India-Iran Relations

[ajtr]

Nuclear arms race in Middle East will affect India, warns U.S.​

The U.S. says it expects India to enforce U.N. sanctions against Iran, but would leave it to New Delhi to decide how to convince Tehran to give up its pursuit of nuclear weapons.

"This is about the danger of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, which will affect countries outside of the region, including India," State Department spokesman Phillip J. Crowley told reporters on Monday.

"So everyone has a responsibility to do what each country can to convince Iran to change its present course," he said. "I'll leave it to India to describe what steps it is going to take."

Asked to comment on Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao's reported remarks that such "unilateral sanctions" can have "a direct and adverse impact" on India's energy security, Mr. Crowley said the U.S. understands that "every country obviously pursues its own self-interest of its citizens".

"By the same token, all countries have international obligations to fully respect and to heed the sanctions that were passed by the Security Council last month."

The U.S. was taking its own steps to fully implement U.N. sanctions and additional steps within its own laws, he said. "And we would expect all countries to respect and commit themselves to undertake and to enforce the sanctions that have been passed by the U.N. Security Council."

Mr. Crowley also offered no immediate comment "as to whether we have concerns about" the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline.

The U.S. has ongoing concerns about the nature of Iran's nuclear programme, he said noting Russian President Dmitry Medvedev too had voiced a concern that Tehran could reach a "tipping point" in its nuclear drive.

"This is just indicative of the cooperation and shared perspective that the United States and Russia have reached on this issue," Mr. Crowley said.

Iran's continued pursuit of sensitive uranium enrichment work was narrowing the "leap from a civilian programme to a military programme," he said.

"We have definite concerns that if this trajectory continues, that Iran will at some point approach that moment-that tipping point, if you will-where it has a de facto military capability," Mr. Crowley said.

"We are doing everything in our power to delay and deter that moment from occurring," he said.

 

[ajtr]

Why only india should follow usa's diktats.USA has nothing to say for china and pakistan having trade relations with iran or same shameless usa pussyfoot china-pak nuke deal at nsg.

US warns India not to break Iran sanctions​

The US has warned India to honour UN sanctions against Iran after its foreign secretary criticised "unilateral" measures against Tehran over suspicions it is developing a nuclear weapons programme.

Phillip J. Crowley, a spokesman for the US State Department, said it was for India to decide what individual measures it would take, but warned its security would be threatened if Iran became a nuclear power.
Mr Crowley said India had a responsibility to persuade Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions. "This is about the danger of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, which will affect countries outside of the region, including India. So everyone has a responsibility to do what each country can to convince Iran to change its present course."India has long-standing ties with Iran and has made a number of substantial investments in its oil and gas sectors. Its Congress-led government has said while it will honour UN sanctions against Iran, it favours dialogue and remains opposed to "unilateral" additional sanctions announced by the US and the European Union.
Last month, the EU and US announced a series of sanctions against Iran which were significantly tougher than those agreed by the UN days earlier. The EU announced sanctions against investments in and technology transfers to Iran's oil and gas industries, while the US banned American investments in Iranian firms.
India's foreign secretary said India opposed any actions which go beyond the UN resolutions.
"Unilateral sanctions recently imposed by individual countries, with their restrictions on investment by third countries in Iran's energy sector, can have a direct and adverse impact on Indian companies and more importantly, on our energy security and our attempts to meet the development needs of our people," she said.

 

[ajtr]

India ignoring Washington as it woos Iran​

By HARSH V. PANT
Special to The Japan Times
LONDON — India and Iran have decided to give new direction to their bilateral ties that have been dormant for some time now.



Ever since the United States and India started to transform their relationship by changing the global nuclear order to accommodate India, Iran has been a litmus test that India has had to pass from time to time to the satisfaction of U.S. policymakers. India's traditionally close ties with Iran have become a factor influencing a U.S.-India partnership.

India-Iran ties have been termed an "axis," a "strategic partnership" and even an "alliance." However, the American focus on India-Iran ties has been highly disproportionate to the realities of this relationship, a result more of the exigencies of domestic politics than of regional political realities.

Until recently, when the choice emerged between Iran and the U.S., India would side with the U.S. But the Obama administration's callous attitude toward India is pushing India toward Iran, and that could have grave geopolitical consequences. Ignoring Washington, India recently signed several agreements with Iran, including an air services agreement and a memorandum of understanding on new and renewable energy aimed at increasing trade from $15 billion to $30 billion.

Economic cooperation in priority areas such as oil, gas, petrochemicals, pharmaceuticals and textiles is key to this endeavor. Plans are afoot for greater maritime cooperation; Iran has already joined the Indian Navy's annual initiative, the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium. Moreover, the two sides have decided to hold "structured and regular consultations" on the issue of Afghanistan.

America's Afghanistan policy has caused consternation in Indian policymaking circles. A fundamental disconnect has emerged between U.S. and Indian interests with regard to Af-Pak. The Obama administration has systematically ignored Indian interests in crafting its Af-Pak priorities. While actively discouraging India from assuming a higher profile in Afghanistan, for fear of offending Pakistan, the U.S. has failed to persuade Pakistan to take Indian concerns more seriously.

While the U.S. may have no vital interest in determining who actually governs in Afghanistan — so long as Afghan territory is not used to launch attacks on U.S. soil — India does. The Taliban — good or bad — oppose India in fundamental ways. The consequence of abandoning the goal of establishing a functioning Afghan state and a moderate Pakistan will be greater pressure on Indian security. To preserve its interests in this milieu, India is now coordinating more closely with states like Russia and Iran.

During Russian President Vladimir Putin's visit earlier this year, India sought Russian support in countering what it views as a U.S.-Pakistan axis in Afghanistan. India is making a concerted move to reach out to Tehran.

India's deputy national security adviser, Alok Prasad, was in Iran a few weeks back trying to seek Iranian support in stabilizing the rapidly deteriorating situation in Afghanistan. Indian Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna, too, has held discussions with his Iranian counterpart, especially concerning the West's plans for reintegrating "good Taliban" gathers momentum.

Over the last several years, India has repeatedly voted in favor of International Atomic Energy Agency resolutions condemning Iran's nuclear behavior. Though the Indian prime minister has been categorical in asserting that a nuclear Iran is not in Indian interests, the Indian government has been keen in recent months to emphasize that it favors dialogue and diplomacy as means of resolving the Iranian nuclear crisis. India has underlined that unilateral sanctions on Iran will hurt India, including sanctions by individual countries that restrict investments by third countries in Iran's energy sector. As Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao recently made clear, India is "justifiably concerned that the extra-territorial nature of certain unilateral sanctions recently imposed by individual countries, with their restrictions on investment by third countries in Iran's energy sector, can have a direct and adverse impact on Indian companies and more importantly, on our [India's] energy security and our attempts to meet the development needs of our people."

The Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline project has also been on the agenda as India remains keen to gain access to Iranian energy resources. Not only has Pakistan signed the deal with Iran, China is starting to make its presence felt in Iran in a big way. It is now Iran's largest trading partner and is undertaking massive investments in Iran, rapidly occupying the space vacated by western companies.

India is right to feel restless about its marginalization with respect to Iran despite civilizational ties with the country. The problems with the IPI pipeline remain difficult to overcome. India has differences over the pricing of the gas even as ensuring the security of the pipeline in restive Balochistan makes it difficult for India to accept the deal in its present version.

Though problems remain in India-Iran relations, the latest overtures by New Delhi toward Tehran underscore the importance that India attaches to ties with Iran. That this is happening at a time when there has been a significant cooling of U.S.-India ties makes it even more significant. With the Obama administration's credibility in India at an all-time low, New Delhi is left with few options, which include engaging with states that Washington doesn't like.

Harsh V. Pant teaches at King's College London.

 

[Phenom]

They should have never stopped engaging with Iran. The vote against Iran in the security council was a big mistake, it probably dented Indo-Iranian relationship to some extent. Let's hope they can patch things up and move on.

 

[ajtr]

X-posting...

India, Iran distrustful of renewed Afghan-Pakistan ties​

NEW DELHI -- Recent moves by Afghanistan and Pakistan to improve their once-frosty relationship have prompted deep concern in other countries in the region and led some to consider strengthening ties to Afghan President Hamid Karzai's political rivals.

The U.S. government considers the Afghan-Pakistan overtures essential to combating insurgencies wracking both nations. But India, Iran and Afghanistan's northern neighbors fear that they are a step toward fulfilling Karzai's desire to negotiate with Taliban leaders and possibly welcome some of them into the government.

These nations believe that Karzai's plans could compromise their security and interests by lessening the influence of Afghanistan's Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara ethnic minorities with whom they have cultivated close links, diplomats and government officials say.

The apprehension, voiced pointedly by senior Indian officials in interviews this week, has emerged as yet another challenge for the U.S. government as it seeks to encourage new initiatives to stabilize Afghanistan while minimizing fallout on the already tense relationship between India and Pakistan.

In an attempt to assuage those concerns, the Obama administration's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard C. Holbrooke, traveled here Wednesday to meet with India's national security adviser and foreign secretary. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, arrived Thursday for two days of meetings with top military and civilian leaders.

The Indians have been riled by a series of recent meetings involving Karzai and Pakistan's top two security officials: the army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kiyani, and the intelligence director, Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha. On Sunday, Afghanistan and Pakistan signed a trade agreement that allows Afghan trucks to drive through Pakistan to the Indian border. Indian officials had wanted to send their own trucks through Pakistan to Afghanistan, but the Pakistani government insisted they not be included in the negotiations. U.S. officials hailed the deal as a major step forward in the relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan and a vital development for Afghanistan's economy.

Of greater concern to the Indians is Karzai's interest in reconciling with elements of the Taliban leadership. Because of the Taliban's historic ties to Pakistan's intelligence agency, Indian officials believe that such a move would give Pakistan new influence in Afghanistan.

Allowing the Taliban, which is dominated by ethnic Pashtuns, to have a role in the Afghan government is something "we don't think is a very good idea," a senior Indian government official said. "It's not that there are two equal political factions, with equal legitimacy, that have a right to political power. Karzai is the elected president. Not the Taliban. It should not be a question of negotiating a place at the table for them."

The Indian government, the official said, disputes "suggestions that come from the Pakistanis that the Taliban is legitimate, they represent the Pashtuns and therefore you need to deal with them and negotiate with them. That's the difference. We don't think they represent the Pashtuns."

Compounding India's pique is the fact that it believed it had cultivated close ties with Karzai. India has opened four consulates in Afghanistan, even though relatively few Indian citizens live there, and invested $1.3 billion in development projects -- far more than Pakistan has.

"The Indians are shell-shocked," said a Western diplomat involved in Afghanistan policy. "They went in with more than a billion dollars, and now Pakistan is eating their lunch."

U.S. officials are trying to persuade the Indians to abandon their traditional zero-sum logic that what's good for Pakistan must be bad for them. "You cannot stabilize Afghanistan without the participation of Pakistan as a legitimate concerned party," Holbrooke said at a meeting with Indian journalists here.Speaking to reporters on his flight here, Mullen said that "the whole region has a role to play" in Afghan reconciliation but that the Kabul government must take the lead.

In his meetings, Mullen sought to assure Indian officials that the U.S.-led counterinsurgency strategy was on track and that the United States has a long-term commitment to assist Afghanistan. "India, perhaps more than any outside country, has the greatest stake in our success in Afghanistan," one U.S. official said.

The United States, Mullen told reporters, is not "looking for the door out of Afghanistan or out of this region."

But Indian officials remain deeply mistrustful of Pakistan's motivations in Afghanistan. The Pakistanis, officials here contend, have deftly capitalized on Karzai's fears of abandonment by the United States -- fueled in part by his misinterpretation of President Obama's pledge to begin drawing down forces by July 2011 -- by offering to help forge a deal with an insurgency that his army and NATO forces have been unable to defeat.

"Pakistan wants to be able to control the sequence of events in Afghanistan," a second senior Indian official said. "We don't want a situation that would entail a revision to pre-2001, with backward-looking people taking the reins of power in Kabul."

Iran, which is predominantly Shiite Muslim, is also worried about any greater political role for leaders of the almost exclusively Sunni Taliban, many of whom regard Shiites as apostates. Diplomats in New Delhi say Iran has encouraged India to send more of its assistance to provinces in northern and western Afghanistan that are under the control of warlords and other power brokers who were part of the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance. The diplomats said that India has not shifted its efforts, much of which were already directed at the north.

Whether the Taliban is genuinely interested in reconciliation is questionable. CIA director Leon Panetta said last month that he saw no clear indications that insurgent leaders wanted to engage in peace talks with the Afghan government.



Mullen echoed that assessment, saying he does not believe reconciliation is imminent. "We've got to be in a position of strength," he said. "We're just not there yet."

 

[ajtr]

UK to press India to back Iran deterrence​

David Cameron, the British prime minister, will press India to support the international community's efforts to deter Iran from building nuclear weapons during his visit to New Delhi this week.

Mr Cameron's new government wants India to be more vocal about Iran's continued enrichment of uranium, in breach of United Nations resolutions, according to a UK official in New Delhi.

Britain believes that India is ideally placed to deliver a message, including to Iran's own people, that concern about their regime's nuclear ambitions is global and not merely the preserve of the west.

"We hope Indian interlocutors can unpick the Iranian system and explain what the concerns are," the official said.

Mr Cameron is being accompanied by William Hague, the foreign secretary, and six other UK cabinet ministers on what will be his first visit to Asia – aside from a trip to Afghanistan – since taking office in May.

But S.M. Krishna, India's foreign minister, travelled to Tehran this month to discuss energy partnerships with Iran. New Delhi is considering joining a controversial pipeline project that would supply Iranian gas to India and Pakistan.

Mr Krishna held talks with Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad, Iran's president, about bilateral co-operation and regional stability. Trade between Iran and India stands at $14bn (€11bn, £9bn) a year. But the foreign minister made no remarks about Iran's nuclear programme, which Tehran insists is for civilian use.

"What good are energy projects and pipelines if Iran is in flames?" asked the British official.

UK officials say India should be concerned not just about the immediate consequences of Iran becoming a nuclear power. Of equal worry, they say, is the possible response of a country like Saudi Arabia, which would view a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat and may seek atomic weapons of its own, with the help of Pakistan and other countries.

Nicholas Burns, a former US undersecretary of state who is leading an American dialogue with India, said this week that New Delhi's stance on Iran would be a test of its suitability for a bigger role at the UN. India wants a permanent seat on the Security Council. "We need India's shoulder behind this wheel," said Mr Burns. "The world, including China and Russia, will be tested. We can't stop Iran just with nice words."

But India's foreign ministry doubts how effective it can be.

One senior Indian official said that Manmohan Singh, the prime minister, had informally offered to mediate between Tehran and the US before his state visit to Washington last year. But Iran had not shown any interest.

 

[ajtr]

Indian market; a target for Iran​

Tehran Times Economic Desk

TEHRAN -- The Iranian commerce minister met Indian ambassador to Tehran and relayed the Islamic Republic's private sector's readiness to carry out technical and engineering projects in that country.

Mehdi Ghazanfari expressed his satisfaction with the positive trend in the two sides' political and economic relations, IRNA news agency reported.

He pointed out that exchanging delegations in specialized fields of trade and industry, increasing banking cooperation and furthering marine transportation will help foster relations.

The Iranian official pointed out that Iran has relations with many countries worldwide and noted that even some European countries which have claimed to boycott Iran have not totally severed their ties with Tehran.

The Indian envoy to Tehran Sanji Singh stated that firms from his country are keen to invest and cooperate in Iran's oil, gas and mine sectors.

The Delhi diplomat mentioned that a delegation made up of members of the Indian Confederation will visit Iran in September to enhance trade links between the two nations

 

[ajtr]

To engage Iran, India looks to beat US, UN sanctions by being 'creative'​

In the clearest indication so far of New Delhi's intent to do business with Tehran despite the growing international isolation of Iran over its nuclear weapons programme, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has proposed "creative mechanisms" to insulate Indian enterprises from the adverse impact of UN and US sanctions.
Last week, a Committee of Secretaries headed by the National Security Advisor decided to first approach Washington to keep Indian entities out of the sanctions using the exemption clause wherein the US President certifies that the waiver is vital to US national security interests.

Pending that, Indian enterprises would be advised to consider venturing into Iran in consortium with Russian, Chinese or Kuwaiti companies to make it harder for the US or the European Union to single out a country or company.

Another option from the Ministry of External Affairs is to create new corporate entities that will not have any financial exposure in the US or EU so that they are insulated from any retaliation.
"Political engagement with Iran, while of great importance, may not be sufficient to ensure that our interests are protected. Economic engagement with Iran is also necessary and would help us in promoting our energy security, connectivity and opening of new markets, and to underpin our political objectives," said the MEA paper on "International Sanctions on Iran and Way Forward for India-Iran Relations".

While the prime reason for India's continued interest in Iran is the need for energy security through steady flow of crude oil and natural gas and acquisition of oil and gas fields there, a concern was raised at the July 20 CoS meeting that India's withdrawal would give China an additional handle to enlarge its presence in Iran.

The MEA said that China was taking "a conscious decision to step into the vacuum created by the exit of western and other companies" since sanctions were strengthened in 2007. It had stepped up its petroleum product exports to Iran and signed three pacts on oil and gas fields.

Other "creative mechanisms" recommended by the MEA were:

n A Rupee-Rial arrangement for settling bilateral trade to avoid a ban on Indian banks from access to the US or EU financial system.

n An arrangement to open letters of credit in Rial, as suggested by the Iranians at the 16th session of the India-Iran Joint Commission.

n Investment by Indian firms through joint ventures in mining, fertilizer, food processing, pharmaceuticals and automobile projects that are not currently sanctioned.

n Opening of warehouses for fast-moving Indian products in Iranian Free Trade Zone with a mechanism to provide insurance cover for political and economic risks.

n Possible involvement of state-run companies to develop the Chabahar port and rail project for access to Afghanistan and Central Asia.

 

[youngindian]

Iran, India to counter 'Taliban threat'


http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=137632&sectionid=351020101

 

[ajtr]

India, Iran discuss 'regional solution' in Afghanistan​

India and Iran on Friday rounded off extensive discussions on Afghanistan, which included an Indo-Iranian initiative to develop a new trading route to the land locked country and a "regional approach" to bringing peace and stability.

Talks between visiting Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Mohammad Ali Fathollahi and senior Foreign Office officials here also touched on the possibility of a trilateral meeting between India, Iran and Afghanistan, to discuss how the situation can be stabilised.

The talks appear to have further coordinated Indian and Iranian positions on national reconciliation in Afghanistan. Both countries agreed that the Afghan Constitution would be the "basis and pillar for any action," Mr. Fathollahi said at a press conference.

Both sides want to accommodate only those militia groups that accept the suzerainty of Kabul in governing Afghanistan.

They also exchanged views on the specific policies of the Afghan Government in the recently held Kabul conference and noted that efforts had begun by countries in the region in the form of trilateral conferences. So far, Pakistan-Afghanistan-Iran and Iran-Tajikistan-Afghanistan meets have been held, Mr. Fathollahi said. Asked about Pakistan's role, he said, "in our regional strategy we believe in cooperation with Pakistan."

The issue of modernisation of Iranian port of Chabar, to give a fillip to economic activity in Afghanistan was also discussed in detail. "This issue is of great importance to the Indian side as well. The details of cooperation with India were discussed today. In future there will be fundamental developments regarding the position of Chabar," he noted.

India has proposed expanding the capacity of the port, currently working at its full handling capacity of 2.5 million tonnes of cargo per year from two active berths, by five times and linking it to the Iranian town of Bam, on Afghan border, with a railway line. From there goods are proposed to be taken to Afganistan through the Zaranj-Delaram road, built by India, which in turn links up with the garland highway connecting all major Afghan cities.

As Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao recently noted, the Zaranj-Delaram road has already revived the economy in Nimroz province of Afghanistan. She is confident that the link up with Chabar would enable it to gain from transit of goods to Central Asia, in addition to the local economy benefiting from access to a sea port.

Iran also indicated that despite India being unenthusiastic about the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline, it was welcome to join the project at a later stage. "Our decision in the beginning was to conclude the project with Pakistan and India. But with delays affecting our investment plans, we have pursued the project with Pakistan. But in the contract we have inserted the line 'through Pakistan to India.' If New Delhi is ready to continue negotiations then it is possible to join and link up to India,'' said Mr. Fathollahi.

 

[ajtr]

India: The Value of an Iranian Friendship​

Summary
In the face of bolstered U.S. and EU sanctions against Iran, the Indian government is blatantly and publicly discussing ideas on how to circumvent the sanctions and maintain a close trade relationship with Iran. India's energy competition with China is a large part of what is driving India's decision-making on this issue, but there are several other geopolitical interests India is considering in demonstrating its intent to openly flout U.S. and EU sanctions on Iran.

Analysis
While the United States and its European allies struggle to get other countries and companies to enforce a new round of sanctions against Iran, the Indian government is openly discussing ways of getting around those sanctions. Details of a report on this subject from the Indian Ministry of External Affairs were leaked to The Times of India recently. The report, called "International Sanctions on Iran and Way Forward for India-Iran Relations," suggests several "creative mechanisms" that would allow Indian firms to continue trade with Iran without getting caught in the sanctions dragnet.

The list of "creative mechanisms," as reported by The Times of India, includes:

Asking the United States to use the exemption clause in the sanctions text. India's National Security Adviser Shiv Shankar Menon met with his U.S. counterpart in New Delhi July 14-15 to seek assurances from the U.S. administration that U.S. President Barack Obama would use the exemption clause to spare Indian firms from penalties for doing business with Iran. The exemption clause allows the president to exempt companies from sanctions if it is decided that imposing sanctions on a certain country could harm U.S. national security interests. U.S. presidents have used this exemption clause frequently in the past. It remains unclear whether Menon received the assurances he was seeking.
Getting Indian firms to enter consortiums with Russian, Chinese and Kuwaiti companies to invest in Iran. The government is advising Indian firms to pursue this strength-in-numbers strategy, which would make it more difficult for the U.S. administration to single out individual firms.
Creating new corporations without assets in the United States or European Union to solve Indian private firm Reliance Industries' quandary. Reliance Industries has been a major gasoline supplier for Iran, but the company has its eyes on several large-scale investments in the United States. This vulnerability has led Reliance Industries to cut back on direct gasoline sales to Iran (though the company is still believed to be shipping gasoline to Iran through third parties). To reduce India's vulnerability, the Ministry of External Affairs has proposed creating new corporations without assets in the United States or European Union to avoid financial exposure to sanctions.
Conducting financial transactions in only Indian rupees and Iranian rials to prevent Indian banks from being blacklisted in U.S. and EU markets. The Iranian government has also suggested that India open letters of credit in rial.
Expanding Indian investment in Iran to areas not covered in the sanctions, including pharmaceuticals, mining, fertilizer, food processing and automobile manufacturing. The report also suggested opening Indian warehouses in Iranian free trade zones to allow Indian businessmen preferential access to the Iranian consumer market.
India's bilateral trade with Iran in 2009 was worth about $14 billion, and the long-time allies have ambitions to double that amount within the next five years. India's bilateral trade with the United States in 2009 stood at $37.6 billion, with the United States making a concerted effort in the past year to demonstrate to India that there is still much more room for their business relations to grow. As Reliance Industries learned from a series of conversations with U.S. Treasury Department officials over the past year, companies that continue to conduct business with Iran could see their assets in the United States threatened. It thus comes as a bit of a surprise that India has been so blatant in discussing different ways to insulate Indian companies, continue trade with Iran and thus stymie the United States' driving policy against Iran right now.

In the report, the ministry emphasizes how a major factor influencing India's brainstorming on sanctions-busting with Iran is the country's intense energy competition with China. About 8 percent of India's total oil imports came from Iran in 2009. During the same period, about 12 percent of China's oil imports came from Iran, though Chinese oil imports from Iran have dropped by 30 percent in the first half of 2010 compared to the same period in 2009 as China bought more oil from Angola and Saudi Arabia in an attempt to reduce its vulnerabilities in the event of a military confrontation in the Persian Gulf.

The Indians have watched warily as China has dug in its heels in Iran while Western companies have pulled out under the weight of sanctions threats. China is involved in a number of upstream and downstream projects in Iran, including deals for the development of Iran's Yadavaran oil field, North and South Azadegan oil fields, North and South Pars natural gas fields, oil and natural gas pipeline construction, and refinery upgrades. With an open playing field in the Persian Gulf, China stands to beat India yet again in the race for energy sources, and India is tired of having to play catch-up in this race. The Indians simply do not have the bureaucratic discipline and deep pockets that the Chinese have to effectively bid and conduct energy business overseas. India thus has an interest in showing Iran its seriousness in maintaining a close trade relationship and willingness to flout sanctions so it can stay in the game against Beijing.

But there is much more to the strategic leaking of this report than India airing its energy security concerns. India finds a great deal of utility in its relationship with Iran, particularly in managing its relationship with the United States. For example, a long-touted natural gas pipeline that would carry Iranian natural gas through Pakistan and on to India is a favorite subject for Indian energy ministers to discuss with their Iranian counterparts. This is not because India truly believes the project is feasible (putting aside all the financial and logistical complications attached to this deal, India is not about to place its energy security in the hands of its Pakistani rival). Instead, India uses the mere discussion of the pipeline as a way to capture Washington's attention and assert its independence in foreign policy matters. India and the United States have been developing a closer strategic partnership in recent years as Washington has sought out a more dependable ally in the Indian Ocean basin, but India also likes to remind the United States from time to time that the development of that relationship does not mean New Delhi can be expected to transform its foreign policy orientation to suit U.S. needs.

This is especially true as Indian frustration grows over the U.S. relationship with Pakistan. India has made no secret of its extreme dissatisfaction with Washington easing its pressure on Pakistan about the Pakistani militant proxy network. Even as Pakistan has incurred risks in cracking down on the Pakistani Taliban network, whose prime target is the Pakistani state, and has shared intelligence with the United States on targets in Afghanistan, India maintains that little is being done to contain those militants whose interests are directed against India and whose actions may be endorsed by Pakistan. India also does not have faith in Pakistan's current efforts and worries about a militant revival in Pakistan and Afghanistan that could undermine India's security down the road. India's threats to bolster its relationship with Iran provide New Delhi with some leverage in discussions with U.S. officials over Pakistan's participation in containing the regional militant threat.

India also has little interest in damaging its relationship with Iran over sanctions. Iran and India have long been allies with mutual interests in the region. One such common interest is the containment of the Taliban in Afghanistan — a project that Iran, India and the Russians have worked together on in the past in bolstering the Northern Alliance against the Taliban. India is nervous about the prospect of the United States negotiating with the Taliban and leaving enough political space for the group to reclaim power in Kabul once U.S. forces withdraw. India has tried to use the United States, Turkey and Saudi Arabia as a channel into the negotiations over Afghanistan's political future, but Pakistan is a major obstacle in these talks. India has thus tried to work through the Iranians, who have a direct link to the Pakistanis and who have cooperated with the Pakistanis on Afghanistan even prior to the Taliban's rise, to ensure their interests are met on this issue. Likewise, Iran can use India's need for a channel into the Afghanistan talks as a tradeoff for Indian assistance in helping Iran circumvent sanctions.

As India is learning, open defiance of sanctions on Iran is a surefire way to rile Washington and capture the attention of the U.S. administration. But India would not be doing so unless it had some knowledge that there is little that the United States can do about the situation. The United States is struggling in its search for an exit strategy from Afghanistan and must rely on Pakistani cooperation to fight this war. The only way it can keep Pakistan's attention focused on the jihadist threat is by maintaining a balance between New Delhi and Islamabad on the subcontinent and staying close to both sides. Retaliating against India over business ties to Iran could threaten that balance, and that is not a risk the United States is likely to take right now.

 

[civfanatic]

Yankees can cry, but the stability of the Central Asia/AfPak region in the future will depend largely on the alliance between India and Iran.

It also brings many strategic benefits to us, such as denying Pakistan strategic depth and giving us operational bases near the Persian Gulf and west Pakistan border (like Chabahar port).

 

[neo29]

Iranian president in a recent speech said that Iran and India will rule the world. Wonder what got into him when he said that. India is already having headaches managing US, Israel on one side and Iran on the other who are sworn enemies of each other.

India can play an important role in bringing Iran and US closer but either one of the sides must reach out their hand first.

 

[civfanatic]

Iranian president in a recent speech said that Iran and India will rule the world. Wonder what got into him when he said that. India is already having headaches managing US, Israel on one side and Iran on the other who are sworn enemies of each other.

India can play an important role in bringing Iran and US closer but either one of the sides must reach out their hand first.

Can you give me the link of a video (or just a report) where he says that? I'm feeling kind of down today and I need a good laugh.

 

[neo29]

Can you give me the link of a video (or just a report) where he says that? I'm feeling kind of down today and I need a good laugh.

Have a good laugh if u can

http://news.rediff.com/report/2010/may/18/iran-india-can-replace-the-dying-big-powers.htm

 

[Shaitan]

hahaha Iran is badass. Does give a shit about anything!

 

[civfanatic]

hahaha Iran is badass. Does give a shit about anything!

The spineless cowards in the GoI should a learn a thing or two from Iran.

 

[Patriot]

India interested in tapping seabed route for Iranian gas: Report

09 September 2010


Dubai: Iranian government sources have indicated that India is likely to resume negotiations for importing natural gas from Iran via a sea pipeline, separate from the 'Peace Pipeline' that was intended to traverse the Pakistan landmass and deliver gas at India's frontiers.

"India has expressed willingness to restart negotiations through an international firm, to independently import natural gas from Iran via a sea pipeline," the Iran Daily quoted deputy oil minister and managing director of the National Iranian Gas Company (NIGC) Javad Owji as saying.

"No exact date has been yet finalised for the gas talks between Iran and India but they are expected to start after the month of Ramadan," Owji said.

He also mentioned that a decision was yet to be taken on the manner in which gas would be exported to India from Iran.

"Using a pipeline through Pakistan's soil or building a deepwater pipeline are the main possible options," he said.

The 'Peace Pipeline' failed to live up to the promise of its name when India opted out of the tripartite venture which included Iran, Pakistan and India. In its earlier avatar the 'Peace Pipeline' was dubbed a more prosaic 'Iran-Pakistan-India', or the 'IPI', gas pipeline.

Both Iran and Pakistan have decided to move ahead with the venture and rope in China as a possible replacement for India. Earlier this year, Iran and Pakistan signed the deal to build the pipeline.

Under the deal Tehran will deliver 21.2 million cubic meters (750 million cubic feet) of natural gas per day to Pakistan, starting 2014.

Inspite of the bi-partite arrangement between Iran and Pakistan, Iran's deputy foreign minister Mohammad Ali Fathollahi did mention in August that Iran would welcome the presence of India in the regional gas pipeline. "There is an article in the gas transfer deal between Iran and Pakistan, predicting the extension of the pipeline to India should the country be ready to join the project," Fathollahi said.

Iranian oil ministry's gas exports authority, Asghar Soheilipour had earlier advised India to reconsider joining the 'Peace Pipeline' project, stressing that it would be the most economical and efficient export route. Soheilipour had mentioned in July that India was currently conducting feasibility studies on the direct seabed route.

Elaborating on the two possible routes for exporting gas to India, Soheilipour said, ''Exporting gas via a direct seabed route and transfer gas via Pakistan's border are the two possible ways.''

So far both India and Pakistan have rebuffed persistent US efforts to sabotage the pipeline project.

With respect to Pakistan, Soheilipour said that country's natural gas reserves had reduced over the past decades.

Meanwhile, it appears that Bangladesh may also have made a proposal to receive Iran's natural gas through the 'Peace Pipeline'.





domain-b.com : India interested in tapping seabed route for Iranian gas: Report

 

[ajtr]

Iran slams India over J&K protests, India hits back, issues demarche​

New Delhi has lodged a strong diplomatic protest with Tehran after the Iranian foreign ministry condemned Indian action against protesters in Jammu and Kashmir. These demonstrations had been provoked by an Iranian channel, Press TV, which showed clips of alleged desecration of the Koran in the US.
While India banned the channel from being broadcast in J&K after over 20 people were killed in the protests on September 13, Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Ramin Mehmanparast spoke out against the Indian government five days later and went to the extent of saying that to counter such protests could be "interpreted as supporting acts of sacrilege." On September 18, Mehmanparast said it was "perfectly acceptable for Muslims to react to the desecration of the Koran" and called upon the Indian government to show "self-restraint".

His remarks were read in New Delhi alongside the negative media commentary in Iran on banning Press TV in J&K and the action against protesters.
The constant outrage from Tehran upset New Delhi, which finally decided to call in the Iranian envoy to the Ministry of External Affairs and deliver a strong protest. The same was conveyed simultaneously by the Indian mission in Tehran to Iranian authorities.

India, sources said, made it clear that maintaining law and order in Jammu and Kashmir was India's internal matter and Iran had no right to interfere or comment on these issues. More so, officials here say, Press TV allegedly showed clips that were "unverified". The comments made by Iran and the subsequent protests were against the healthy momentum building up in the relationship during the past few months. In fact, Iran has proposed a trilateral meeting between India, Iran and Afghanistan and the first meeting was being planned on the sidelines of the UNGA but sources added that the Kashmir issue was "too sensitive" for India at the moment. More so, the Organisation of Islamic Countries also issued a statement in New York on the situation in Kashmir, whch was critical of the Indian government.

It's learnt that External Affairs Minister SM Krishna did meet his Iranian counterpart Manouchehr Mottaki for a brief while at the UNGA and agreed to carry forward the proposal on the trilateral. India, it may be recalled, had recently joined the NAM statement in Vienna criticising the IAEA for not following "proper procedures" while preparing the latest Director General's report on the Iran nuclear programme.

Further, both countries decided to approach the United Nations Security Council for a review of the decision to sanction an Indo-Iranian shipping joint venture called Iran-o-Hind. This company is part of the latest list of companies placed under sanctions in Iran. Even though this could prove to be an uphill task, India agreed with Iran to seek a review. Given the deteriorating security situation in the Af-Pak region complicated by the US decision on drawing down troops, India is keen to re-energise its relationship with Iran. On the other hand, Tehran also wants to expand bilateral ties at a time when it is facing severe sanctions from the West.

 

[ajtr]

India-Iran trade, investment seminar in Tehran​

By Salman Ansari Javid

The Embassy of India along with Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) organized a seminar entitled "India-Iran Trade and Investment" Thursday morning at the Parsian Evin Hotel. Businessmen and officials from both countries were in attendance to promote their countries' potentials in technology, investment and trade.

Present at the seminar was the Indian Ambassador Shri Sanjay Singh, Director General of the Organization for Investment, Economic and Technical Assistance of Iran (OIETAI) Saman Ghasemi, Director General of Trade Promotion Organization (TPO) Amir Talebi, Representative for Iran Chamber of Commerce R. Danishmand, and Chairman and Managing Director of Kirloskar Electric Co. Ltd. Vijay R. Kirloskar who was heading a 15-member delegation from CII.

Managing Director of Heavy Industrial Minerals India Pvt. Ltd. Chitranjan Kapur was the CII mission's co-leader and presented the speakers.

Indian Ambassador was the first to go on the podium. Sanjay Singh said that India and Iran are both cradles of civilization. He pointed out that bilateral ties between the two countries are marked today by high level visits from officials of both countries. The size of Indian economy, which has had over 8 percent growth since 20002, was $1.2 trillion and average income in India was set to double in a decade, Singh added.

Iran is India's second largest crude supplier and India is Iran's third largest market.

"Our meeting today is in augmentation to the 16th Iran-India Joint Commission meeting in July in Delhi," the ambassador said.

Director of TPO was the next presenter. Talebi said that "growth of Iranian exports to India in the past few years was over 70 percent." Iran ranks fourth in terms of diversity of agricultural products and seventh in terms of tourist attractions in the world, the TPO director pointed out.

Mineral reserve is another asset for Iran which boasts 195,000 mines presently and producing some 230 million tons of mineral products per year.

Talibi said another sector for investment and trade with Iran is the auto industry, the largest in the Middle East.

There are 11 ports in Iran with some 128 million tons of cargo transiting every year and many free trade zones with can help boost Iran-India cooperation.

Iran can also offer a wide variety of technical and engineering services including power lines, plants, electronics industry, information technology, construction of dams, tunnels and bridges, with the main export partners in the Middle East and CIS countries.

Talebi concluded by proposing signing an agreement on commodity standards and establishing joint export companies.

Managing Director of Kirloskar Electric Co. Ltd. started his presentation by pointing out the close cultural ties between the two countries and said that "before the British India the court language of northern India was Persian."

Bilateral trade between the two countries stood at $13.35 billion for 2009-2010 with more trade promotion and agreements in the pipeline. He pointed out that the largest Indian bank, the State Bank of India, had a branch office in Iran and should be used to promote trade.

Kirloskar said that the potential of Indian companies is not known in Iran and needs an awareness program. Iranian public and businesses should know that India makes quality products using the latest technology.

CII is a non-government, non-profit organization founded 114 years ago, and "it is India's premier business association, with a direct membership of over 8,000 organizations and 90,000 companies," he added

Ghasemi of OIETAI started his presentation by pointing that the first FDI opportunities conference was held in India this year with over 200 participants exhibiting the two countries capabilities.

He praised Iran's ideal geographical location, between the Caspian Sea and the Persian Gulf, at the crossroads between East, West, North and the South.

"Iran is the world's fourth largest oil producer, has the second largest gas reserves, it is the biggest industrial center in the region and is ideal for FDI and contractual investment," Ghasemi said.

"Tax exemptions are the other incentives for business investments in Iran," he said pointing out that the agricultural and tourism sectors were 100 percent and 50 percent tax exempt, respectively.

For investment opportunities in Iran Ghasemi referred the audience to the website: Iran Investment opportunities which among other things also explains risk coverage by the Iranian foreign investment law (FIPPA).

Following a tea break various CII members made presentations for their companies, including Indo-Iran JV Project and Forbes Marshal Pvt. Ltd.

Representative of the Iran Chamber of Commerce Danishmand was the last presenter of the day. He pointed out the importance of the North South Corridor for transit of Indian goods from Bandar Abbas Port to Anzali Port to Caspian Sea to Russia, CIS and European countries.