Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Iran News and Discussions

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 2808
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Iran News and Discussions

Postby Rakesh » 12 Dec 2007 04:33


Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16187
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Postby Philip » 27 Dec 2007 10:10

Time's "Man of the Year",Vladimir Putin is wasting no time to the US intransigence in ereecting a missile defence shield in Eastern Europe,using the fig leaf of the threat from Iranian missiles.The US spurned Russia's offer of using CIS territory for the same purpose, being more effective.In response,Pres.Putin is increasing defence supplies to iran so that it can protect itself from any rogue attacks by the US or its allies,chiefly Israel.Though US intelligence has downgraded the nuclear bomb threat from Iran,no one can totally rule out a "rogue" attack in the dying days of theBush administration,as the neo-cons led by Bush and Cheney might make one final gesture to delight their constitituency of fundamentailist "Christians".

A must read for every BR memebr is the book,by Craig Unger "Fall of the House of Bush",how Bush lost the War.It is a devastating indcitment upon Dubya and his team of neo-con fanatics,who destroyed almost everything that his father built up during GW1.Here is a brief synopsis of the contents of the book.

"Vanity Fair contributing editor Craig Unger has just published a new book entitled The Fall of the House of Bush: The Untold Story of How a Band of True Believers Seized the Executive Branch, Started the Iraq War, and Still Imperils America’s Future (Scribner; $27.00). In some respects the work continues Unger’s keen focus on the Bush clan’s ties and dealings with the Middle East found in his prior book House of Bush, House of Saud, but The Fall introduces some fascinating new research on the role that Neoconservatives played in Bush 43’s rise and his presidency, the role of the Christian Right and the curious dealings between Neocons and Religious Right figures. But the core of the book is an intimate account of the struggle that the key foreign policy advisors of Bush 41 waged to set his son’s administration back on a more “realistâ€

Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Postby Rye » 27 Dec 2007 10:58

US supplied Stingers to the Taliban in Afghanisthan -- the Russians are supplying similar weapons to Iran. Very interesting times.

vvijay
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 11
Joined: 08 Nov 2007 02:00

Postby vvijay » 27 Dec 2007 11:16

Doesn't the S-300 affect the Israelis? Can't see them being too pleased about it.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6700
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Postby shyamd » 28 Dec 2007 04:13

No comment from Olmert apparently, and Israeli ministers hasn't made a comment about it. Debka has been running the story since 26th.

Debka says Damascus is gonna receive it too "as they move toward a unified military command"

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4071
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Neshant » 28 Dec 2007 21:24

Anytime there is a war with the US, an awful lot of russian weapondry ends up as smouldering junk.

If they think a few missiles are going to protect them against anything, they are fooling themselves.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 28 Dec 2007 23:59

Neshant wrote:Anytime there is a war with the US, an awful lot of russian weapondry ends up as smouldering junk.

If they think a few missiles are going to protect them against anything, they are fooling themselves.


Like in Vietnam you mean?
Aircraft losses of the Vietnam War

Or 71 Liberation war perhaps?

shyam
BRFite
Posts: 1380
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31

Postby shyam » 29 Dec 2007 11:00

Philip wrote:Russia will supply new anti-aircraft missiles for Iran
http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/articl ... 45,00.html

· Advanced S-300 could hit US and Israeli fighter jets
· Air defence system 'better than American version'

This might have been the new intelligence report that convinced Bush that Iran has stopped its nuclear program in 2003.

AshokS
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 29 Jan 2007 08:57

Postby AshokS » 29 Dec 2007 11:16

Frankly its a real danger to the world if Iran gets nuclear weapons or reprocessing capabilities. Its bad enough that the US turned a blind eye when China let the nuclear genie out of the bottle by giving the weapon designs to Pakistan, but Porkistan is a US lackey state - therefore Porkistan is effectively nook nude. Iran is not.....

Lets seriously hope the US doesn't back out of this fight with Iran if necessary for the lack of resolve....... no one else has the ability to contain this threat.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6700
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Postby shyamd » 07 Jan 2008 21:01


Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Postby Sanjay M » 08 Jan 2008 03:32

USN Describes Encounter with Iranian Gunboats

Hmm, is this a possible lead-up to that much-predicted US strike on Iran??

Or are the Iranians so confident that the strike is off the table, that they don't mind tugging at Uncle's beard?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16187
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Postby Philip » 08 Jan 2008 10:03

Dick Cheney ,the key neo-con behind Bush a neo-con himself,will try every trick in the book to see that Iran is bruised or burnt before Bush demits office.The revealation by US intelligence that Iran was not making a bomb pulled the carpet from under the feet of the warmongerers in the Bush administaration.This latest incident appears to be an attempt at "baiting" the Iranians,who wisely refrained form going too far and just avoided an armed clash in the Gulf,with unpredictable consequences.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/mid ... 318010.ece

US almost opened fire on Iranian boats, Pentagon says
By Kim Sengupta
Published: 08 January 2008
The Strait of Hormuz The US and Iran have engaged in their most serious military confrontation in recent times, with American warships on the verge of opening fire on gunboats of the Revolutionary Guards which had threatened to blow them up.

The incident, details of which were confirmed by the Pentagon yesterday, came on the eve of President George Bush's visit to the Middle East and follows claims by US commanders in the Persian Gulf that Iran was trying to destablise the region.

The three US ships and five Iranian vessels clashed in the early hours of Sunday in the Strait of Hormuz, the stretch of water where a 15-strong British naval party was taken hostage by the Revolutionary Guards last year. American officials at the time said that a similar attempt to seize their personnel would have led to immediate retaliation.

The Pentagon claimed the American ships were in international waters, although the demarcation of the border between Iran and Iraq on the Strait remains a matter of dispute. An American official said that the Revolutionary Guards boats "swarmed" to within 200 metres of the USS Port Royal, destroyer USS Hopper and frigate USS Ingraham and the Iranians transmitted a radio message saying: " I am coming at you; you will explode in a couple of minutes".

The captain of one of the US vessels was "literally moments away" from giving the order to open fire when the Iranian vessels moved away, American officials said. The Iranian boats were observed before the stand-off, dropping "small white containers" into the water, the Americans said, an exercise for laying mines.

"It is the most serious provocation of this sort that we've seen yet," a Pentagon spokesman said. "There were no injuries, but there could have been." The White House has warned Tehran that such "hostile action" will not be tolerated.

The US State Department spokesman, Sean McCormack, said: "The United States will confront Iranian behaviour where it seeks to do harm either to us or to our friends and allies in the region. There is wide support for that within the region."

In Tehran, a Foreign Ministry spokesman, Mohammad Ali Hossein, confirming that there had been a confrontation, added: "The example that happened at the weekend was similar to previous cases and is an ordinary and natural issue."

Tensions between Washington and Tehran over Iran's nuclear programme continue, and both the Americans and the British have repeatedly charged the Iranians with supplying explosives which have been used to kill coalition troops in Iraq.

In October, the US accused the Revolutionary Guards of trying to obtain chemical and biological weapons and its Quds force of supporting terrorism. The following month, the US military claimed that the Revolutionary Guards have taken over operations in the Gulf from the Iranian navy.

One aim of President Bush's visit to the region is expected to be to reassure Gulf states nervous about Tehran's intentions of continuing US support. American officials have noticeably ratcheted up their rhetoric about Iran. At a security conference in Manama, Bahrain, last month, Admiral William J Fallon, head of the US Central Command, said: "Their behaviour has really been a problem ... to the extent it destablises the region, which it does."

Vice-Admiral Kevin J Cosgriff added that the main concern was Iran's " threat to attempt to close the Strait of Hormuz to normal merchant marine traffic ... mines, coastal cruise missiles, tactical aviation, submarines and ships could be used to close the waterway." An American-led multinational naval force of 45 vessels, including British ships, patrols the Gulf.

More than 45 per cent of the world's oil trade flows through the Strait. After revelations about the confrontation between the Iranians and the Americans, the price of crude jumped 49 cents to $98.40 a barrel before slipping back later.

The battleground

* Although only 34 miles wide at its narrowest point, the channel between Oman and Iran is of massive strategic importance, providing a crucial import and export route for world energy supplies.

More than 20 per cent of the world's total oil supply passes through the strait, with tankers carrying the liquid riches of Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states on to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea.

If the Strait of Hormuz was blocked, only a small fraction of the 17 million barrels of crude that travel along it every day would be able to pass along alternative routes. Iran has threatened to impede trade through the waterway if attacked, which would lead to a massive rise in energy prices.

Ownership of the region's waterways is disputed, particularly near the southern borders of Iraq and Iran, and hostile military action is not unheard of: last March, Iran seized Royal Navy personnel accused of trespass in Iranian waters. The channel is also used to transport heavy armour and military supplies to Iraq and other Gulf states.

pradeepe
BRFite
Posts: 741
Joined: 27 Aug 2006 20:46
Location: Our culture is different and we cannot live together - who said that?

Postby pradeepe » 10 Jan 2008 04:57

Check out this NYT's editorial:

A Dangerous Game in the Strait

Now see it get ripped apart in the comments -

link

Bush and co., are a tad short on credibility surely, I just didnt know it was this bad.

derkonig
BRFite
Posts: 953
Joined: 08 Nov 2007 00:51
Location: Jeering sekular forces bhile Furiously malishing my mijjile @ Led Lips Mijjile Malish Palish Parloul

Postby derkonig » 10 Jan 2008 10:12

ppl, stop bashing dubya. he may appear to be low on public support, but i am sure history will judge that man a a great prez. he may be a neo-con/bible-thumping-EJ whatever, but he has the cojones to take the fight to the enemy. it will be very important that iran gets no nukes & if that necessiates an american invasion, then so be it & the sooner the better.

the world can do with lesser abduls jihadis anyday & dubya is ensuring just that. i guess we need to be grateful to that man. moral posturing & moonbat-ism is no substitute for military action. if the dems win it will be an unmitigated disaster for modern civ. & the whole world may as well find itself pushed back into the 7th cent. if you don't want that, then bush is the guy you need to look upto.

pradeepe
BRFite
Posts: 741
Joined: 27 Aug 2006 20:46
Location: Our culture is different and we cannot live together - who said that?

Postby pradeepe » 10 Jan 2008 22:36

:D Sure

All hail Dubya

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16187
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Postby Philip » 14 Jan 2008 12:31

The BBC carried a report on ther incident in Gulf,where the voice of the Iranian naval officer talking to US warships,was different from the one who uttered the alleged threat.The blame is now being attributed to "Fillipino Monkey",a radio ham,described as a "local heckler".
Despite the new evidence,Dubya Bush has repeated his ranting and raving about the Iranians,urging his allies to let him have ago at Iran and the Mullahs before he demits office.It now appears that Bush's Middle East "peace talks"were really warmongering at Iran,judging from the content of his speeches to Arab leaders.Little talk about striving for peace between Israel and the Palestinians,but huge noise about dangerous Iran.It appears that Bush still has Iran in his gunsights and will spare no opportunity of using any trivial excuse for attacking Iran in the future.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/

'Iran threats' may have been work of a heckler
By Tom Chivers and agencies
Last Updated: 2:30am GMT 14/01/2008

Threats to US ships in the Strait of Hormuz heard at the end of a Pentagon-released recording of an incident between Iranian patrol boats and US Navy warships last week may have been the work of a local heckler known as the "Filipino Monkey", The Navy Times has reported.

Watch: Footage released by Iran over US navy vessel incident | Watch: Footage released by the Pentagon
A video released on Friday showed several small Iranian boats approaching US ships in an incident that President Bush has described as "provocative", while a previously-released audio recording included a threat to destroy the ships.

The Pentagon says the threat was received during the incident.

In accented English a voice is heard to say "I am coming to you ... You will explode in a few minutes." Pentagon officials had previously stated that the voice came from one of the boats, but they are now distancing themselves from that claim, saying instead that they do not know the source of the transmission.

The Navy Times said that the voice in the audio did not match that of an Iranian officer shown speaking to Navy cruiser USS Port Royal over the radio in a video released by the Iranian authorities.

advertisement
This has led several Navy experts to raise the possibility that a heckler, known locally as the "Filipino Monkey" - or a copycat - could have made the threats.

"Filipino Monkey" is believed to be more than one person. Its modus operandi is to listen in to ship-to-ship radio traffic before jumping in with insults and threats.

According to The Navy Times, US Navy women come in for particularly harsh treatment.

A civilian mariner told the paper that the "Filipino Monkey" phenomenon is worldwide, but more common in areas of heavy shipping such as the Strait of Hormuz.

Despite the discovery that Iran may not have been behind the threats, US President George W Bush has not toned down his rhetoric against the Islamic state. Speaking during his eight-day tour of the Middle East, Mr Bush described Iran as "the world's leading state sponsor of terror," which funds extremists, stirs up unrest in Lebanon, arms the Taliban, and threatens the stability of the entire Middle East with its refusal to fully disclose the facts surrounding its nuclear programme.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4071
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Neshant » 15 Jan 2008 08:15

LOL ...Filipino Monkey

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6700
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Postby shyamd » 18 Jan 2008 15:26

Why Indian companies must do business in Iran
"We also import and export to America."

These words from Iran's Finance Minister Danesh Jafri stunned the gathering into silence at a seminar arranged by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI).

After letting the significance of his statement sink in for just a second, a smiling Jafri clarified that while Iran does engage into business with the United States, it is not done directly but through a third country.

The Iranian finance minister, who is in India to attract investment, was trying to allay fears among Indian businessmen that American resistance to Iran is creating insecurity among the companies and making them think twice about doing business with Iran.

Integration with world economy has now become a well-established policy of the Iranian government and if the Jafri's presentation was any indication, it sounded better than those of so-called liberal South Asian countries. At the venue, the Iranian Embassy was distributing CDs containing forms and full details of the country's industrial policy, even as Jafri insisted that licenses for the industry and new investments will be given within 30 days.

India's Ambassador to Iran Manbir Singh and Indian Oil [Get Quote] chairman Sarthak Behuria were also present at the meeting, where Jafri presented a confident picture of Iran. He refused to underscore the pressure from the United States on Tehran or the countries desirous of doing business with it. He reminded the gathering that even the US intelligence agencies had accepted that their information about Iran's nuclear weapons programme was incorrect.

During his presentation, he emphasised that Iran's geographical location is well suited to companies interested in oil and gas, power, petrochemicals, mining, and the services sector.

Iran, the fourth largest oil producing country and the second largest gas producer, has a big opportunity to enter the hydrocarbon projects, he said.

When rediff.com asked him about the possible problems in acquiring international finance for the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline, Jafri said: "Iran and India can finance the project easily." When further questioned about its progress, he passed the buck by saying, "It is not a bilateral project. It involves three countries. If India and Pakistan can conclude the talks then we can start the project."

On the American opposition to Iran he said, "We can live with opposition from Russia or the US. We would continue doing what is good for us."

He said that Iran is has not only oil and gas but also surplus electricity to export. He affirmed that Iran will soon produce 20,000 megawatt of nuclear energy.

When asked about the long-pending LNG gas deal that has yet to be finalised because of the high price demanded by Iran, he said: "I can say that we are not raising the price. International price has risen after we signed the memorandum of understanding." (An MoU is just an agreement to enter business)

"The price of oil and gas is not a bilateral issue. The increase in oil price has been very high recently. (Even) we are not happy about it," he said.

Currently, annual bilateral trade between Iran and India stands at around $2 billion, which is less than one per cent of India's global trade.

The Iranian minister, while highlighting the advantages of doing business in Iran, said that Tehran is uniquely located sharing borders with important regions. It is in proximity with China, Central Asian countries, Africa, West Asia, Europe and South East Asia. Jafri also emphasised that a legal framework has been put in place and the security of foreign investments is ensured through new changes in the law and the Constitution.

Iran, the minister said, had reduced tax rates from 65 per cent to a flat 25 per cent. It has given tax holidays to agriculture, industry, mining, tourism, and exporters.

The enactment of a new Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Act to replace the earlier Law Concerning Attraction and Protection of Foreign Investments in Iran will provide full security and legal protection to foreign investments based on transparency and international standards, Jafri pointed out.

The minister emphasised that steps have been taken to settle industrial disputes. Iran has signed a double taxation treaty with 44 countries while talks are on with India too for this.

He said Iran is now opening up like never before. Few years ago, foreigners could only own 49 per cent of any company but now there is no restrictions and foreigners can own 100 per cent share in companies operating in Iran.

He also said there will be no limit to repatriation of income and there is a buy-back policy in place where if you invest in, say, an oil field, you will get your investment back and also be paid according to the prevalent market price of gas or oil.

Jafri said Iran is also open to non-equity forms like civil partnership and built-operate-transfer kind of projects. Indians can invest in new projects or even buy existing companies. But according to Iranian laws, private parties cannot own the land that has gas and oil deposits, he added.

He said he is offering investors Iran's vast domestic market, which has a population of 65 million, and, also quick access to neighboring markets with approximately 300 million people.

Ambassador Manbir Singh said, "Iran holds out major opportunities for us."

Asked about the minister's promises, Behuria, who is also the chairman of the India-Iran Joint Business Council, gave the other side of doing business in Iran.

"The issue of banking and reimbursement of the Iranian Letter of Credit and their confirmation by Indian banks has remained one of the most demotivating factors for the Indian and Iranian businessmen to build upon the existing trade relations."

He also demanded that there should be a conflict arbitration council between affiliate chambers of the two countries to assist member companies in contractual issues and in recovery of payments.

Another area for worry is the issue of visa. Behuria said he has been asking for a multiple business visa facility for three years. Air connectivity between Iran and India is yet another problem. Behuria said that the Iranian government should open its skies for Indian carriers for passenger as well as cargo services.

bala
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Postby bala » 04 Feb 2008 23:26

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, centre, surrounded by officials, stands under a research rocket, in Tehran on Monday. Iran launched a research rocket on Monday and unveiled its first major space center that will be used to launch research satellites, state-run television reported.

Image

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7473
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 06 Feb 2008 06:04


Tilak
BRFite
Posts: 733
Joined: 31 Jul 2005 20:19
Location: Old Lal Masjid @BRFATA (*Renovation*)

Postby Tilak » 10 Feb 2008 04:39

X-Posted

Has Unkil's footprint all over it. 8)

Turkey offers alternative to Iran pipeline
10 Feb 2008, 0048 hrs IST,Indrani Bagchi,TNN

NEW DELHI: For India, looking to diversify its energy sources, Turkey has just offered an exciting and potentially viable :lol: alternative that could get Central Asian and Caucasian oil to India's doorstep - and without breaking the bank.

During his visit to India, Turkey's foreign minister Ali Babacan (the first visit by a Turkish foreign minister in 30 years) has proposed that oil from Central Asian countries like Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and even Georgia be transported through Turkey's massive pipeline infrastructure to Ceyhan port. Traveling through the Mediterranean Sea in super tankers, the oil will then be fed into Israel's Ashkelon-Eilat pipeline, while super tankers pick it off from the Gulf of Aqaba port of Eilat and back again on super tankers to India. :rotfl:

"According to our calculations, this will give India a unique opportunity to access Central Asian oil, and will be quicker and, according to our energy experts, even cheaper," said Babacan in an exclusive chat with The Times of India.

"It will also bypass the crowded Suez Canal route, which only takes very small ships. Most important, for India's booming economy, it gives India an alternative source of oil," he added.

The proposal, which has been made to the Indian government, is currently being "examined" by New Delhi. But energy officials are quietly excited about the prospect of this new route.

Currently, none of India's imported oil travels through the Suez Canal. Most of it comes from the Persian Gulf (Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq and Dubai) and the rest that comes from Venezuela, Nigeria and Colombia travel around southern Africa's Cape of Good Hope.

But two important considerations have made it imperative for India to seek alternative sources and alternative routes for its oil - first, the persistent instability in the Persian Gulf area means that any conflict say, with Iran, will see a virtual collapse in oil supplies to India. Second, India needs to source as much energy as it possibly can, because power, or lack thereof, could become the greatest hindrance to India's economic story.

This route also opens up the vast Central Asian oil reserves for exploitation by India, which is otherwise locked out by geography.

Politically, the most important consideration here is it offers India a golden opportunity to significantly upgrade ties with a major Muslim country like Turkey:oops: . This could offset whatever ambivalence India might feel about Israel. India already has very deep relations with Israel, so this would not be a political challenge. :P

Turkish officials pointed out that none of the pipelines will have to be built. They are already in existence. The Ashkelon-Eilat pipeline is a functioning one, as is the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline which started work in 2006. Tel Aviv and Ankara have announced plans to carry water, electricity, natural gas and oil to Israel by way of a proposed Ceyhan-Ashkelon-Eilat passage. So, its not difficult to imagine gas coming through this passage, though this will need liquefaction and gasification terminals, which are a longer term investment.

IOC is one of the companies involved in building the Samsun-Ceyhan bypass pipeline in Turkey as well, which actually gives India a presence in Turkey's energy infrastructure.

Both Turkey and Israel are positioning themselves as relevant players in the global energy market by becoming secure providers.

The Iran pipeline is not going anywhere, neither is the Turkmenistan pipeline after Turkmenistan announced that most of its gas would be sold to Russia's Gazprom. Iran's Chahbahar port is not yet accessible to India and likely to make much longer. :oops:

India is now taking a new look at the energy equations in the region.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 12 Feb 2008 13:17

oops IPI as a manna from heaven anybody?

Will take Iran gas if India backs out, China tells Pakistan


ISLAMABAD: : China has said it was ready to join Pakistan and Iran in their gas pipeline project if India did not, sources told Daily Times on Sunday.

Pakistan plans to import 2.2 billion cubic feet of gas a day from Iran under the project, and has said it was willing to consume an additional 1.05 billion cubic feet if India did not join the project.

Sources said that China had told Pakistan it was interested in importing the additional gas if India did not join in. They said Iran had no objection to exporting gas to China.

In case China joined the project, the pipeline might pass through Gilgit, they said, where Pakistan has already approved a project to widen the Karakoram Highway.

Pakistan also plans to extend a railway track to China to connect it to the Gwadar port. Chinese experts would visit Pakistan to finalise the route of the pipeline if it joined the project, they said.

The Pakistani law ministry had vetted a draft of the Gas Sale and Purchase Agreement, they said, but it had not been signed because of differences between India and Pakistan over the transit fee for the pipeline. Pakistan had invited India to negotiate the fee on February 7 and 8 but India said it would talk to an elected Pakistani government after the February 18 elections.

Iran and Pakistan may sign the agreement on February 24, a date proposed by Iran, they said.

Pakistan had earlier proposed the agreement be signed on January 25 in Abu Dhabi, but sources said Iran had told Pakistan it would only sign the agreement with an elected Pakistani government.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16187
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Postby Philip » 12 Feb 2008 13:41

Why on earth do we have to search as far off as Turkey to find our petro-products.If the heat is on us to avoid a JV for a pipeline with Pak and Iran,we can instead invest in a fleet of gas tankers for the same.No nation can stop us from buying oil or gas from any supplier and it would look ridiculous if anyone tried to do so.The pipeline indicates a partnership,something more.In any case,if pak wants,it can forever possess a stranglehold on the pipeline,holding us to ransom,brought upon ourselves! The Chinese gambit is the Middle Kingodm itching to get further entrenched into the Gulf through Pak and Iran.About time we told off the critics who want us to curtail our fratrenal ties with Iran.

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5086
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

Postby niran » 12 Feb 2008 13:55

Philip wrote:Why on earth do we have to search as far off as Turkey to find our petro-products.If the heat is on us to avoid a JV for a pipeline with Pak and Iran,we can instead invest in a fleet of gas tankers for the same.No nation can stop us from buying oil or gas from any supplier and it would look ridiculous if anyone tried to do so.The pipeline indicates a partnership,something more.In any case,if pak wants,it can forever possess a stranglehold on the pipeline,holding us to ransom,brought upon ourselves! The Chinese gambit is the Middle Kingodm itching to get further entrenched into the Gulf through Pak and Iran.About time we told off the critics who want us to curtail our fratrenal ties with Iran.


Because transporting with tankers is costly. and it is a slow process
compared to pipeline.
with the quantity India needs its cheaper through pipe.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 12 Feb 2008 14:16

Iran is not willing to sign a treaty based on oil tankers AFAIK.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14217
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Postby svinayak » 13 Feb 2008 10:54

Send this Article to a Friend

Iran, A.P. sign MoU

Special Correspondent

Digitisation of archives

HYDERABAD: The Governments of Andhra Pradesh and the Islamic Republic of Iran on Tuesday entered into a memorandum of understanding for the repair, restoration and digitisation of about five crore documents in the State Archives.

Minister for State Archives Anam Ramnarayana Reddy and Consul-General of Iran Hossein Ravesh looked on as Andhra Pradesh State Archives Director A.L. Kismat Kumar and Director, Noor Microfilm Centre, New Delhi, Khajeh Piri signed the Memorandum of Understanding.

Mr. Reddy told presspersons later that the cost of repair, restoration and digitisation worked out to about Rs. 40 per page.
Five crore documents

While the cost for handling five crore documents worked out to Rs. 200 crore, it was not as if every page needed to be worked upon, he said. Hence the project cost would work out much lesser.

The project was expected to take about three years and the entire cost would be borne by the Iranian Government.
Panels set up

Two four-man committees were set up and entrusted with the responsibility of prioritising the documents that needed to be worked upon.

The first committee would comprise technical experts, mostly former officials of the Archives Department of the rank of Deputy Director and others, the Minister said. The other committee would have Poturi Venkateswara Rao, V. Ramakrishna, Vaikuntham and Tirumala Rao.
Project cost

Mr. Ravesh said the project cost was initially estimated at Rs. 60 crore and that, given the linguistic and cultural connections that Iran shared with Andhra Pradesh, it was their privilege to be associated with the project.

While the funding would be from Iran, the State government’s contribution would be by way of providing space in the AP State Archives to install the hardware and other equipment.

http://www.hindu.com/2008/02/13/stories ... 230400.htm

Rudranathh
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 20:06

Postby Rudranathh » 13 Feb 2008 14:27

Acharya wrote:Iran, A.P. sign MoU
Digitisation of archives

HYDERABAD: The Governments of Andhra Pradesh and the Islamic Republic of Iran on Tuesday entered into a memorandum of understanding for the repair, restoration and digitisation of about five crore documents in the State Archives.

Why is the AP gov letting precious historical documents into the hands of the foreign iranian gov agency who have history of supporting islamic jehadi groups?

The ASI can take care better of these documents of historical value to the nation than the iranian gov agency who cant look beyond their religion. These people may even destroy some documents if they perceive them to be against islam. The Iranian gov has promised an 'reward' to the person who will kill Salman Rushdie who allegedly wrote against islam. Now if such people are giving important historical documents they are bound to destroy them rather than peserve them.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14217
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Postby svinayak » 15 Feb 2008 12:07


Prasenjit Medhi
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Bangalore

Postby Prasenjit Medhi » 15 Feb 2008 12:50

Another big problem with undersea pipelines, as opposed to overland gas pipelines .. Security.

We saw what happened to the submarine cables in the Suez area.

I dont see why governments need to be involved. How evolved is the gas derivatives market? I know that crude is traded very, very actively. Why not gas? Let companies build pipelines, why should governments care?

Iran has larger ambitions of perhaps becoming more than just a regional power. Even if India's relations with them are amicable, should we open the door to a foreign power to cultivate areas of influence in our economy and in our territory? I think its suicide. But then, I'm not the wisest.

Personally I think that an Islamic republic which values theocratic control, does not have much in common with an increasingly progressive, liberal democracy which enshrines values such as liberty, equal justice, and modernity: India.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 15 Feb 2008 13:40

Acharya wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJRcOF7rEfQ


Thanks Acharya; I would say good find but knowing you; you probably didnt have to "find" it. :lol:

But more seriously; I really wish that US attacks Iran, especially if a Moderate govt does not come in move them away from Islamism. I know its a lose lose for US and for Iran; but hey thats no skin of my nose is it?

ranganathan
BRFite
Posts: 277
Joined: 06 Feb 2008 23:14

Postby ranganathan » 15 Feb 2008 13:46

Unless Mcain comes topowerand iraq and afghnaistan are peaceful, I don't see that happening.No use setting fire to the whole of middle east. Islamic govt is a head ache for iranians not us. As lon as India does not have any defence relationship we are fine.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 15 Feb 2008 14:25

ranganathan wrote:No use setting fire to the whole of middle east. Islamic govt is a head ache for iranians not us.


Perhaps there is some use. To start with I for one dont want to see a regional player with Nukes at any cost; and a Islamic one too; to boot.

Secondly; with us and Israel getting closer together; we may have to chose one over the other at some point of time. Lets say the Mullahs have yet another attack of bravado and attack Israel? What do we do; sit on the sidelines and mouth platitudes as has been our record under the great NAM movement? Would that leave us with ANY friends when the dust settles?

Thirdly; they are not being nice to us with their oil; in fact they are being as hard as they can. Dont we owe it to ourselves to ensure that Iranian oil becomes easy and dependable for us? Not to mention cheap?

Fourthly; a whole huge pain in the world is because of Pakistan controlling the access of Afganistan. Guess what would a American presence in Iran do to that?

And more....

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46067
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 27 Feb 2008 07:45

I know it could be disinfo but the Iranians are dabbling in dangerous stuff.

Link:

http://nightwatch.afcea.org/NightWatch_20080225.htm


[quote]
IRAN-IAEA: Most major international news services carried snippets of the IAEA report presented to the Board on 22 February and the subsequent comments by the chief British delegation to the IAEA, Simon Smith. The text of the report has been posted on the internet at www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/392207.html, and at least one other site.



The most controversial paragraph in the body is quoted below.



“39. During the meetings on 3–5 February 2008, the Agency made available documents for examination by Iran and provided additional technical information related to: the testing of high voltage detonator firing equipment; the development of an exploding bridgewire detonator (EBW); the simultaneous firing of multiple EBW detonators; and the identification of an explosive testing arrangement that involved the use of a 400 m shaft and a firing capability remote from the shaft by a distance of 10 km, all of which the Agency believes would be relevant to nuclear weapon R&D.

[color=green]Iran stated that the documents were fabricated and that the information contained in those documents could easily be found in open sources. During the meetings mentioned above, the Agency also described parameters and development work related to the Shahab 3 missile, in particular technical aspects of a re-entry vehicle, and made available to Iran for examination a computer image provided by other Member States showing a schematic layout of the contents of the inner cone of a re-entry vehicle. This layout has been assessed by the Agency as quite likely to be able to accommodate a nuclear device. Iran stated that its missile programme involved the use of conventional warheads only and was also part of the country’s space programme, and that the schematic layout shown by the Agency was baseless and fabricated.â€

Scofield
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 13
Joined: 15 Jul 2007 00:11
Location: sipping champagne at jianggezhuang

Postby Scofield » 27 Feb 2008 09:12

Acharya wrote:Iran, A.P. sign MoU
Digitisation of archives

HYDERABAD: The Governments of Andhra Pradesh and the Islamic Republic of Iran on Tuesday entered into a memorandum of understanding for the repair, restoration and digitisation of about five crore documents in the State Archives.


:roll:

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46067
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 27 Feb 2008 09:21

The Iranians are paying AP govt to restore and digitize paper records of Andhra Pradesh . Must be related to the Qutb Shahi and Nizam's dynasty period.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14217
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Postby svinayak » 27 Feb 2008 09:46

ramana wrote:The Iranians are paying AP govt to restore and digitize paper records of Andhra Pradesh . Must be related to the Qutb Shahi and Nizam's dynasty period.

Iran wants to show to Us that it has cultural heritage with India

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 27 Feb 2008 11:18

Ok; those BRFites who tend to feel for Iran (or will feel for Iran when the Unkil messes with it) please read this. I think this article is worth its weight in gold for the facts it mentions again; typical Iran terror behavior along with typical European hypocrisy of all sorts.

Moral of the story? Let them fight; good for us.

Look who came to the funeral

Look who came to the funeral


Barry Rubin

Hizbullah, Iran and Syria have 'taken credit' for Mughniyeh's past killings and urged many more in the future. The world must take note of this revelation

A funny thing happened at the funeral of Imad Mughniyeh. Those who had for years been denying any connection with him and his international terrorist activities -- Iran, Syria, and Hizbullah -- suddenly admitted that he was one of their favourite people.

At the same time, other critical points came out. Mughniyeh's vital position as the link between those three allies, in their conduct of terrorism and subversion, stood out clearly. In addition, Mughniyeh's career as an international terrorist, who often operated against Western targets, showed how Hizbullah -- along with its backers in Tehran and Damascus -- were second only to Al Qaeda in their global operations of violence.

Let's first look at the record of the man who Iran, Syria, and Hizbullah were so eager to praise and ready to revenge. Mughniyeh, a Lebanese citizen, first worked with the PLO and then with Hizbullah, leading the latter group's main terrorist operations. During the 1980s alone, he was involved in killing 340 American and French soldiers in the bombing of a peace-keeping force base; 63 civilians in the bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut; kidnappings and executions of Westerners living in Lebanon; attacks on the US Embassy in Kuwait; hijacking an American airliner in which a US citizen was murdered; killing two US officials in Lebanon; and, hijacking two Kuwait Airways' passenger planes.

In 1994, he organised the bombing of a Jewish Community Centre in Argentina, killing 86 civilians. The official Argentinean investigation concluded Iranian intelligence had hired Mughniyeh and his unit for this job.

As a result of his activities, Mughniyeh was on the US list of 10 most wanted terrorists, with a $ 25 million reward on his head. Interpol had an extradition warrant against him due to the Argentina attack. But travelling between Lebanon, Iran, and Syria-protected and often working for the latter two Governments -- Mughniyeh continued his career of violence up to the day of his death.

With the exception of the September 11 attack, Mughniyeh was probably responsible for more terrorist violence and killings than any other individual over the last quarter century.

How did Iran's rulers respond to his demise? They all praised him. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei called him, "An example for the young generation to follow." Powerful former President and current Expediency Council Chairman Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani referred to Mughniyeh as a "great figure" whose actions Iran did not consider terrorism. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad eulogised him as, "An outstanding leader from Hizbullah," though up to his death that organisation denied Mughniyeh held such a post.

Hizbullah's own leader, Hassan Nasrallah, used his funeral oration to threaten to wipe out Israel, paralleling what many Iranian leaders say. If Iran obtains nuclear weapons that threat becomes most plausible. But Hizbullah hopes to achieve the same end through lower-level violence.

Nasrallah declared "open war" on Israel and boasted he would launch attacks anywhere in the world, presumably against anyone he deemed to be standing in the way of his destructive dream.

As for Syria, where Mughniyeh was repeatedly given help and safe haven, he was being protected in a highly secure area under Government control. An Iranian television station reported he was killed near a Syrian intelligence base at a time a major meeting of Palestinian groups was taking place, including Hamas leader Khalad Mishal, who is based in Damascus. Two respected Arab newspapers claimed Mughniyeh was the guest of top Syrian leaders and had been meeting with them and Hamas chiefs to plan the kind of bloody deeds he was so good at doing.

Revenge was also threatened by such pro-Mughniyeh groups as Hamas and the Muqtada Sadr forces in Iraq. Not all Arabs reacted in this way. In Kuwait, for example, it was pointed out that Mughniyeh had been involved in the murder of many Arabs and Muslims, in Kuwait, Lebanon and Iraq.

A Lebanese newspaper, backed by Syria and Hizbullah, noted that Mughniyeh's death was the hardest blow to Hizbullah ever. Ironically, however, many in the past had refused to condemn Hizbullah as a terrorist organisation -- including the EU -- because they said there was insufficient evidence of such involvement.

As one expert on Hizbullah, Magnus Ranstorp, retorted, too many had "allowed themselves to be misled" about Hizbullah use of international terrorism and its orchestration by Iran and Syria. "And so Hizbullah was allowed to have its cake and eat it too" since it could carry out terrorism without any significant international price or punishment.

When Iran, Syria and Hizbullah embraces such a person as a great hero and role model they are:


# Openly admitting their association with many past acts of terrorism.


# Making clear that they favour murderous attacks deliberately designed to kill civilians.


# Showing their past denials of involvement to be lies.


# Urging people to commit many more such attacks in future, include genocide against Israel and its people.


Now that Hizbullah, Iran and Syria have "taken credit" for Mughniyeh's past killings and urged many more in the future, the world should confront the fact that these groups are engaged in a systematic terrorist policy and react accordingly.

--Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal. His latest books are The Truth About Syria and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East.


Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Postby Rye » 05 Mar 2008 01:55

All this tall talk of consensus among the P-5 about UN Sanctions on Iran is a lie.

link

Russia, China Scuttle Resolution Plans

By GEORGE JAHN
Associated Press Writer

Russia, China Scuttle Resolution Plans

VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- Russia and China on Tuesday scuttled a Western attempt to introduce a resolution on Iran's nuclear defiance at a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency, diplomats said.

The decision appeared to be the result of lingering unhappiness by the two world powers about not being informed earlier of plans for such a resolution.

It came a day after the U.N. Security Council imposed another round of sanctions on Iran for refusing to suspend uranium enrichment. Iran defiantly vowed to continue its nuclear program, which it insists is aimed only at generating power.

"This resolution is contrary to the spirit and articles of the International Atomic Energy Agency. It has been issued based on political motivations and a biased approach. It is worthless and unacceptable," Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said, according to the state news agency IRNA.

Moscow on Monday had threatened not to back the new U.N. sanctions against Iran unless the West gave up its IAEA resolution plans.

Then on Tuesday it signaled that it was ready to back such a document if it was given substantial input in drafting it before deciding later in the day that it was against it after all, said the diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the information was confidential.

Asked why Russia and China were opposed, one of diplomats said Moscow decided to withdraw its support "on principle" and Beijing, which often takes a cue from Russia on the Iran nuclear dispute, followed suit.

A senior Western diplomat said the decision to scrap plans for a resolution was jointly taken by the six powers taking the lead on engaging Iran on its nuclear program - the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany.

He said the six felt that new U.N. Security Council sanctions passed Monday to punish Iran had sent enough of a message.

Gregory L. Schulte, Washington's chief IAEA delegate, said the new sanctions resolution underscores "that Iran's file remains open" and backs the IAEA's right to continue its probe of Tehran's past nuclear program, particularly attempts to make weapons.

But two of the other diplomats, speaking separately, insisted the resolution was scrapped because of Russian and Chinese opposition and said any suggestions of unity on the issue were an attempt to cover up an East-West split among the world powers.

A draft of the resolution, marked "restricted" and made available to The Associated Press, reflected Western attempts to ramp up pressure on Iran using the IAEA as a venue.

It said the board "firmly supports" attempts by IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei to shed light on past experiments "that could have a military dimension" - shorthand for alleged attempts by Iran to develop nuclear arms.

It cites ElBaradei in calling such alleged programs "a matter of serious concern." And it "deeply regrets" Tehran's refusal to suspend uranium enrichment - a possible pathway to nuclear arms - despite four Security Council resolutions demanding it do so.

© 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy

Vivek_A
BRFite
Posts: 593
Joined: 17 Nov 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Postby Vivek_A » 12 Mar 2008 03:23

This is huge news....

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote ... 212&page=1

Top U.S. Commander in Middle East Resigns
CENTCOM Commander Adm. William Fallon Resigns, Citing Magazine Article on Iran Policy
By JENNIFER PARKER, MARTHA RADDATZ, JONATHAN KARL and LUIS MARTINEZ
March 11, 2008
Font Size

E-mail
Print
Share

Admiral William Fallon, the top U.S. military commander for the Middle East, has resigned, citing a magazine article in which he appeared to criticize President George W. Bush's policy toward Iran.

In a statement released by U.S. Central Command, Fallon referred to a recent Esquire magazine article which suggested differences between his views and administration policies concerning Iran.

"Recent press reports suggesting a disconnect between my views and the president's policy objectives have become a distraction at a critical time, and hamper efforts in the CENTCOM region," Fallon said in a written statement released from his Tampa, Fla., office.

"And although I don't believe there have ever been any differences about the objectives of our policy in the Central Command area of responsibility, the simple perception that there is makes it difficult for me to effectively serve America's interests there," Fallon's statement read.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6700
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Postby shyamd » 15 Mar 2008 23:36

Western intel are now using Iraqi Kurdistan along with the Moss aaad to infiltrate their spies into Iran. They have started recruiting Dari(primarily spoken in North western Iran) and Farsi speakers.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Falijee, IndraD, LokeshC, Nsmith, Sicanta, Sridhar K, V_Raman and 29 guests