Israel or Iran who is the strategic partner?

[Singh]

Some Key points against Iran

1. Iran is supporting many insurgencies around the globe and many of them are against our "friends", and being victims of terrorism ourselves we can't be hypocritical on this subject.

2. We as a responsible, secular, democracy cannot afford to be associated with Iran more than we already are. Iran is too fickle, too brutal, too unpredictable, too radical, too volatile, too confrontational etc. to be an ally. Being associated with Iran sends the wrong signals.

3. Iran is aiming to becoming a nuclear power, this is clearly against our interests. We can't afford to have another nuclear armed country in our region and esp not one which is anti-west. And neither can we afford to go against our declared policies when it comes to Iran. Iran therefore can look towards China, NK and Pakistan axis to get its hands on nuclear tech.

----

Some key points for Iran.

1. Iran and Indian interests converge regarding Astan-Pstan-CAR. India is building railway connecting Iran to Russia, building a port in Iran and has already built a highway to connect Astan with Iran. Both would like to see Taliban and ISI backed terrorism dismantled in Astan and Pstan.

2. Iran has plentiful of oil and gas, and a large market. Iran's desire to be a modern economy can be exploited by opening up Indian market to Iranian goods and allowing Iranian companies to invest in India. Iranian gas is very lucrative if Indian companies are somehow manage to exploit it.
The only downside is the lack of transparency with which Iran conducts its business and economic deals, and often reneges on its promises.

3. Iran acts like our proxy in the OIC, and it was perhaps the only nation that didn't condemn India when the Babri Masjid demolition happened. Friendship with Iran also is looked upon favourably by the massive Shia community of India and keeps in check the Sunni and Wahabi countries.

4. Iran operates similar military equipment to India's, India can not only help Iran upgrade their equipment but also supply them military goods in the future. However there can be a conflict of interest viz a viz Israel.

 

[Yusuf]

Lets look at the trade. India-Israel trade in 2008 = $4 billion, India-Iran direct trade $13 billion. Real Iranian trade is actually $30 billion as India goes through third countries (UAE). Most of the Israeli trade was imported weapons which doesn't help the Indian economy. India and Iran trade in 55 items in sectors such as auto, pharmaceuticals, engineering, and petroleum, among others. Without India and Russia developing the Iranian economy, it would collapse. Looking at the numbers, it really is a no brainer who is more important, Iran is overtaking even China in trade.

Vladimir the trade ties are indeed significant but its iran nuke policy that is troublesome. India doesn't have to chose between the two. relations with both countries are important and no one is dispensible.
Just like india is not choosing between the US and Russia but working with both. International diplomacy is all about protecting your national interests. A nuclear iran is not in indias national interest

 

[LETHALFORCE]

A nuclear Iran may not be in Indian interest, but it maybe because of because of Iran's nuclear program we may have received the Bush nuclear deal(this is debatable). USA viewed India as a country that had positive relations with Iran, if Iran had the backing of the three biggest powers in Asia -India,Russia and China it would weaken USA's position in trying to isolate Iran. By giving us the nuclear deal we more or less lost interest in IPI pipeline and voted against Iran, it also prevented any possible cooperation between India and Iran in the nuclear area, and it allowed Pakistan to be forgiven for their proliferation this way USA,India and Pakistan were all happy at the cost of Iran. This fact was also expressed by the Iranian when they asked why being NPT signatories there were being punished while India and Pakistan were essentially being rewarded as non NPT members.

 

[Yusuf]

Iran is choosing the option of being punished. It could have gone about in a transparent manner to get nuclear power for its energy needs. Instead it chose a secretive option with a lot of fudging and hiding which obviously raised doubts about its intentions. No one is denying iran its right to civilian nuke technology. The negotiations so far have been to give that to iran but in a manner that is verifiable by the international community and that its not a military program.

Iran crying hoarse is not going to help it. We don't want another pakistan in the world. Iran cannot be compared with india which never signed the NPT and conducted its first test in 74. The NPT came into being because of indias test. Is irans intentions that worry the world.

 

[K Factor]

What do we gain from a "strategic" partnership with Iran other than a minor debatable counter-weight against Pakistan? It will antagonise more people than it will please. As to Afghanistan, they have more interests than us not to let Taliban resurgence grow as they have more to lose than us. So, regardless of our partnership with them, they will try to protect their interests.

As to Israel, there is a saying, as some-one rightly quoted Kissinger before - "there are no permanent enemies and no permanent allies" other than the ABC.
Israel was happy to sleep with China in the nineties, proof of which is flying in the air as the J-10 and also the fizzled out Phalcon deal with China. Israel is a friend because now, India has a lot of purchasing economic power and also that we share some common issues (which are not that important geo-strategically). Also, as pointed out in the article by AV, Israeli goods are being proxied and sold in the ME through India.

So I don't see either as a long term strategic partner, as once India gets to to good military industrial and economic base, we will not need Israel any more, but they will need us.

 

[Vladimir79]

Vladimir the trade ties are indeed significant but its iran nuke policy that is troublesome. India doesn't have to chose between the two. relations with both countries are important and no one is dispensible.
Just like india is not choosing between the US and Russia but working with both. International diplomacy is all about protecting your national interests. A nuclear iran is not in indias national interest

What is wrong with Iran's nuke policy? They aren't entitled to civilian nuklear energy? They aren't entitled to defend themselves? Lets face it, Iran's military is no longer capable of defending itself. Developing nukes is the only way to ensure the IR's political survival. Relations with Pakistan are not too rosy and conflict in Northern Iraq could strike a cord against Turkey. Iran doesn't stand a chance against either of them. Israel has nukes for the same reason. They are allowed to build them while others are not?

Lets rewind to when India was developing her nuklear weapons. How did India feel when the West told you blokes cannot develop nukes eh? Not too good I am sure. You told the world to piss off and now India has them. Well now Iran is in the same position. There is nothing anyone can do to stop them either. It is too late to bomb them, USA is too weak to invade and sanctions have already failed. Provoking them more is only going to make them more desperate. Iran already has a bio/chem stockpile that can wipe out Israel so they really aren't getting any more capability. It is all about prestige and the fear factor. A handful of 50kt nukes that will never be used isn't the real issue here. It is double standards that are at play, the same that were used against India.

Relations between Israel and India aren't really relations between Israel but USA. They are nothing but their puppet state. By voting to placate Amerikan policy India is falling into their corner. By increasing bilateral ties India is becoming more dependent on Amerikan policy that doesn't give a rats arse about India's sovereignty. Iran isn't going to break so it is a futile effort. In the process, increased sanctions can kill that $30 billion in bilateral trade between Iran, even the front operations in UAE will cease. Do you remember what happened in Iraq when sanctions were placed on Saddam? 1 million people starved to death! In the case of Iran, you can multiply that by several factors. You really want that blood on your hands? I sure don't. Having the Iranian economy collapse is going to drive up global energy prices which is going to kill Indian economic development. Russia will make a killing, India and China will enter into recession. By playing this card, India has alot to lose, but nothing to gain.

 

[Yusuf]

Vlad,
Iran is entitled to civil nuclear power. I have said that many times, you can look back. Irans strategic program is the problem. They have their NPT obligations and thats why they cannot have a strategic program. India was never a part of NPT but the cause of the NPT. India has had safeguarded plants even when its outside the NPT. India is not Iran and vice versa. India is a democratic responsible state. Nukes in the hands of Iran is another headache world will have to face like Pakistans.

You are getting it all jumbled. You are linking Indias relations with Iran just on the basis of the IAEA vote and that should not be the case. There are more broad based issues on which Indo Iranian relations go. India has voted against it in the IAEA as far as its pursue of clandestine nukes go, but read all reports which say India has firmly said that it will not support any more sanctions against Iran.

So dont view the whole thing from the prism of IAEA vote.

 

[tarunraju]

There have been several powerful NPT signatories who cheated on their commitments, let's get over the NPT angle. It's not like Iran is the only 'evil-doer' who has to be punished by imposing sanctions (in which it's ultimately the common people who are affected the most).

It's in our interests not to let Iran become a 'witch' for powerful nations to engage in their once-in-a-decade nuclear witch hunt for cheap oil.

 

[Yusuf]

Yes, welcome to the world of geo political hypocrisy. This is how the world has functioned. Eveyone pursues its own policies and interests. Thats how conflicts arise.
Why do you think Libya give up its nukes? National interests as it knew if it was Iraq now, it could very well be the next target of the US.
If in spite of all international efforts, Iran does get the bomb, good for it. And bad for the world as a rogue state will have nukes and has the potential to pass it on to others. But make no mistake the world will try its best to stop it.

Why do you think China and Russia also vote for the resolution? They too are scared of a rogue nation having nukes that can potentially go in the hands of the extremist muslim terrorists in their respective countries.

Tell me Vlad, Tarun that you dont mind nukes in the hands of the Iranians.

 

[tarunraju]

Yes, welcome to the world of geo political hypocrisy. This is how the world has functioned. Eveyone pursues its own policies and interests. Thats how conflicts arise.
Why do you think Libya give up its nukes? National interests as it knew if it was Iraq now, it could very well be the next target of the US.

If we continue to lose our individuality in the world (indications include not being able to retaliate 26/11, not being able to get anything done "in the right channels" one year on, big snub in Egypt, vulgar display of superiority at Sino-US meet where the two pretty much pissed at our sovereignty, a fruitless PM trip to the US, and compromising our stand on emission standards that could cripple our growth), we're pretty much an Iran, 20 years in the making. Therefore it's in our interests to maintain ties with Iran, and ensure we keep our realpolitik alive and kicking.

Why do you think China and Russia also vote for the resolution? They too are scared of a rogue nation having nukes that can potentially go in the hands of the extremist muslim terrorists in their respective countries.

Tell me Vlad, Tarun that you dont mind nukes in the hands of the Iranians.

I would rather see a stronger nuke-equipped Iran, than nukes in Pakistan which are under a constant terrorist threat. Besides a nuke-equipped Iran isn't any more dangerous than a P5 member with 1000-strong stockpiles. They're merely making up for conventional military deficit with nuclear weapons, in defence of their natural resources and people. Such tradeoffs are common. The Russians are pretty much making up for quantitative troop strength with massive nuke stockpiles. That's why China doesn't dare doing anything manly against them. With this much of Indian money making it into Iran, I don't think even the most fascist of regimes there would point their guns at us, Russia, or even China. The Russians or Chinese wouldn't mind a weaker Iran for it would mean greater presence there ( == cheaper natural resources). They have nothing to lose.

 

[zenith86]

My first post:

India-Isreal: (tech benifits -> replacable)
1. Good for tech and intelligence purposes. In the long term we need to build up
these capabilities.
2. Can become a liability, something like South Africa. Growing demand for single state solution.
India backed Apartheid movement ==> doom for Isreal, so will keep India Happy.
3. Not going to back pakistan.
4. Heavy US influence on Isreal-China relationship. Will not be significant as far as India is concerned.

India-Iran: (Geographical and resource benifits -> irreplacable)
1. Gateway to CAR, Gulf and Afghanistan via Chabar, until we get back POK.
2. Cutting Pakistan, Turkey as well as Saudi Influence in the region.
3. Our need for gas + oil.
4. Isolated Shia country in sunni dominated area, needs support.
5. India + Russia + Iran --> keep the pot boiling in Afghanistan. If we dont get it than neither does Pak or China.
6. Current Regome useless in long term. Either have a pro western regime or current regime with nukes.

 

[Yusuf]

I will deviate from the topic if i had to counter all the points that you raised about India becoming a near Iran and losing its decision making independence. But very quickly, WTO talks, Climate change and the fact that we have had now finally managed to eat the cake we had for the last 35 years (read nukes weapons and nuke deal) shows how independent we are. There is always some lobbying from the powerful nations on some matters. One way or the other even other nations toe their lines when they finally see their own interests as well. Nothing wrong with it.

Turn it actually having a vote on imposing sanctions on Iran and you will see India oppose it as any strict economic sanctions against Iran will hurt Indian business there. India has already stated that they will oppose any sanctions.

 

[Yusuf]

Seriously, people are getting the vote against Iran mixed up with the whole spectrum of relations India shares with Iran. What happened after the last time India voted against Iran? Nothing. We are still doing a lot of business there which is growing.

Minor irritants are there in every relationship in one form or the other. But that doesnt compromise or break the entire relationship.
Take for example the case of Indo Russian relationship. We have had some topsy turvy times with them esp wrt to the defence deals. Has India broken of ties with Russia? We are working even more and bigger manner with the Russians and the 5th gen fighter program is an example.

 

[Vladimir79]

Vlad,
Iran is entitled to civil nuclear power. I have said that many times, you can look back. Irans strategic program is the problem. They have their NPT obligations and thats why they cannot have a strategic program. India was never a part of NPT but the cause of the NPT. India has had safeguarded plants even when its outside the NPT. India is not Iran and vice versa. India is a democratic responsible state. Nukes in the hands of Iran is another headache world will have to face like Pakistans.

All you have to do is drop out of it, but then you don't even have to do that much. Iran can just hide their programme and kick out inspectors at will. If an NPT member gets nuked, do you think founding members will retaliate with nukes as per NPT? No way... NPT means nothing. India is Iran when it comes to nukes, you didn't have them, you told the world to piss off, now you do. The same WILL happen in Iran and there is nothing to be done.

You are getting it all jumbled. You are linking Indias relations with Iran just on the basis of the IAEA vote and that should not be the case. There are more broad based issues on which Indo Iranian relations go. India has voted against it in the IAEA as far as its pursue of clandestine nukes go, but read all reports which say India has firmly said that it will not support any more sanctions against Iran.

India said it wouldn't vote for sanctions on Iran on the last round, yet they did for the second time. Now the vote has cost India a $5 billion LNG deal which is "definetely off." PM Singh said "if Iran did not open its nuclear facilities up for inspection, and if the UNSC then passed a resolution imposing sanctions, India would back such a move." Iranian Mullahs are now killing lucaritve deals with India over this and it is only going to cost you more business. Is it worth it?

So dont view the whole thing from the prism of IAEA vote.

Iran sees it through the prism of the IAEA vote and your government's insistence on backing sanctions. India is playing right into the Amerikan trap and costing you business in the process. Is it worth it to give up Iran who supports Indian sovereignty or become US puppet who will tell India what it can or cannot do? Bad choices are being made.

 

[Yusuf]

Why did Russia and china too vote against Iran? Are they puppets of the US as well?

And i will say it again. India didn't violate any treaty. There was no NPT when India conducted it's first test in 74. NPT was born because of Indian tests to stop anymore countries gatecrashing the nuclear club.
Iran chose to be in the NPT but refuses to adhere to it's laws.

 

[Vladimir79]

Why did Russia and china too vote against Iran? Are they puppets of the US as well?

We abstained in the last round. US is taking it too far.

And i will say it again. India didn't violate any treaty. There was no NPT when India conducted it's first test in 74. NPT was born because of Indian tests to stop anymore countries gatecrashing the nuclear club.
Iran chose to be in the NPT but refuses to adhere to it's laws.

What law has Iran violated? They are pretty good at skirting it.

 

[Yusuf]

We abstained in the last round. US is taking it too far.



What law has Iran violated? They are pretty good at skirting it.

why abstain? Why not vote against the resolution? What went wrong this time that Russia voted for the resolution this time. Ditto China?

What law is Iran violating? It's obligation under NPT which requires it to place all it's nuke reactors under safeguards and not pursue weapons.

 

[NSG_Blackcats]

Many members are mixing up India’s trade relations for a strategic partnership with Iran. India has very good trade relationship with China. Does that mean China is our strategic partner? We are having a partnership with China on climate change and trade negotiation in WTO. So India is protecting its national interest by having partnership with China on these two issues. Similarly India is having trade relations with Iran which is beneficial for both these countries.

Iran is a signatory to NPT. Iran can use nuclear technology for civilian purpose. Iran has to open all its nuclear facility for IAEA to make an inspection. Iran is not doing that. If I am not wrong IRAN is also a signatory to CTBT.

Now while voting against Iran, India has mentioned there must not be any punitive action against Iran. India supports a dialogue with Iran to resolve this issue. But I feel ultimately we may see some sanctions on Iran in near future. It is all depends on China and Russia. We have to see for how long these two countries can hold back US and EU.

 

[GokuInd]

Many members are mixing up India’s trade relations for a strategic partnership with Iran. India has very good trade relationship with China. Does that mean China is our strategic partner? We are having a partnership with China on climate change and trade negotiation in WTO. So India is protecting its national interest by having partnership with China on these two issues. Similarly India is having trade relations with Iran which is beneficial for both these countries.

Iran is a signatory to NPT. Iran can use nuclear technology for civilian purpose. Iran has to open all its nuclear facility for IAEA to make an inspection. Iran is not doing that. If I am not wrong IRAN is also a signatory to CTBT.

Now while voting against Iran, India has mentioned there must not be any punitive action against Iran. India supports a dialogue with Iran to resolve this issue. But I feel ultimately we may see some sanctions on Iran in near future. It is all depends on China and Russia. We have to see for how long these two countries can hold back US and EU.

shortly OT: The EU at least in context of being a FP agent is more like a toothless tiger; their institutions and mechanisms are not really able to pool forces of all members for determining a global agenda, let alone significance (The official assignment "High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy" is therefore a compromise between intergovernmental realpolitik and supranational aspirations).

That's why I think they can hardly be relied on given their domestic structures and compulsions, especially when it comes to sanctions against Iran in case of their non-compliance.

Regarding CTBT, as far as I know Iran has signed but not ratified the CTBT (just like the US). Hence I dunno if the treaty immediately comes into effect.

 

[K Factor]

I would rather see a stronger nuke-equipped Iran, than nukes in Pakistan which are under a constant terrorist threat. Besides a nuke-equipped Iran isn't any more dangerous than a P5 member with 1000-strong stockpiles. They're merely making up for conventional military deficit with nuclear weapons, in defence of their natural resources and people. Such tradeoffs are common.

They have nothing to lose.

You are forgetting Iran's blatant political, financial and military support to the Hamas and Hezbollah, the most organized terror outfits in the ME. Since Iran doesn't border India, its not a threat to us, heh?