Iran News and Discussions

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 06 Jan 2013 06:18

^^ NIAC and other West-based Iranian expat orgs lobby hard to ease sanctions that hurt "ordinary" Iranians while speakingout against the human rights abuses of the Iranian regime. They also lobby against war with Iran and urge diplomacy. I don't fully understand what exactly they aim to achieve by that. Do they have the objective of regime change? Or is it a "reformist" agenda a la Mousavi? Other Iranian expatriate orgs (such as the Mojahedin e Khalq and its covert affiliates) dismiss the NIAC and its ilk as covert regime supporters.

Meanwhile the sanctions continue to hurt, and at least a large section of "ordinary" Iranians see it as confirmation of America being the oppressive 'zaalem' of this era. And so the kerbala-lila is held with greater fervor each passing year during Ashura. The history and mythology of a people is important in influencing how they respond to events, and therefore Khomeini called these passionate Ashura and Majles e Azadari sessions the founts of the continuous revolution.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfnslsR3zqE

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 09 Jan 2013 08:05

هشدار رهبر ایران: دائما نگویید انتخابات باید آزاد باشد
'The Supreme Guide of Iran warns: "Don't keep saying that elections ought to be free and fair"'

Supreme Guide of Iran, Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamane'i, with regards to the criticisms of people "who repeatedly keep saying that elections must be free", has said: "In which country are elections more free than in Iran?"

According to the Office for the Preservation and Dissemination of the Impressions of Ayatollah Khamane'i, this Tuesday Iran's Guide has asked such criticizer to watch their words and not speak in a way that would "make the people disillusioned about the electoral process", and added: "Its obvious that elections should be free. Since the Revolution we have had 34 elections. Now which of those has not been free?"

These expressions of Mr. Khamenei were at a gathering of some government servants of the city of Qom, after which he also broadcast that people like ...Rafsanjani,...Ahmadinejad..., and Khatami... had started to talk about "free" elections as part of their different/separatist vision.

In the same vein, Ayatollah Khamenei warned "those who suggest to the public that elections are not 'healthy and safe' enough" that they are in fact "assisting the accuracy of the targeting of the 'health and safety' of Iran's electoral process by the governments of haughty powers."

...

علی سعیدی: وظیفه ذاتی سپاه مهندسی معقول و منطقی انتخابات است
'Ali Saeedi: "It is the personal responsibility of the Sepah (IRGC) to engineer the electoral process in a reasonable and logical manner"'
He is the Supreme Guide's representative in the Sepah. He says that the IRGC's role in looking out for the worldview-framework and the ideological standards w.r.t. the electoral process and its outcomes is not tantamount to "interference".

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 11 Jan 2013 09:13

Egypt’s President Invited to Iran, Discusses Syria

(CAIRO) — Iran’s foreign minister on Thursday invited Egypt’s president to visit Tehran again, a sign of improved relations between the two nations since an Islamist government took over in Cairo.

Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi discussed the Syria crisis with President Mohammed Morsi, who has launched a four-nation initiative to end the civil war that has taken the lives of more than 60,000 people in 22 months.

It was Salehi’s third visit since Morsi took office last summer. Diplomatic relations, downgraded after the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran and Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel, remained cold during the three-decade rule of President Hosni Mubarak, who was deposed in a 2011 popular uprising.

[...]

“Egypt is an acceptable partner for all involved,” Salehi said at a news conference with Egyptian Foreign Minister Mohammed Amr Kamel. “We hope from our heart that countries in the region unite to find a Syrian-Syrian solution and prevent any foreign intervention.”

Salehi said other Muslim countries have expressed interest in joining the initiative, naming Indonesia, Pakistan and Malaysia.

In December, Iran floated a vague peace plan for Syria, calling for a transitional government and elections for parliament and president, without stating whether Assad should remain in office.

The plan marked a shift in Iran’s previous unwavering support for Assad.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 13 Jan 2013 07:22

Iranian army unrest over postponed paydays as global boycott bites

Iran has cut benefits to the armed forces and is failing to pay its troops on time in the latest sign that the regime is struggling to make ends meet under pressure from international sanctions.

The situation has prompted growing discontent in the lower ranks of the army and the Revolutionary Guard, the linchpin of the regime’s security apparatus.

The salaries of both groups have arrived late for the past three months, the first time this has happened since the Islamic Republic was founded in 1979. Payday was more than a week late last month.

Tehran has trumpeted the skill and determination of its armed forces as the brinkmanship mounts over its disputed nuclear programme. A series of war games, including manoeuvres at the mouth of the Gulf last week, have showcased Iran’s military deterrent.

But military sources say that morale has plummeted after cuts to basic services and benefits in recent weeks. Even free lunches have been scrapped for all but senior officers.

Worst of all, troops have been told that their annual bonus of one month’s salary for Nowruz, the Persian new year, will almost certainly not be paid. The festival falls in March this year and the bonus is traditionally paid a few weeks early to cover the cost of gifts and food before the celebrations begin.

“The situation is terrible. We have been told not to expect our bonus. Overtime has been stopped completely. There used to be bus services for soldiers who live outside Tehran, but they have even stopped them too,” said a military source.

Meanwhile, it has not gone unnoticed by Iranian troops that their Government is still paying army salaries in Syria, spending billions of dollars to prop up President Assad’s regime.

Details of Western intelligence reports passed to The Times in October revealed that Tehran spent $5 billion over six months last year in support to Damascus, including $500 million in cash for Syrian army salaries.

“The Syrians have not seen a cut in their allocation, and the Government is still spending on projects in Iraq and Afghanistan, yet they don’t have the money to pay salaries,” said one Iranian source.

With the collapse in Iran’s currency last year, the basic salary for a new conscript, without education or skills, can start from as little as $12 (£7.50) a month. Troops in all ranks of the Revolutionary Guard earn double, a source of huge resentment in the army.

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 15 Jan 2013 16:57

Iran: Khamenei's ban of nuclear weapons binding

TEHRAN, Iran — A religious decree issued by Iran's supreme leader banning nuclear weapons is binding for the Iranian government, the Foreign Ministry said Tuesday, suggesting that the edict should end the debate over whether Tehran is pursuing atomic arms.

Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said the West must understand the significance of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's edict for Iran: "There is nothing higher than the exalted supreme leader's fatwa to define the framework for our activities in the nuclear field."

"When the highest jurisprudent and authority in the country's leadership issues a fatwa, this will be binding for all of us to follow," he added.

Khamenei, who has the final say on all state matters in Iran, said last year that Tehran is not seeking atomic arms. He called possessing such weapons a "sin" as well as "useless, harmful and dangerous."

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 15 Jan 2013 23:40

Rony wrote:Iranian army unrest over postponed paydays as global boycott bites

Iran's national police is warning that new unrest will erupt soon -- and that because of the effects of sanctions this time it will be from the mofussil areas (towns other than Tehran).

member_23658 · Post by **member_23658** » 18 Jan 2013 11:19

Anti India broadcasts on Iran-Bangladesh radio
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 068631.cms

But there remains a strong constituency that hews to the anti-India line. India is concerned that broadcasts like this could undo all the good work being put into the relationship. "Bangladesh has made no move to stop anti-India programming," said officials tracking this development.

On the other hand, officials said, Iran's own motives are under the scanner. The radio station is publicly owned, which means the government would have to bear responsibility for running anti-India broadcasts in Bangladesh. No one is quite sure where the programming is done, but they say its unlikely this is done in Bangladesh. Therefore, Iran has a greater responsibility to oversee the tone and tenor of its radio programming

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 23 Jan 2013 08:58

I don't know if this is the right thread but :Press TV: Kashmiri Separatist polemic

I want to draw attention to how Iran's official and semi-official media outlets have become a stage for anti-India Pakistani rhetoric and Kashmiri separatists.

Such behavior from them needs to be monitored and needs to be pointed out, the next time people talk about India's "deep cultural and political ties" with Iran and about how India is bending over backwards, risking US and European sanctions on our economy to help Iran out.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 23 Jan 2013 10:16

^^^ And as if on cue, from the very same PressTV: Iran and India have a special relationship, Indian president says

Code: Select all

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/01/23/285038/iran-india-have-a-special-relationship/

During a meeting with the new Iranian ambassador to India, Gholamreza Ansari, in New Delhi on Tuesday, Mukherjee said India wants good relations with all countries and attaches great significance to its ties with certain countries -- including Iran and China -- since such relations date back centuries and have their roots in numerous affinities.

...

Ansari said Iran-India relations are deeply-rooted, and Iranian history is vividly manifested all over India.

It looks like the Iranians believe that they, too, can use Pakistan to twist India's arm. Its clear they don' give a damn about the ongoing genocide of Shi'a engineered by the Pakistanis.

India hesitant to implement sanctions against Iran: Report

WASHINGTON, 19 JAN: India is hesitant to implement all aspects of US and European Union sanctions against Iran, a Congressional report has said, attributing this to New Delhi's reliance on Tehran with regards to Afghanistan and the historic, cultural and economic ties between the two nations.

"India is implementing UN sanctions against Iran but its cultural, economic, and historic ties ~ as well as its strategic need for access to Afghanistan ~ have made India hesitant to adopt all aspects of US and EU sanctions on Iran," the independent and bipartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) said in its latest report on Iran.

"India first signalled greater support for sanctioning against Iran in late 2012 when its central bank ceased using a Tehran-based regional body, the Asian Clearing Union, to handle transactions with Iran," said the report.

...

CRS said India appears to be distancing itself from participation in the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 23 Jan 2013 16:20

Carl ji,

I sense a certain troubling development in Iran viz-a-viz India.

As Iran gets a bloody nose in West Asia, with Iran losing out Syria, and the accompanying levers to push pressure on Israel, thus losing a major spoke for its pan-Islamic leadership claim, I see Iran building its Pan-Islamic leadership plank in the Indian Subcontinent, trying to get official Pakistani support for it.

Which other Arab country would really be in Iran's orbit? Iraq - just one, but South Iraq isn't Sunni and Iraqi Govt. doesn't really have much support in rest of the region!

Which other Muslim country would really be in Iran's orbit? None!

Iranian influence in West Asia is going to collapse with Syria and with a castrated Hezbollah! In North Africa, Iran is a marginal player. In Central Asia, Iran is a player, but there Turkey and Saudi Arabia are also players and have possibly more influence.

So Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia are the remaining countries where Iran can vie for influence.

With Taliban controlling Afghanistan, Iran can either keep up the good fight with the Northern Alliance, the Tajiks, the Uzbeks, etc. Or Iran can try to find accommodation with the bosses of Taliban sitting in Pakistan, and hope to keep some influence in Afghanistan through the Pakis, for otherwise under the directive of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan may finish off all Iranian influence there.

So both for retaining some influence in its backyard in Afghanistan and Tajikistan, as well as holding on to some semblance of Pan-Islamic leadership role, Iran could possibly try to appease Pakistan, and that means Iran would play the Kashmir card. It is a no-loss card, and India will hardly punish Iran for that.

The last time Iran helped the Northern Alliance, Iran still had weaponry from Shah's time. Now they have been under long sanctions. When the economic situation in Iran is itself precarious, it is questionable how much they can support Northern Alliance.

Another thing is that if they do support Northern Alliance, the Iranians will be in direct conflict with Pakistan as well, for their proxies would be fighting each other in Afghanistan.

Can the Iranians afford to lose out in both West Asia and Central Asia? What is then left of Shi'ite Theocratic claim as a leader of the Ummah? Nothing!

So I think we have to keep an eye on Iranian regime's options and how they would affect India.

AbhiJ · Post by **AbhiJ** » 23 Jan 2013 19:14

During Pee Bee UU Ach Film Episode, they planted some fake news on the radio (which is heard in Kashmir).

Kashmir erupted in Riots and 18 Slaves of Allah departed to Allah and also 1 Policeman (Also a Slave of Allah).

That was Iranian warning to India that same can be done in the heartland of UP/Bihar if we don't toe their line.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Jan 2013 05:21

From Indo-US dialog news group

New US sanctions create panic, India’s oil imports from Iran
Fri Jan 25, 2013 1:13 pm (PST) .
New US sanctions create panic, India’s oil imports from Iran could be hit hard from Feb 6

As the sanctions regime against Iran is extended to impact all its overseas earnings, its bound to cast a longer shadow over Iran-India ties as well.

The author has posted comments on this article

Indrani Bagchi & Sanjay Dutta, TNN | Jan 25, 2013, 09.09PM IST

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/ india-business/ New-US-sanctions -create-panic- Indias-oil- imports-from- Iran-could- be-hit-hard- from-Feb- 6/articleshow/ 18186715. cms

NEW DELHI: India's oil imports from Iran could take a severe knock as a new set of US sanctions kick in from February 6. India will no longer be able to route oil payments to Iran through the Turkish Halk Bank that has been the norm over the past couple of years.

Instead, India will have to pay for Iranian oil in local currency which will have to be kept in an Indian bank. India already pays 45% of its oil payments in rupees, which is kept in UCO Bank. After February 6, Iran will not be allowed to repatriate its foreign earnings except to buy goods from the country concerned. This could prove to be a problem all by itself particularly as Iran now has over $5 billion in rupees in the bank.

The new set of sanctions come about as a result of the amendments to the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012 ( ITRSHRA) by the US treasury department. For the first time, a US company can be penalized if its foreign subsidiary is found to be dealing with Iran government entities. This will extend the scope of the sanctions regime to even tertiary players in the international market.

India has already reduced its oil imports from Iran, which now makes up just under 10% of the import mix. India bought about 17 million tonnes in 2012, which is expected to come down to 14 million tonnes by end-March. India is also one of the few countries to get sanctions exemption by the US state department which is expected to be extended again. As the sanctions regime against Iran is extended to impact all its overseas earnings, its bound to cast a longer shadow over Iran-India ties as well.

By July 1, 2013, a further set of sanctions are expected to kick in — the Iran Freedom and Counter-Proliferation Act (IFCPA), which will invite US sanctions against any entity, US or non-American that is involved in energy, shipping or ship-building sectors in Iran, or, more importantly is a port operator in Iran. The new sanctions might impact India's plan to develop the Chabahar port in Iran, which has big stakeholders, including Afghanistan that expects to benefit from the port.

India intends to develop the port with the Iranian rupee funds parked in an Indian bank. However, this might run into trouble if Iran is only allowed to import goods from India. Theoretically, this may positively impact Indian exports to Iran, but Tehran has been traditionally reticent about importing goods from India. Indian officials have been in Iran recently to try to expand the export basket, but with little success.

So what the US sanctions will do is to create a Iranian rupee account just as the FSU had a rupee ruble account.

Also Iran must be morons to be reluctant to buy Indian goods. Its not like they have choice. And India can reduce the 10% oil it already deals with Iran. And Iran has $5B in rupees.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 27 Jan 2013 07:24

RajeshA wrote:I sense a certain troubling development in Iran viz-a-viz India.

As Iran gets a bloody nose in West Asia, with Iran losing out Syria, and the accompanying levers to push pressure on Israel, thus losing a major spoke for its pan-Islamic leadership claim, I see Iran building its Pan-Islamic leadership plank in the Indian Subcontinent, trying to get official Pakistani support for it.

RajeshA ji, I replied here: http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 6#p1399996

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 29 Jan 2013 17:58

Iran's monkey in space: A big concern or no big deal?

"They're following the path that we followed more than half a century ago," Logsdon said, adding that Iran is probably ahead of India in terms of space ability, but behind its arch foe Israel.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 29 Jan 2013 18:32

So how much does a monkey weigh? The same weight as Logsdon I'll bet.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 29 Jan 2013 18:41

Rony wrote:Iran's monkey in space: A big concern or no big deal?

"They're following the path that we followed more than half a century ago," Logsdon said, adding that Iran is probably ahead of India in terms of space ability, but behind its arch foe Israel.

It says "gray-tufted monkey", but one knows of gray-tufted langoor from India. Does somebody know this specimen's species?

Was it an Indian monkey, and was Iran permitted to take liberties with the life of an Indian 95%human citizen?

pentaiah · Post by **pentaiah** » 29 Jan 2013 19:41

It means re entry has been mastered.

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 29 Jan 2013 20:31

"Logsdon said, adding that Iran is probably ahead of India in terms of space ability, but behind its arch foe Israel'

How so? In terms of range, number and sophistication of satellites? So now, Israel is also ahead of India, since Israel is ahead of Iran. Doesn't sound right, to put it mildly!

Iran is joining those countries that are obsessed with the symbolism and prestige of space technology, much more than the scientific and social dimension. The US, Russia, France and China all have pompous space programmes, designed to show off might and capablity. India is pretty unique that way. India made it clear from the outset that its space programme would serve social, economic, scientific and infrastructural needs first and foremost. The symbolism and prestige are secondary, at best, and can speak for themselves.

sum · Post by **sum** » 29 Jan 2013 21:06

merlin wrote:So how much does a monkey weigh? The same weight as Logsdon I'll bet.

pentaiah · Post by **pentaiah** » 29 Jan 2013 22:09

Ok here is the pedigree of "Logsdon" how in the world do idiots like this get hired as Professors? we had one posting here from the same university who was the founder og US Pakistani friendship forum as well.

anyways reminds me of the great saying " Better untaught than ill taught"

Here we go Logsdon the "Expert"

John M. Logsdon
Professor Emeritus of Political Science and International Affairs
Address: 1957 E St., NW, Suite 403-O
E-mail: logsdon@gwu.edu
Phone: (202) 994-7248

Education: Ph.D., New York University
Expertise: Space policy and history
Background: John M. Logsdon is Professor Emeritus of Political Science and International Affairs at George Washington University's Elliott School of International Affairs. He was the founder and from 1987-2008 Director of the Elliott School's Space Policy Institute. He began his faculty service at GW in 1970. Dr. Logsdon is the author of John F. Kennedy and the Race to the Moon (2010) and The Decision to Go to the Moon: Project Apollo and the National Interest (1970) and is general editor of the eight-volume series Exploring the Unknown: Selected Documents in the History of the U.S. Civil Space Program. He has written numerous articles and reports on space policy and history, and authored the basic article on "Space Exploration" for the most recent edition of Encyclopedia Britannica. Dr. Logsdon is a member of the Exploration Committee of the NASA Advisory Council. In 2003 he served as a member of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board. He is a Fellow of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and a member of the International Academy of Astronautics. From September 2008 through August 2009, Dr. Logsdon held the Charles A. Lindbergh Chair in Aerospace History at the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 30 Jan 2013 10:16

Is it just me or did someone else observed that there is no mention of Indian SLBM test in Press TV.Not that it matters to India but in their India section, its all about Kashmir (mostly anti-Indian) and India killing Pakistan's soilder and ofcourse gang rape.Do anyone still think these donkey jockeys are our allies ?

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 01 Feb 2013 03:28

NIAC says that sanctions are tightening the Iranian regime's grip and control over all aspects of the economy. Ergo, they say, the US should resort to "diplomacy".

Iranians, whether living in Iran or expats like NIAC, keep hoping for something good to happen (like more freedom, etc) but they are too cautious about not wanting to uproot and burn away the fellow-Iranian forces that hold them down, for fear that some of the power and standing that Iran has in the region or world may be lost also, or that non-Iranians may take advantage. But I wonder if they have failed to find real, reliable friends too, or cultivate such friendships. This dithering and "chankian" mentality tries to walk a fine line, but eventually other forces will determine Iran's fate. It seems to be Iran's historical and geographic destiny.

रात्रिर्गमिष्यति भविष्यति सुप्रभातम्
भास्वानुदेष्यति हसिष्यति पङ्कजश्रीः ।
इत्थं विचिन्तयति कोशगते द्विरेफे
हा हन्त हन्त नलिनीं गज उज्जहार ॥

" 'Night will be over, there will be morning,
Sun will rise, lotus flower will open.'
While the bee trapped inside the lotus flower was thinking thus,
WTF! Alas! the lotus plant was uprooted by an elephant."
~ Kuvalayaananda

sum · Post by **sum** » 01 Feb 2013 08:23

Very interesting article from a very high powered person:
Lesson on diplomacy, from an Iranian

Chinmaya R. Gharekhan

Track II meetings can be useful when participants express their views candidly, without worrying about offending the sensitivities of others. When the event is held in India, visiting think tankers take pain not to upset their hosts. Since most foreigners have rightly concluded that Indians are not only flattery prone but credulous as well, they are usually complimentary about India’s role in various situations such as in Afghanistan, Syria, Middle East, etc.

It is therefore refreshing when a visiting participant in a Track II meeting gives free rein to his views about India’s foreign policy as was the case when an Iranian expert, familiar with the official thinking of his government, spoke his mind at an event in Delhi some time ago. Other Iranian participants at the same meeting spoke in a similar vein.

India, he said, was anxious not to make the United States unhappy. “Your ‘qibla’,” he said, “is Washington.” India was much inclined towards the U.S. and should reconsider striking a balance in its foreign policy; India had some shortcomings and should reconsider its relations with Iran; India was not being pragmatic but opportunistic. Traditionally, India enjoyed huge social capital in Iran; it was hugely popular with the Iranian people. All that had been destroyed for generations in one stroke because of India’s anti-Iran vote in the International Atomic Energy Agency. India could not vote against Iran and claim, at the same time, that Iran was important for India; it just did not make sense. A little later in the interactive session, he reiterated his view that India could not vote against Iran and, at the same time, say it wanted to work with Iran. “I repeat this because it was a very harmful act and it is very hard for any friend of India in Iran to accept this.”

Some Indian participants, evidently upset and taking advantage of this candour, reminded the Iranian gentleman that Iran had always sided with Pakistan and asked him what it was that Iran had done for India, that Iran was buying wheat from the U.S. but was not willing to buy it from India, that Iran was spreading radicalisation among the Shia community in India, that India says Iran is important for India but Iran never says India is important for Iran, etc. Someone pointed out that Shiite Iran supported the Taliban in Afghanistan, which was a diehard Sunni movement.

The Iranian friend — we have to describe him as a friend since friends are supposed to talk frankly without worrying about offending anyone — was not nonplussed. It was not Iran which placed obstacles for Indian wheat sales in Iran; this was a matter of business considerations. He added that India could not have an unfriendly attitude towards Iran and, at the same time, expect special consideration. Iran was a land of moderation, not a land of extremism; it never exported Shia extremism to India. If there is Shia extremism in India, there is also Hindu extremism, he added for good measure. As for supporting Pakistan, he said Iran had to, since Pakistan was a neighbour and a friendly country, but Iran had never done anything against India and wanted to be helpful to both. He rubbished the reports about supporting the Taliban and added that India had been in touch with the Taliban.

The red bolded part is a term gifted from UPA to all of India's enemies which India will have to bear for the rest of its history

As of today — and this must be emphasised — Iran certainly needs India’s friendship. It is true that our anti-Iran vote in IAEA has harmed our relations with Tehran, but international relations cannot forever be held hostage to past actions. We ourselves have long forgotten even the fact that many countries had voted against us in the United Nations at the time of Bangladesh’s war for independence in 1971.

No section of Iranian society saw nuclear weapons as a matter of privilege or security. Islamic jurisprudence specifically forbade intentionally polluting the atmosphere. Nuclear weapons did not provide security to nuclear weapon states; the U.S. and Nato had nukes but of what use had they been in Afghanistan? Had India been able to use them against Pakistan? As for some ‘evidence’ contained in a laptop revealed in Vienna, it was fabricated and a cheap argument.

The ‘friend’ used the very point raised by the Saudis and others; India, he pointed out, could easily get oil from other sources, Iran was not really important for India as an energy source.

Instead of taking offence at his remarks, we ought to draw some lessons from them.

Unlike Iran, which never says India is important for it, Indian strategic community never tires of repeating how crucial Iran is to us for its energy resources, for alternative access to Afghanistan and for the northern corridor to Central Asia. For good measure, we often remind ourselves of the fact that there is a large Shia community in India, the assumption being that the Shias in India expect the government to be mindful of their religious sentiments while deciding on the policy towards Iran. Such talk only strengthens Iran’s attitude of being somewhat contemptuous or dismissive of India. It further makes people in Iran and India conclude that India needs Iran much more than Iran needs India, if at all.

The Iranian friend was right; there are other sources from where India can buy oil. Saudi Arabia would be delighted if we were to turn to it to make up the shortfall, since it would clearly be interpreted as India siding with it in the undeclared politico-sectarian war against Iran. (This is one reason why India would not want to do so.) But the number of buyers of Iranian oil is dwindling fast and Iran is hard put to find alternative buyers, even at discounted prices. Contrary to what our friend said, his Oil Minister has publicly acknowledged that Iran’s oil exports fell by 40 per cent last year.

Iran needs India’s friendship

The Prime Minister paid an official visit to Iran last year for the non-aligned summit, no doubt upsetting the Americans. The fact that he was ‘granted an audience’ by the supreme leader should not flatter us. Iran certainly needs friends like India. Would the supreme leader have ‘received’ the Prime Minister if his country did not face sanctions? Iran surely knows that India has not joined in the unilateral sanctions imposed by the West. If Iran, in the face of these facts, has convinced itself that India’s ‘qibla’ is in the direction of Washington, there is nothing we can do to disabuse it of its thinking.

The above analysis is not an argument for downgrading Iran’s importance for us and for the region of which it is a part. Rather, it is meant to keep in mind what Harish Khare, the respected columnist, recently observed: Appeasement policy does not serve national interest, in domestic politics or in international relations. His advice is aimed at the government but is equally true at the non-governmental level. International relations must be conducted on the basis of reciprocity and mutuality of interests. We also have to keep in mind that countries which at present have strained, even hostile relations with Iran, can and will change their policy at a time of their choosing; we should not be left surprised.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 01 Feb 2013 09:46

sum wrote:Very interesting article from a very high powered person:
Lesson on diplomacy, from an Iranian

Some Indian participants, evidently upset and taking advantage of this candour, reminded the Iranian gentleman that Iran had always sided with Pakistan and asked him what it was that Iran had done for India, that Iran was buying wheat from the U.S. but was not willing to buy it from India, that Iran was spreading radicalisation among the Shia community in India, that India says Iran is important for India but Iran never says India is important for Iran, etc. Someone pointed out that Shiite Iran supported the Taliban in Afghanistan, which was a diehard Sunni movement.

The Iranian friend — we have to describe him as a friend since friends are supposed to talk frankly without worrying about offending anyone — was not nonplussed. It was not Iran which placed obstacles for Indian wheat sales in Iran; this was a matter of business considerations. He added that India could not have an unfriendly attitude towards Iran and, at the same time, expect special consideration. Iran was a land of moderation, not a land of extremism; it never exported Shia extremism to India. If there is Shia extremism in India, there is also Hindu extremism, he added for good measure. As for supporting Pakistan, he said Iran had to, since Pakistan was a neighbour and a friendly country, but Iran had never done anything against India and wanted to be helpful to both. He rubbished the reports about supporting the Taliban and added that India had been in touch with the Taliban.
The red bolded part is a term gifted from UPA to all of India's enemies which India will have to bear for the rest of its history

It is always entitlement, and Iranians show a lot of it.

Since we do not publish any surveys of Shia Extremism or have GoI statements that Iran is supporting Shia Extremism in India, even though that is the blatant truth, it becomes difficult to pin anything on Iran.

But what can be pinned down, without any hesitation is Iran's votes on Kashmir in international fora, on Jammu & Kashmir, a state in the Indian Union. And if Iran has voted against India, Iran has zero entitlement on any Indian support in international fora either. That should be made crystal clear.

Now there has been a lot of overlap of strategic interests in the past as far as Afghanistan is concerned, and India has interests in Central Asia. But the Iranians have made it amply clear that their ego has been bruised and they will use India's very mild vote against Iran as a club to pound us with. So we should say too bad. Suck it.

In any case, we know Iran is not going to give us unhindered access to Central Asia and Afghanistan, or for that matter unhindered access to them to the Indian Ocean. In the end, after 2014, most probably Iran and Pakistan with the help of China are going to cut off Central Asia for good from the rest of the world. Iran and Pakistan are going to act as the gatekeepers to Central Asia and they are going to work in sync.

India needs to gate-crash.

More and more, I feel USA would not agree to make Pakistani Baluchistan free. USA is too invested in Pakistan. So we should go for Iran's Baluchestan. There will be many countries in the world willing to help there - the Saudis, the Americans.

Liberation of Pakistan's Baluchistan comes AFTER liberation of Iran's Baluchestan. Iran simply cannot be a friend to India, not in its current theocratic form.

It is time for India to enter the fray.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 01 Feb 2013 09:59

India warns Israeli diplomats of possible Iranian attack

Indian security officials met with Israeli diplomats in the country and notified them they may be a target for Iranian operatives on the anniversary of the February 13th attack against the Israeli embassy in India.According to the report in The Times of India, security has been reinforced around Israeli institutions per the Israel's request.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 01 Feb 2013 10:56

RajeshA wrote:Liberation of Pakistan's Baluchistan comes AFTER liberation of Iran's Baluchestan. Iran simply cannot be a friend to India, not in its current theocratic form.

That's an interesting angle. TSP is such a mess that most would logically assume that Paki Baluchestan would be first to gain independence, if anything. But given that the US interest at this point of time is more in terms of leaving the area in a sea of instability, semi-lawlessness and turmoil, that objective is mostly fulfilled in Af-Pak.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 01 Feb 2013 11:32

Carl wrote:
RajeshA wrote:Liberation of Pakistan's Baluchistan comes AFTER liberation of Iran's Baluchestan. Iran simply cannot be a friend to India, not in its current theocratic form.
That's an interesting angle. TSP is such a mess that most would logically assume that Paki Baluchestan would be first to gain independence, if anything. But given that the US interest at this point of time is more in terms of leaving the area in a sea of instability, semi-lawlessness and turmoil, that objective is mostly fulfilled in Af-Pak.

Carl ji,

in the last years, independence for Baluchistan has been of special focus of interest for me, and I and many others here, have always thought that Pakistani Baluchistan would be the first to get independence, mostly because of the anti-Pakistan focus on BRF, but Iran has escaped due scrutiny on this.

We have considered Iran a friend, or at least a country of considerable strategic importance to India.

My realization now is that we need to look at Iran objectively, and how the next decades would pan out, especially as the attention of Pakistan would shift from AfPak where it was post 9/11 as well as of Iran from West Asia as it loses its Pan-Islamic base there, with its ally Syria collapsing as a pivot of Shi'a Crescent, possibly Hezbollah being neutralized starved of logistical support from Iran, etc. Iran is going to be pushed out of its confrontation with Israel, and the Sunnis are taking over Israel portfolio.

When we look at it, Iran-Pakistan strategic understanding is a foregone conclusion, and it will happen despite the Shia deaths in Pakistan.

That cuts off India from Central Asia either completely or we would have to heavily bribe our way through, and if we do that we will be stripped of any strategic interests there.

Access to Central Asia and Afghanistan is important for India for energy and mineral resources from Russia, Central Asian Republics and Afghanistan, but also to keep Pakistan off-balance. If we do not keep Pakistan off-balance through a relationship with Afghans, we face Pakistani proxy-war in Kashmir and elsewhere.

In order to get free access, we would have to go through Baluchistan. And despite all the killing going on in Pakistani Baluchistan, India would not get any international support for its liberation - neither from the Gulf, nor from USA or the West in general, certainly not from PRC, and Russia doesn't have the will after their Afghanistan fiasco.

Since Iran is not going to partner India in any strategic sense in Central Asia, and has consistently shown anti-Indian positions, there is no need to keep ourselves back.

Iranian Baluchestan's Liberation would in contrast to Pakistan's Baluchistan find a lot of takers. Americans, Saudis would be on board. Even Russia could be enticed as that would give Russians a North-South corridor not manned by any regional powers.

In fact there may be elements in Pakistan under the influence of Saudi interests who may see it in their interest to go after Iranian Baluchestan as well, and thus offer Americans some bases there.

But even if Pakistan helps, Iranian Baluchis would never be indebted to Pakistan. There is too much anti-Pakistan feeling among the Balochs.

India can enter the fray contributing a big military presence in Iranian Baluchestan once Liberation is underway. Once we have a presence in (ex-)Iranian Baluchestan, Pakistani Baluchistan would really be a piece of cake, as then Pakistani Baluchistan would have a great motivation to join the liberated (ex-)Iranian Baluchestan, and Pakistan would also lose all moral standing for not letting their Baluchistan join with the Independent Baluchestan.

Iranian regime would hate us. It doesn't change much. We can help the Iranian people much better if we share a border with them.

More importantly what we should keep in mind is that one does not get too many opportunities and whatever opportunities present themselves e.g. in this case, we should grab them.

sum · Post by **sum** » 01 Feb 2013 12:31

Rony wrote:India warns Israeli diplomats of possible Iranian attack

Indian security officials met with Israeli diplomats in the country and notified them they may be a target for Iranian operatives on the anniversary of the February 13th attack against the Israeli embassy in India.According to the report in The Times of India, security has been reinforced around Israeli institutions per the Israel's request.

We now have Iranian proxies also running rings in Desh?

As if the TSP-ians weren't enough!

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 01 Feb 2013 14:20

RajeshA ji,

It looks like the Arabs and the US are definitely more likely to actively support trouble in West Baluchestan (Iranian-occupied) than East Baluchestan. Even in Baluchi demonstrations in the US when Ahmadinejad visited, some of them were discouraged from carrying anti-Pakistani placards along with anti-Iran ones. If they want funding, then they should focus on Iran, is the message.

OTOH, the Baluchi intelligentsia (which seems wholly based on E. Baluchestan) prefers that Paki-held Baluchis gain freedom first and lead the whole movement in general, rather than the W. Baluchis, for whom they seem to have disdain - because W. Baluchis usually tend to be involved in drug-running or other schemes to make money, rather than a well-thought out ideology, or else they tend to focus more on Sunni Islamism and in demanding more rights from Tehran. Moreover, the E. Baluchi intelligentsia in TSP prefers to keep the ideology of Baluchi nationalism relatively non-sectarian and "secular" (relatively speaking). Since the 1800's, a lot of Baluchis became "Zikris" (a Mahdi-ist movement), plus there exist some Baluchi Shi'a. But Baluch movements focused on Iranian Baluchestan tend to be Wahhabi funded and indoctrinated. As it is, the Zikris are merging back into the regular Hanafi Sunni fold, so this added Wahhabi extremism and its macabre tactics with groups like Jondullah is even more unwelcome according to these Baluchi thinkers.

So far, internal lack of unity has been the bane of the Baluchi freedom struggle. This East-West difference could add to that. It would be interesting to see how the powers that are funding it will get everyone on the same page.

Moreover, in a case as transparent as this, an Iran-Pak-China axis is a possibility. Pak-China can easily bear down on India to deter us from participating actively. The chances of active Indian participation seem higher if TSP itself was the chief target of the first round of Baluchi liberation (East). But if W. Baluchestan is going to be the chief focus, and the co-operation of a section within Pakistan is also required, then its conceivable that - even if the break-away happens - Indian participation could be kept down.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 01 Feb 2013 15:44

Carl ji,

My response is here!

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 02 Feb 2013 08:08

Is Iran's space monkey a fake?

Iran’s triumphant claim that it successfully sent a monkey into space may have been nothing more than hot air.

The monkey triumphantly presented to the nation’s media in his own silk tuxedo appeared markedly different to the creature that was picture strapped into a rocked prior to its launch into space.

That animal had light fur and a distinctive red mole over its right eye. But the monkey that returned was dark haired and had no mole.

“It looks like a very different monkey, the nose, the features, everything is different,” said Yariv Bash, founder and CEO of Space Israel, a non profit organisation working to send an unmanned Israel space ship to the moon.
“This means that either the original monkey died from a heart attack after the rocket landed or that the experiment didn’t go that well,” Mr Bash concluded.

Dismissing as remote the possibility that space flight had a dramatic physical affect on the Iranian monkey, international observers have concluded that either the original animal died in space or that the launch – timed to coincide with the 34th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution - simply never took place.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 03 Feb 2013 05:55

After the monkey episode which boomeranged, now this. The Iranians never fail to entertain.

Ahmadinejad unveils Iran’s newest fighter jet that militant officials claim can evade radar

After the monkey that didn't quite make it to space, the Iranian 'stealth bomber'

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 03 Feb 2013 19:08

sum wrote:India, he said, was anxious not to make the United States unhappy. “Your ‘qibla’,” he said, “is Washington.” India was much inclined towards the U.S. and should reconsider striking a balance in its foreign policy;

This may be a valid point to an extent. It can't be denied that Indian governments are elected using US-installed software. But if India gets a pro-Indian govt, it should not unnecessarily alienate the western block either.

RajeshA wrote: But what can be pinned down, without any hesitation is Iran's votes on Kashmir in international fora, on Jammu & Kashmir, a state in the Indian Union. And if Iran has voted against India, Iran has zero entitlement on any Indian support in international fora either. That should be made crystal clear.

iirc Iran has helped India on the Kashmir issue in the OIC and other fora.

In the end, after 2014, most probably Iran and Pakistan with the help of China are going to cut off Central Asia for good from the rest of the world. Iran and Pakistan are going to act as the gatekeepers to Central Asia and they are going to work in sync.

This part may be right. But that is not an entirely negative scenario. If Pak goes unambiguously into the anti-western camp it will provide some clarity to the regional situation.

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 04 Feb 2013 02:00

Iran is ready for talks again.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/fe ... lks-resume

The sanctions are hurting.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 04 Feb 2013 08:42

Balancing Rivals: India’s Tightrope between Iran and the United States

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 04 Feb 2013 10:36

Iran Claims It’s Rolled out a Stealth Fighter Jet — But Is it Real?

Iran has unveiled a new domestically designed and manufactured fighter jet that it says has stealth capabilities, a claim that aviation experts are already questioning.

Iranian authorities rolled out a single-seat bomber, the Qaher F-313 (“Dominant”), on Saturday to much fanfare, including an appearance by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who assured the jet is for defensive purposes only, a claim reminiscent of Iranian assurances that its nuclear program is designed for peaceful purposes.

The Tehran Times reports that Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi detailed some of the plane’s capabilities which he claims include:

• avoiding radar detection
• flying at low altitudes
• carrying advanced domestically-manufactured weapons
• taking off and landing on short runways
• able to combat other aircraft and targets on the ground

The Tehran Times writes that the aircraft reflects Iran’s “significant achievements in the field of aerospace technology.” This as the official in charge of the project, Hassan Parvaneh, told Iran’s state-run television, “Its shape and structure is completely unique and peerless.”

The stealth claims are eliciting skepticism as they come on the heels of Iran’s admission that one of two official photos of the monkey it says it sent into space last week showed the wrong animal. Iran insists it successfully sent a monkey to space and returned it safely to Iran.

The Israeli paper Maariv interviewed aeronautical expert Tal Inbar who says the aircraft looked like a model made of fiberglass or cardboard. He said, “It’s not a plane, because that’s not how a real plane looks.”

“Iran doesn’t have the ability to build planes. Plain and simple,” Inbar added.

The Times of Israel spoke with an Israeli aerospace engineer on condition of anonymity who had a slightly different take. It reports the engineer “said that while the plane displayed by the Iranian press on Saturday was clearly not a working prototype, it integrated advanced stealth design with extreme maneuverability.”

He also believes that even though the plane can’t drop bombs, it could potentially operate as an interceptor to defend Iranian skies from foreign bombing threats. “They need a defensive interceptor that gives them the element of surprise, and it is big enough to carry real air-to-air missiles,” he said.

David Cenciotti, a pilot, Italian Air Force veteran and aviation reporter who runs the blog The Aviationist examined the photos and video of the new Qaher F-313 and is asking some big questions as to the viability of the plane. He writes:

Indeed, based on the first photographs released by the FARS News Agency, the new stealthy jet has a really peculiar design. It features hard edges and those distinctive edges and angle of the U.S. F-22 and the twin tail shape much similar to that of the F-35 Lightning II. […]

The canopy material is at least odd (based on its transparency, it looks like plexiglass or something like that).

The cockpit seems to be basic (a bit too much for a modern plane – note the lack of wirings behind the front panel and the presence of few instruments, some of those similar to those equipping small private planes…).

The nose section is so small almost no radar could fit in it.

The air intakes are extremely small (they remind those of current drones/unmanned combat aerial vehicles) whereas the engine section lacks any kind of nozzle: engine afterburners could melt the entire jet.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Feb 2013 14:37

It's a real mockup! However,full marks for ambition.If the aircraft is built in similar style,with some degree of composites in the body,a small radar either of type in service or obtained from outside,pals like the PRC,would suffice for a humble little stealth fighter.The main Q,"where is the engine going to come from?",remains unanswered and what weaponry will it possess.perhaps the Iranian stealth fighter may have a Chinese godfather.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 04 Feb 2013 16:06

Philip wrote:It's a real mockup! However,full marks for ambition.If the aircraft is built in similar style,with some degree of composites in the body,a small radar either of type in service or obtained from outside,pals like the PRC,would suffice for a humble little stealth fighter.The main Q,"where is the engine going to come from?",remains unanswered and what weaponry will it possess.perhaps the Iranian stealth fighter may have a Chinese godfather.

Phlilip-> it is a very poor mockup and the one in the air was a toy plane. What radar will fit, there is no weapons bay or hard points, no jet nozzles, its wings don't seem to adequate to generate any sort of lift, the engine inlets look inadequate, the HUD looks like a joke with toy style wiring and canopy made of Plastic.

This seems to be nothing but H&D, like monkey in space aimed at the domestic audience.

The Persians as discussed here have a bit of High opinion of themselves and look down on SDRE's, so the public must be questioning them and they have come up with this sham to claim they are great.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 05 Feb 2013 04:28

Monkey Se Kumm Nahi. Kanha Hai Apna Leader

Ahmadinejad says he is ready to be first Iranian in space

(Reuters) - President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Monday he was ready to be the first human sent into orbit by Iran's fledgling space program, Iranian media reported.Iran declared last week that it had successfully launched a monkey into space and retrieved it alive, which officials hailed as a major step towards their goal of sending humans into space.The launch added to Western concerns about Iran's space program because the same rocket technology could potentially be used to deliver a nuclear warhead on a ballistic missile."I am ready to be the first human to be sent to space by Iranian scientists," Ahmadinejad said on Monday, on the sidelines of an exhibition of space achievements in Tehran, according to the Mehr news agency.Sending living things into space is the result of Iranian efforts and the dedication of thousands of Iranian scientists."Ahmadinejad is known for provocative public comments and it was unclear whether the suggestion was a serious one.His second and final term as president ends in June, and his political star has been on the wane since he fell out with parliament early in his second term and appeared to lose the support of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 06 Feb 2013 00:43

Iran's Ahmadinejad gets red-carpet welcome in Egypt