agreements need to be negotiated alongside the engineering work,” said Nick Holland, of risk advisory group and insurance broker Marsh.

“Subsea pipelines may also require detailed seabed surveys, specialist installation vessels, marine approvals and construction within defined weather windows.”

But Holland added that pipelines are the type of projects in which Gulf Cooperation Council countries – Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman and the UAE – can work more closely together to improve resilience and enhance the value of their natural resources.

Two mooted cross-border pipelines are at best only on the drawing board – at least in the short- to medium-term.

One is the Iraq Pipeline to Saudi Arabia (Ipsa), which was mothballed in 1990. Iraq’s oil ministry mentioned the line earlier this year, but no talks have been made public.

Another is the historic Trans-Arabian pipeline (Tapline) which runs from Saudi Arabia’s oil rich eastern province to Sidon on the Lebanese Mediterranean coast. This was a groundbreaking project when it was completed by state-backed Saudi oil giant Aramco in 1950 but it was decommissioned in 2001. Local media reported that in March Syrian officials were mulling reviving the pipeline, though with an endpoint in Syria rather than going the former full route to Sidon.

“The pipeline remains in good condition,” Soosay says, but would require modernisation and “the possibility of renewed conflicts in Syria and Lebanon could pose a risk.”