Bharat Rakshak

RoyG wrote:RamaYji,

The Chinese have already moved into POK. There isn't much we can do. The Chinese want to prevent a link up with Russia and the Stans.

In fact India can do much in PoK. China's official position is that they aren't in PoK.

RamaY wrote:

RoyG wrote:RamaYji,

The Chinese have already moved into POK. There isn't much we can do. The Chinese want to prevent a link up with Russia and the Stans.

In fact India can do much in PoK. China's official position is that they aren't in PoK.

Right, but they are.

As of now the capability to cause massive unrest in Pakistan is limited and the Chinese will simply move in when it comes to that starting with POK.

Isn't that a good outcome? At least we will be fighting a two-front war with commies who are "said" to be rational unlike irrational Pakis?

Remember that any defeat anywhere is a H&D loss for China.

NEW DELHI: Country's imports of Iranian crude oil rose last month to their highest level since March 2014 as refiners boosted purchases ahead of a final push by international negotiators to reach a deal on Tehran's disputed nuclear programme by end-June.

The jump to a 14-month high comes just two months after India dropped its crude imports from Iran to zero under US pressure to limit its purchases of the Islamic republic's oil.

In March this year India did not take any Iranian oil for the first time in at least a decade.

Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... paign=cpps

OK, P-6 and POTUS/WHOTUS have made the deal with Iran. Whether COTUS approves or not is moot for the rest of the world.

China's stance will be that they will only get out of PoK if India hands them AP -- and what are the chances the political leadership will actually go to war to China over that? POK is lost for all practial purposes to China. an unrest in Xinjiang could make the chinese give up this game of supporting pakis, but no reason why they would do anything to give up territorial claims, especially when India cannot respond with force.

http://www.ibtimes.com/india-asks-refin ... ts-1989907
This from June 30:
"India Asks Refiners To Prepare $6.5 Billion To Pay Iran For Oil Imports"

India asked refiners to form a balance between the euro and U.S. dollar to avoid placing pressure on the Indian rupee in case Iran finalizes a deal with six world powers. Indian refineries owe around $6.5 billion to Iran for oil imports -- or around 55 percent of the total bill for crude oil purchased since February 2013.

The payment was halted under pressure from European and U.S. sanctions against Iran. India used to pay Iran through Turkey's Halkbank.

Even though India abides by a U.S. request to limit oil imports from Iran, it has expressed a willingness to rebuild business relations with the Islamic republic. India’s oil ministry sent a letter to local refiners June 11 stating that Iran would be expected to ask for the payment if the nuclear agreement was secured.

"The refineries may buy forex in the spot/forward market in an incremental manner so as to build up the required USD/EUR balance," Reuters quoted from the letter, which was sent to HPCL-Mittal Energy Ltd. (HMEL), Indian Oil Corp., Essar Oil, Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. and Hindustan Petroleum Corp.

UlanBatori wrote:OK, P-6 and POTUS/WHOTUS have made the deal with Iran. Whether COTUS approves or not is moot for the rest of the world.

Bibi and Rudio and Jindal and Fuax Noose will make the usual noise about how Obama sold out US interests even though Iran is nuke nude and their RAPE is firmly in western pockets. This is the so called "debate" we will see next few days.

RamaY wrote:

Turkey is EU's Pakistan.

RamaYji, Turkey isn't yet EU's Pakistan but it has the potential to be one. For this to happen, the layer of Westernization Kemal Atataturk imposed on Turkey has to peeled off, dreams of a Greater Turkey have to be encouraged. Militaristic expansionism is already a trait of the Turkish psyche, even with the Westernized Turks. All we need is for the real Turkey, the Islamic Turkey to reassert itself again.

RamaY wrote:Isn't that a good outcome? At least we will be fighting a two-front war with commies who are "said" to be rational unlike irrational Pakis?

Remember that any defeat anywhere is a H&D loss for China.

Oh please, the PA is just as rational as the Chinese. They operate a huge number of businesses and own a huge chunk of real estate all across the country especially in fertile Punjab. They aren't going to part with their moolah and vroom vroom just to get a quick peak at allah.

As far as fighting a 2 front battle is concerned - the worst thing we could do especially when the Chinese are occupied with the South China Sea and Pakistan is steadily losing everything outside of Punjab. We have to build up our economy. PoK is lost for the foreseeable future.

don't understand why the +1 has to be germany?

SaiK wrote:don't understand why the +1 has to be germany?

Centrifuges.

Next good news will be Crude at normal 35$a barrel. Iran will soon start pumping another 1-2 Million Barrels a day. India importing 4 Million barrels a day will save $$$ for enhancing economic and military strength. World getting back into pre 90 era and great opportunity for India to be another China on horizon but with peaceful intent and international influence .

Iran deal reached, Obama hails step towards 'more hopeful world'

Oil prices tumbled more than a dollar on Tuesday after the deal was reached.

This is a huge step forward and good one for the whole world.
Once the crude starts flowing it would be great news for India.
If relations between Iran and USA normalizes, it will reduce USA's dependence on Pakis for reaching Afghanistan.

Look at the juicy position the Persians are in:

1) The have effectively formed an arc of Shia, Kurds, and some Sunni tribes to expand their sphere of influence stretching to government controlled Syrian territory.

2) They control half of Iraq and are in the process of taking half of Yemen.

3) They thwarted all covert and overt attempts including sanctions to derail their economy and nuclear program and brought the West to the negotiating table. A huge psychological success for the Ayatollah.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The main question is what did they get in return for effectively using their nuclear program as a bargaining chip? IMO:

- The US promises not to move against Assad and takes steps to mitigate the threat to Lebanon.
- Tehran gets back into the SWIFT system on the condition that they go back to a US dollar invoicing system in the near future.
- Tehran allows Qatari hydrocarbons to flow through Iraq and Syria into the Mediterranean thus cutting Gazproms monopoly to Europe.
- Tehran allows the Yanks to use their territory to support anti-Taliban strongholds in Afghanistan.
- In return, Saudis don't go nuclear and keep half of Iraq and half of Syria.

Are you serious? I like your optimism but we must be reading different news reports.

Iran's moves have been reactive, not part of some grand plan. They've been desperately moving to defend themselves against encirclement and destabilization from all sides. Iran has actually lost a great deal of influence in the region with the Assad govt barely hanging on to 30% of the country and Iraq's Shia-friendly govt also weakened and constantly terrified of the Gulf Kingdoms, who have the money to stir up powerful Sunni rebellions in the areas of Iraq where they are the majority. As for Yemen, the Houthi are screwed. Saudi\Arab bombardment has left the Houthi in control of a country with no economy and no future. Saudi-backed AQAP and other Sunni militant forces will keep nibbling away at the Houthi until they collapse.

Iran is also suffering from cheap oil and sanctions, which won't be lifted anytime soon, deal or no deal.

Lavrov: Russia expects US to abandon Europe AMD plans after Iran deal

“We all probably remember that in April 2009 in Prague [US] President [Barack] Obama said that if the Iran nuclear program issue is sorted out, then the task of creating the European segment of the missile defense system will disappear,” Lavrov said at press conference in Vienna.

Russia will take an active part in practical activities which are aimed at realization of the nuclear agreement with Tehran reached on Tuesday, Lavrov said, which concerns two issues directly mentioned in the documents.

They are “the removal of low-enriched uranium to Russia in exchange for the delivery of natural uranium to Iran, and … the re-purposing of the Fordow former enrichment facility into an isotope production facility for medicinal and industrial purposes."

Y. Kanan wrote:Are you serious? I like your optimism but we must be reading different news reports.

Iran's moves have been reactive, not part of some grand plan. They've been desperately moving to defend themselves against encirclement and destabilization from all sides. Iran has actually lost a great deal of influence in the region with the Assad govt barely hanging on to 30% of the country and Iraq's Shia-friendly govt also weakened and constantly terrified of the Gulf Kingdoms, who have the money to stir up powerful Sunni rebellions in the areas of Iraq where they are the majority. As for Yemen, the Houthi are screwed. Saudi\Arab bombardment has left the Houthi in control of a country with no economy and no future. Saudi-backed AQAP and other Sunni militant forces will keep nibbling away at the Houthi until they collapse.

Iran is also suffering from cheap oil and sanctions, which won't be lifted anytime soon, deal or no deal.

Are you serious?

They are the ones who started the oil bourse and began transacting in non-dollar currencies on top of seriously building up their nuclear capacity. They knew from the start the Americans would be packing their bags in Iraq and Afghanistan eventually. If anything, they are less surrounded than they were starting in 2001.

It's a mixed bag of reactive and proactive but they have managed to expand their sphere of influence. Shia gov may be weakened but its holding steady. Iranian forces including its intelligence services have moved in. The government is relying on primarily Shia groups to counter ISIS. Up until 2001, Saddam had managed to limit Iranian influence. It has only increased since then.

Assad's government is indeed only in control of about 30-50% of the country. Hezbollah and Quds forces have moved in and run joint operations with the NDF and army. If anything, Assad has ceded more control to Shia backed groups and Iran.

Iran is supplying Kurds with weapons and cash. I remember Zarif showed up in Erbil some time back and they are now carving through Sunni tribes and into ISIS territory both in Iraq and Syria.

As far as sanctions go, SWIFT has already let a few iranian banks back in even before the deal. What sanctions are you talking about?

Houthi's are their to stay. The peace talks will continue despite all the bombings and there will probably be a political settlement.

We'll have to agree to disagree as you seem to interpret events based on a foregone conclusion that Iran is some sort of aggressive Persian empire in the making (or something). I don't see it, but fair enough.

But one thing we'd have to agree on, is that India wasted a valuable opportunity by snubbing and betraying the Iranians back in 2005. The prior govt turned on Iran as part of it's campaign of kissing American ass in the hopes they'd throw us some scraps, but that failed miserably. The Americans screwed us anyway, as they always do, and now the Iranians don't think much of us either. Can't say I blame them; from the Iranian point of view, India is a back-stabbing and unreliable ally.

will the massans be able to overcome om-baba's veto?

So, does Saudi cash in with the Pakistanis?

And will the Pakistanis provide a nuke?

NRao: Would saudis get a working nuke?

That is what everyone signed up for. China, US, France, UK, SA, Pakistan, ...... IAEA, UN, UNSC. Who have I left out?

Y. Kanan wrote:We'll have to agree to disagree as you seem to interpret events based on a foregone conclusion that Iran is some sort of aggressive Persian empire in the making (or something). I don't see it, but fair enough.

But one thing we'd have to agree on, is that India wasted a valuable opportunity by snubbing and betraying the Iranians back in 2005. The prior govt turned on Iran as part of it's campaign of kissing American ass in the hopes they'd throw us some scraps, but that failed miserably. The Americans screwed us anyway, as they always do, and now the Iranians don't think much of us either. Can't say I blame them; from the Iranian point of view, India is a back-stabbing and unreliable ally.

Some aspects of their foreign policy can be put into the "aggressive" category but overall its been slow and steady. They love to be called Persians, not Iranians. They have a distinct culture from Arabs. They are drawing upon Shia populations all across the Middle East and are very educated. What would you call their expanding influence?

How exactly is India backstabbing Iran? We are continuing with work on Chabahar, in the process of paying our oil dues, calling for greater multilateral cooperation to minimize tensions, etc. There will be missteps especially under a very corrupt center, but the Iranians know that. Overall things have been going smoothly.

NRao wrote:So, does Saudi cash in with the Pakistanis?

And will the Pakistanis provide a nuke?

No.

Y. Kanan wrote:We'll have to agree to disagree as you seem to interpret events based on a foregone conclusion that Iran is some sort of aggressive Persian empire in the making (or something). I don't see it, but fair enough.

Which is exactly what they are. As far as India goes, they are Snakes (like Arabs and Turks) and cant be trusted.

But one thing we'd have to agree on, is that India wasted a valuable opportunity by snubbing and betraying the Iranians back in 2005. The prior govt turned on Iran as part of it's campaign of kissing American ass in the hopes they'd throw us some scraps, but that failed miserably. The Americans screwed us anyway, as they always do, and now the Iranians don't think much of us either. Can't say I blame them; from the Iranian point of view, India is a back-stabbing and unreliable ally.

Spare me this BS about India "snubbing Iran". Have you known or worked with Iranians and debated with them about India. I did. and they have ****** superiority complex with respect to Indians. Long before India "snubbed" them, they were already supporting Islamists in Kashmir, their news channels were and are indulging anti-Indian propaganda with respect to Kashmir. Even before Ayotollahs, the secular Shah was in allaince with pakis and actually gave pakis access to hid their planes in Iran. I fail to understand where this pro-Iran thing comes to some Indians. We should treat Iran just like we treat Arabs and Turks. Nothing more, nothing less.

"The Secular Shah" and Pakistan were both allies of Uncle.

Yes, Iran-India will never have a "deeper-than-ocean, taller-than-mountains" friendship, but (a) Iran is better than Pakistan or Saudi Arabia (b) both Iran and India do not want an Afghanistan that is a vassal of Pakistan (c) India-Iran trade has been healthy (until hit by sanctions) and has great scope to grow and (d) Iran is a much more reliable partner to get to Central Asia than Pakistan or China.

Remember that its because it is **P6** that Iran got this deal. Let's not underestimate Indian influence in this. The other 5 can't think beyond "Bomb-Em!!"

All well and good, Iranians and Indians are the brothers that split thousands of years ago. Before Pakistan was born out of India; the Indian and Iranian civilization had come from common grounds rubbed shoulders and then looked down upon each other and spat at each others face. Before Pakistan, there was Iran. Brothers and cousins will fight. But is blood thicker than water?

Rony wrote:Long before India "snubbed" them, they were already supporting Islamists in Kashmir, their news channels were and are indulging anti-Indian propaganda with respect to Kashmir. Even before Ayotollahs, the secular Shah was in allaince with pakis and actually gave pakis access to hid their planes in Iran. I fail to understand where this pro-Iran thing comes to some Indians. We should treat Iran just like we treat Arabs and Turks. Nothing more, nothing less.

It's nothing more than the usual "enemy of my enemy is my friend" thing. India has a favourable disposition to Iran because they share our goals in Afghanistan and because we happen to share the same enemies (Pakistan, Saudi Arabia).

RoyG wrote:How exactly is India backstabbing Iran? We are continuing with work on Chabahar, in the process of paying our oil dues, calling for greater multilateral cooperation to minimize tensions, etc. There will be missteps especially under a very corrupt center, but the Iranians know that. Overall things have been going smoothly.

I'm referring to India's decision under the previous govt to support US sanctions against Iran. I still maintain that was a mistake, and I think events since then have proven me correct. We lost influence with Iran and what did we get in return?

This deal is good for India. It enables greater strategic autonomy, and commercial flexibility. Iran is much more useful now than it was last week. They are far more predictable and reliable than almost any player in that area.

Some on BRF have long advocated an end to the US-Iran blockheadedness and a sustainable, normal relationship. There are more chances of this happening now.

Now that Iran is free of sanctions, it is going to back stab India in no time commercially. We will off course rationalize the same wit platitudes like self interest is paramount.

But is blood thicker than water?

Oil is. I don't think gas is. Question is: Are Eyeranian Baboon thicker than Desi Baboon.

nobody will take us seriously including Iranians till we grow 1) economically, 2) militarily,3) socially 4) diplomatically...and be ready to take strong decisions.

I was tired of these negotiations. One thing is clear Iranians are very good diplomats and negotiators. Look the at the difference in the state of EYrak and Iran. Iranians do not trust West any more. I am sure they will go for "look east and north policy". So we are good.Salam

nobody will take us seriously including Iranians till we grow 1) economically, 2) militarily,3) socially 4) diplomatically...and be ready to take strong decisions.

This seems to be the standard excuse provided by the new delhi buraucracy for their ineffectiveness in dealing with less powerful countries in the neighbourhood -- seems more like a boilerplate excuse for inability to take hard decisions, that cannot be refuted without looking all jingoistic, especially the "socially" part. The IFS types already think they are one of the most top-notch diplomatic corps in the this side of the alpha quadrant (a look at Nirupama Menon's timeline will convince you, shirley), so we are all set there.

India is going to have to compete with China and anyone else who has anything to offer Iran, so Iran getting out of the woods may not necessarily work in India's favor....their actions will inform us shortly.

We have to work out our own methodology for bi-lateral relations with other nations,where we place our special,unique capabilities forward,not competing mile for mile with China. India spells innovation,China gigantism. Why China has to steal from all over the world to get ahead in life,including the designs for Kancheepuram sarees!

Our unique geography,democracy,versatility,diversity of thousands of years of civilization,plus today an independent nuclear power with massive military capability,brings with it our own "flavor",which many smaller nations find attractive,reassuring and a willingness to participate with us in many ways.Indo-Iranian relations are ancient and historic,far more ancient than that of the US/West. Our great Parsi community ,renowned for industry and philanthropy are Persians in origin.We need to exploit our ties with Iran as much as possible esp. because Iran is the gateway to Central Asia for us and a Shiite bulwark against the Wahaabi extremism of Pakistan.

manjgu wrote:nobody will take us seriously including Iranians till we grow 1) economically, 2) militarily,3) socially 4) diplomatically...and be ready to take strong decisions.

A semi-literate white women rules over a billion people and you talk about social, economic blah blah.