Iran News and Discussions

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 19 Jul 2018 10:47

I see a lot of

on Iran. Despite the americans wanting to bomb Iran from the time of the islamists gaining power, they haven't done it. Even this I only see as a temporary blip. Given Trump's up and down decision making, it might even reverse like NoKo peace talks.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 19 Jul 2018 22:53

So much

on India backstabbing Iran ... knee jerk anti-American-ism or Anti-China-ism or any others-ism always leads to sub-optimal analysis.

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... 455469.ece
Chabahar port project delayed due to Iran: Jaishankar

“In the case of Chabahar, I know we always like to beat up on ourselves. But to be very honest a lot of the problems were because the Iranians kept changing the terms of the agreement. I mean they changed it in very fundamental ways at least about three times in the last three years,” Dr. Jaishankar said while delivering the ‘Jasjit Singh memorial lecture on national security’ organised by the Centre for Air Power Studies.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 27 Jul 2018 04:26

shyamd wrote:Indian move is because Trump admin are plotting war with Iran - there is no room for negotiation on cutting oil. First step is to bleed iran of funds, pressure trading community and minorities to create unrest.
Iran is swiftly losing its friends - most recently PRC rebuked Iran for threatening to close the straits. Iran has been put on notice. Iran's only choice is to conduct covert negotiations.

Tensions are running high in the region. Smaller neighbouring states sending senior diplomats flying urgently to DC, EU, PRC and New Delhi to discuss these issues and the new strategic realities in the region (read KSA-UAE alliance).

Expect India to be called to keep it's commitments to keep the straits open. There will be a ramp up of mil presence in the region.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-27/d ... y/10037728

First official confirmation of trump admin plans to strike Iran

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 27 Jul 2018 10:36

US Preparing To Bomb Iran's Nuclear Capabilities As Soon As Next Month: Report

Senior figures in the Australia's Turnbull government have told the ABC they believe the US is prepared to bomb Iran's nuclear capability. The bombing could be as early as next month. —ABC report

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07- ... -bomb-iran

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Jul 2018 10:59

iran has been blackmailing India for the longest time and India has been very foolishly using the "ancient civilizational ties" BS to gloss over this fact.

It foolishly gave iran a big stick in chabahar to beat India with, without first ensuring safeguards and guarantees. Its high time that India reviewed this arrangement to its own benefit.

Bringing in the hans and the pakis into chabahar is not the action of a friendly country and it is vital that India understands this fact without always peering at the wretched Islamic country through rose-tinted glasses.

We are past masters at fooling ourselves and it is a national failing.

Just like nehru and chins in 1962.

iran brazenly manipulates India through it's local shia population including frequently planting shady stories in the DDM, using the presstitute media.

We have also failed to leverage afghanistan into pressurizing iran on chabahar.

‏

Tanvi Madan@tanvi_madan
Jul 19
Tanvi Madan Retweeted Shashank Joshi

Tehran's given Delhi a tough time over Chabahar, E&P contracts, Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline, oil supply, 25-yr gas deal - over price, terms, &/or whether/how India votes. Then there's Afghanistan, Isr diplo attack in Del. Wldn't know this from some Ind press coverage it gets

Shashank JoshiVerified account@shashj

Former Indian foreign secretary S Jaishankar: "In the case of Chabahar, I know we always like to beat up on ourselves. But to be very honest a lot of the problems were because the Iranians kept changing the terms of the agreement"

Shashank Srivastava@shanks1234567

Replying to @tanvi_madan @jmohanmalik

There are no long term gains from helping / siding with Iran. A troubled economy can’t help anyone. As for Afghanistan, it is for them to exert pressure on Iran so that chabahar is a success.

8:59 PM - 19 Jul 2018

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 27 Jul 2018 12:22

chetak wrote:iran has been blackmailing India for the longest time and India has been very foolishly using the "ancient civilizational ties" BS to gloss over this fact. [The talk of "ancient civilizational ties" may be BS but till the GOI understands that it is all right. Such BS is part and parcel of diplomacy to gloss over cracks. You name a country and I will show you similar BS. Sri Lanka, Nepal, China and America to name just a few.]

It foolishly gave iran a big stick in chabahar to beat India with, without first ensuring safeguards and guarantees. Its high time that India reviewed this arrangement to its own benefit. [Chabhar is not a big stick to beat India. India has a far bigger sticks to bear Iran. Oil imports are one. There are others. Diplomacy is art of trade-offs where you risk a little for a little gain elsewhere. In one previous incarnation of western sanction did Iran not hold ~~half~~ a portion of their oil revenues with an Indian bank in Indian Rupee in India. Was that not leverage? How do we make assessment based on partial facts?]

Bringing in the hans and the pakis into chabahar is not the action of a friendly country and it is vital that India understands this fact without always peering at the wretched Islamic country through rose-tinted glasses. [If Chabhar port is not strategic but an economic project why would we object to a han or baki presence. As an economic project it makes sense to bring in as many party as possible. Unless it it turned over to the Hans as a STRATEGIC port there should be no concern but Hans already have Gwadar/Jigani/<<Whatever>> for that purpose.]

We are past masters at fooling ourselves and it is a national failing.

Just like nehru and chins in 1962.

iran brazenly manipulates India through it's local shia population including frequently planting shady stories in the DDM, using the presstitute media.

We have also failed to leverage afghanistan into pressurizing iran on chabahar.

Not to excuse the Iranian behavior but if India was manipulated so easily then why is the project fallen so behind on most parameters and most of the associated projects remain only on paper?

It is not the manipulation through planted stories via DDM that give Iran the leverage. It is our reaction to those slanted/planted stories without analyzing the facts leading to an unthinking outrage that gives Iran whatever little leverage it has with India. We, in India, have this sky is falling narrative for every small deviation from our imagined path to global nirvana.

We have strange notions of economics, diplomacy and leverage.

uskumar · Post by **uskumar** » 27 Jul 2018 12:46

Iran can’t issue threats to seek India’s help
excellent article by pant sir regarding the india-iran relationship

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Jul 2018 13:22

Neshant wrote:US Preparing To Bomb Iran's Nuclear Capabilities As Soon As Next Month: Report

Senior figures in the Australia's Turnbull government have told the ABC they believe the US is prepared to bomb Iran's nuclear capability. The bombing could be as early as next month. —ABC report
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07- ... -bomb-iran

Who every is giving POTUS that shit piece of advice and I think it Nutanyahoo it would be a grave mistake and ruin POTUS chances of winning next election in 2020.

Oil price will skill rocket to $ 150 + and we will see extended period of recession not seen since 1929.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Jul 2018 16:52

pankajs wrote:
chetak wrote:iran has been blackmailing India for the longest time and India has been very foolishly using the "ancient civilizational ties" BS to gloss over this fact. [The talk of "ancient civilizational ties" may be BS but till the GOI understands that it is all right. Such BS is part and parcel of diplomacy to gloss over cracks. You name a country and I will show you similar BS. Sri Lanka, Nepal, China and America to name just a few.]

It foolishly gave iran a big stick in chabahar to beat India with, without first ensuring safeguards and guarantees. Its high time that India reviewed this arrangement to its own benefit. [Chabhar is not a big stick to beat India. India has a far bigger sticks to bear Iran. Oil imports are one. There are others. Diplomacy is art of trade-offs where you risk a little for a little gain elsewhere. In one previous incarnation of western sanction did Iran not hold ~~half~~ a portion of their oil revenues with an Indian bank in Indian Rupee in India. Was that not leverage? How do we make assessment based on partial facts?]

Bringing in the hans and the pakis into chabahar is not the action of a friendly country and it is vital that India understands this fact without always peering at the wretched Islamic country through rose-tinted glasses. [If Chabhar port is not strategic but an economic project why would we object to a han or baki presence. As an economic project it makes sense to bring in as many party as possible. Unless it it turned over to the Hans as a STRATEGIC port there should be no concern but Hans already have Gwadar/Jigani/<<Whatever>> for that purpose.]

We are past masters at fooling ourselves and it is a national failing.

Just like nehru and chins in 1962.

iran brazenly manipulates India through it's local shia population including frequently planting shady stories in the DDM, using the presstitute media.

We have also failed to leverage afghanistan into pressurizing iran on chabahar.
Not to excuse the Iranian behavior but if India was manipulated so easily then why is the project fallen so behind on most parameters and most of the associated projects remain only on paper?

It is not the manipulation through planted stories via DDM that give Iran the leverage. It is our reaction to those slanted/planted stories without analyzing the facts leading to an unthinking outrage that gives Iran whatever little leverage it has with India. We, in India, have this sky is falling narrative for every small deviation from our imagined path to global nirvana.

We have strange notions of economics, diplomacy and leverage.

it is the manipulation of Indian media that has prevented the real picture from coming out.

iran a a piddly country so very full of itself. We need to put it in its place. As customers with enormous clout and reliability in the petroleum space we are not lacking for suppliers.

iranian crude is actually sold at a discount because it is so difficult to process.

we are so very reluctant to break eggs even when omelettes are to be made.

They led us on when we wanted to invest in their gas fields. these islamic buggers are, as usual, looking for a free ride. They have pulled out the rug from under us on numerous occasions.

Their support for the pakis is undiminished, despite the so called sunni shia divide.

chanakyaa · Post by **chanakyaa** » 27 Jul 2018 19:00

...
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-27/d ... y/10037728

First official confirmation of trump admin plans to strike

Official confirmation from Aussie neuj paper!! Nice. Aussies becoming good at peddling quality Turn-bull$hit down and under. ABC is gov funded, but independent

nvishal · Post by **nvishal** » 27 Jul 2018 20:23

Pathetic state of affairs. When phattu indian insurers got frightened, the iranians have offered to give insurance and ships from their side.

Iran is offering to insure oil cargoes to India after some local insurers stopped providing the service in the face of impending US sanctions

[...]

Tehran recently insured oil cargoes to India in tankers operated by National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC)

[...]

Indian Oil (IOC) and Bharat Petroleum (BP) have started lifting Iranian oil in NITC-owned vessels with the cargoes covered by Iranian insurance, sources said. IOC, last week lifted oil in Very Large Crude Carrier Devon after United India Insurance refused to provide cover for the shipment. IOC is seeking to buy August cargoes from Tehran on similar terms, with Iran responsible for the delivery to Indian ports.

A source at United India Insurance confirmed the company has stopped providing insurance cover for Iranian cargoes.

State-run insurers rely on reinsurance from India’s General Insurance Co (GIC), which in turn depends on companies in both Europe and the US to hedge its risk.

Iran offers oil cargo insurance, ships to India after indian Insurers withdraw

One wonders what the indian navy is doing in the arabian sea. Maybe they are focusing on somalian pirates. Meanwhile, indian insurers are depending on western security firms to secure oil trade from the middle-east to india. Indian navy waala shayad boltai, "nai nai, yeh hamara kaam nai hai". Phir kiska kaam hai yeh, hain?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Jul 2018 10:37

What ?? What has this got to do with the navy ? The article is talking about insurance risk. At least try to comprehend before asinine dhoti shivering.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 28 Jul 2018 10:45

We have a tradition of unloading without research about how things work and without critical thinking. It is on display almost everyday.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 28 Jul 2018 11:02

chetak wrote:
pankajs wrote: Not to excuse the Iranian behavior but if India was manipulated so easily then why is the project fallen so behind on most parameters and most of the associated projects remain only on paper?

It is not the manipulation through planted stories via DDM that give Iran the leverage. It is our reaction to those slanted/planted stories without analyzing the facts leading to an unthinking outrage that gives Iran whatever little leverage it has with India. We, in India, have this sky is falling narrative for every small deviation from our imagined path to global nirvana.

We have strange notions of economics, diplomacy and leverage.
it is the manipulation of Indian media that has prevented the real picture from coming out.

iran a a piddly country so very full of itself. We need to put it in its place. As customers with enormous clout and reliability in the petroleum space we are not lacking for suppliers. [Not a very helpful strategy. Iran may be piddi but its importance comes from what we want from it and also from what we want to prevent it from doing. E.g. Becoming FULLY dependent on China. Depending on the time, place, our interests and this countries options we tailor our response even with *piddy* countries. Case in point Maldives.]

iranian crude is actually sold at a discount because it is so difficult to process.

we are so very reluctant to break eggs even when omelettes are to be made. [My previous comment especially wrt China. We do what we can and stay engaged rather than act all haughty and walk off the field and giving the other competitor a walk over. My be China will eventually win Iran over from India but that does not mean that we give them a walk over.]

They led us on when we wanted to invest in their gas fields. these islamic buggers are, as usual, looking for a free ride. They have pulled out the rug from under us on numerous occasions. [True, but we have yet to even begin thinking on the followup projects like the Aluninium plant or the Fertilizer plant that was supposed to come up in a free trade zone next to the port and supplied by the gas field.]

Their support for the pakis is undiminished, despite the so called sunni shia divide.

Iranians have this vision of greatness of the past Persian empires and they try playing games to get the upper hand. India plays its own games based on its own interests.

Diplomacy is not black and white but shades of grey. India is a risk averse country and so its seeks to harmonize rather than break eggs.

nandakumar · Post by **nandakumar** » 28 Jul 2018 11:36

The importance of Iranian oil comes from the fact that currently global oil market is tightly balanced with supply disruptions from Venezeula, Libya and Nigeria. The American sanctions against threatens to pull out 3 million barrels per day of oil that cannot be made good from supply elsewhere. Hence Iranian oil is important. Oil cargo has to be insured. It is customary for insurance companies to hedge their risk by reinsuring a part of their exposure with a reinsurance company. Companies such as MunichRe and SwissRe do a lot business with American insurance companies. So they may not offer reinsurance to Indian insurance companies fearing the loss of lucrative American market. Additionally, Indian insurance companies too fear loss of insurance business from Indo American trade should US sanction these companies as well.
Having said that, the Iranians are being too clever by half offering insurance through their own insurance companies. This is not much of an offer for importers such as IOC. The Iranian insurance companies do not have much of a business reputation to protect. So it is tempting for them to repudiate claims on some flimsy ground and oil importers will have no recourse. Secondly even if they settle claims they have no foreign exchange with which to settle. This is therefore an useless offer. If Iranians were serious they should offer to deliver oil on a cost plus insurance basis delivery at any of the Indian ports rather than FOB Iranian port.

nvishal · Post by **nvishal** » 28 Jul 2018 11:44

Rahul M wrote:What ?? What has this got to do with the navy ? The article is talking about insurance risk. At least try to comprehend before asinine dhoti shivering.

I think insurance and trading in US dollars go hand in hand. The same firms who provide banking services(LoC) to this trade may also be responsible for providing freight and insurance. A single package - finance, logistics and insurance.

I don't think India has invested in this so IOC and BP have to(through general insurance India) approach foreign institutions (banking and security) to enable this. They maybe offering these services at attractive rates because the trade in being done in US dollars. I worked in a textile export firm in my collage days and can recall that many of the enabling institutions were foreign(Europe, Singapore etc).

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 28 Jul 2018 11:56

nandakumar wrote:The importance of Iranian oil comes from the fact that currently global oil market is tightly balanced with supply disruptions from Venezeula, Libya and Nigeria. The American sanctions against threatens to pull out 3 million barrels per day of oil that cannot be made good from supply elsewhere. Hence Iranian oil is important. Oil cargo has to be insured. It is customary for insurance companies to hedge their risk by reinsuring a part of their exposure with a reinsurance company. Companies such as MunichRe and SwissRe do a lot business with American insurance companies. So they may not offer reinsurance to Indian insurance companies fearing the loss of lucrative American market. Additionally, Indian insurance companies too fear loss of insurance business from Indo American trade should US sanction these companies as well.
Having said that, the Iranians are being too clever by half offering insurance through their own insurance companies. This is not much of an offer for importers such as IOC. The Iranian insurance companies do not have much of a business reputation to protect. So it is tempting for them to repudiate claims on some flimsy ground and oil importers will have no recourse. Secondly even if they settle claims they have no foreign exchange with which to settle. This is therefore an useless offer. If Iranians were serious they should offer to deliver oil on a cost plus insurance basis delivery at any of the Indian ports rather than FOB Iranian port.

A lot of the iranian oil is processed by reliance.

A lot of petro products ex refinery are re exported to iran.

Either we have a proper supplier customer relationship with these bozos or we look else where.

We can never compete with the chinese nor out bid them for resources. Why piss against the wind??

nandakumar · Post by **nandakumar** » 28 Jul 2018 12:09

chetak
This news report says Reliance will stop Iranian imports.
https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 364_1.html

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 28 Jul 2018 12:22

nvishal wrote:Iran is offering to insure oil cargoes to India after some local insurers stopped providing the service in the face of impending US sanctions

Iranian insurance may be the kind where they collect the premium but if the oil tanker gets wrecked, they may not pay up.

They have a hard time sticking to agreements.

Do you really think their insurance policies will be any different?

Thus it may be insurance in name only.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 28 Jul 2018 12:28

India should plan what its response will be if and when Iran is attacked.

nvishal · Post by **nvishal** » 28 Jul 2018 14:32

^ The shias acquiring nukes broke the balance in the middle-east and in favour of shias. The Americans have two options:

1) Transfer nukes to the Arabs. If the Americans don't, the Arabs will try to acquire it clandestinely from the Pakistanis. It turns out that the Arabs were the ones who funded the Pakistani nuke program in technical collaboration from the Chinese. The Pakistanis owe the Arabs very large.

2) Sanction Iran in a way that will halt it from acquiring parts that will assist it in enriching uranium or fund it altogether.

Attacking Iran is not an option. They might use drones or stealth planes to destroy nuclear facilities at most. But another doable option and a very americanish strategy would be to assemble a coalition of Sunnis states/militias to invade Iran.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 29 Jul 2018 02:10

Coalition is better and will most likely be used. Russia benefits regardless b/c persian gulf will be closed minimum of 1.5 months.

It will allow them to consolidate hold over East Europe and Asian markets.

Furthermore, with the US economy ready to nosedive into another recession (real estate going to pop soon) pressure on US dollar denominated oil trading will put more pressure on Anglo-Saxon Alliance.

When a country is all out of options, they go to war. It's the only way to divert the public attention away from financial system.

Unfortunately for US, with right wing take over of gov, we may actually see some sort of insurrection starting from left wing. This is what the Russians are counting on.

Its the perfect storm that the Russians have been quietly preparing for. China and US are both about to crash.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Jul 2018 16:39

Major General Soleimani sharply reacts to Trump’s recent military threat

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 01 Aug 2018 23:18

Read only a couple of para here and there. I will read it fully at a later date. Posting here for others.

http://bharatshakti.in/indias-iranian-dilemma/
India’s Iranian Dilemma [Ambassador Anil Trigunayat]

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Aug 2018 04:30

Chetak, I would be happy if Iran is taken down as that will make Islam mono themed i.e. Sunni only.

It was fall of Persia that led to spread of Islam.
And later Mongol conquest...

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 02 Aug 2018 07:32

Neshant wrote:India should plan what its response will be if and when Iran is attacked.

We should be interested in war booty and hopefully get 30% of their energy resources . Otherwise India can hurt Sunni cause by supplying right Maal to Mullas.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 02 Aug 2018 09:03

nvishal wrote:Pathetic state of affairs. When phattu indian insurers got frightened, the iranians have offered to give insurance and ships from their side.

Iran is offering to insure oil cargoes to India after some local insurers stopped providing the service in the face of impending US sanctions

[...]

Tehran recently insured oil cargoes to India in tankers operated by National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC)

[...]

Indian Oil (IOC) and Bharat Petroleum (BP) have started lifting Iranian oil in NITC-owned vessels with the cargoes covered by Iranian insurance, sources said. IOC, last week lifted oil in Very Large Crude Carrier Devon after United India Insurance refused to provide cover for the shipment. IOC is seeking to buy August cargoes from Tehran on similar terms, with Iran responsible for the delivery to Indian ports.

A source at United India Insurance confirmed the company has stopped providing insurance cover for Iranian cargoes.

State-run insurers rely on reinsurance from India’s General Insurance Co (GIC), which in turn depends on companies in both Europe and the US to hedge its risk.
Iran offers oil cargo insurance, ships to India after indian Insurers withdraw

One wonders what the indian navy is doing in the arabian sea. Maybe they are focusing on somalian pirates. Meanwhile, indian insurers are depending on western security firms to secure oil trade from the middle-east to india. Indian navy waala shayad boltai, "nai nai, yeh hamara kaam nai hai". Phir kiska kaam hai yeh, hain?

Pathetic state of affairs. When phattu indian insurers got frightened, the iranians have offered to give insurance and ships from their side.

Indian insurers will lose valuable business in other markets if they continued to insure iranian cargo and so they took a risk based business decision which incidentally is the ONLY correct decision.

The iranians are left with no options but to insure their own cargo if they wish to sell to us. That is also how it should be.

Rest assured that the iranians would have shopped around for insurance cover and found none willing to insure their cargo because of the widespread ameriki clout and market domination.

All phattu insurers, the world over get frightened, when the amerikis are on the prowl. The amerikis have the economic clout to sink ANY insurance company dealing with iran and they will not hesitate to make an example of it. So, phattu it is.

The very first thing to rise dramatically and at the merest hint of trouble in any corner of the world are the insurance rates.

Do you think that the IN will get involved in some piddly commercial deals??

The IN mandate is the protection of India and her maritime trade routes and not the facilitation of crass iranian business interests as you seem to think.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 02 Aug 2018 09:23

nvishal wrote:^ The shias acquiring nukes broke the balance in the middle-east and in favour of shias. The Americans have two options:

1) Transfer nukes to the Arabs. If the Americans don't, the Arabs will try to acquire it clandestinely from the Pakistanis. It turns out that the Arabs were the ones who funded the Pakistani nuke program in technical collaboration from the Chinese. The Pakistanis owe the Arabs very large.

2) Sanction Iran in a way that will halt it from acquiring parts that will assist it in enriching uranium or fund it altogether.

Attacking Iran is not an option. They might use drones or stealth planes to destroy nuclear facilities at most. But another doable option and a very americanish strategy would be to assemble a coalition of Sunnis states/militias to invade Iran.

According to many reports, the saudis have paid thru their noses for a paki nuke "umbrella" and per some reports have, long ago, already acquired cheeni missiles with nuke warheads presently sited on saudi soil with cheeni operators.

The israelis are more than somewhat saudi pasand, especially against iran. Into this already volatile mix, throw in the US and NATO and not to forget the russkies.

India is the ONLY nuke power not in the mix and India's tested warheads and tested delivery systems have the range as well as the undoubted capability.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 03 Aug 2018 05:08

Fascinating paper. Explains many of the insinuated threats, bluffing, and disinformation routinely carried out by the Iranians.

http://www.herzliyaconference.org/_Uplo ... anself.pdf

Iran: Cultural Values, Self images and Negotiation Behavior

chanakyaa · Post by **chanakyaa** » 03 Aug 2018 07:13

Before the reader embarks on reading this pdf, may I ask, what are the odds of Shmuel Bar, a former Eye-DF intelligence officer (30+ years), providing a balanced view of the psyche of Eye-ran and its population?

https://www.hudson.org/experts/676-shmuel-bar

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Aug 2018 12:59

China Rejects U.S. Request to Cut Iran Oil Imports

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... il-imports

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Aug 2018 13:10

U.S. Issues New Warning to Europe: End Business With Iran or Face Harsh Sanctions

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 05 Aug 2018 13:03

Austin wrote:U.S. Issues New Warning to Europe: End Business With Iran or Face Harsh Sanctions

US planning to start a war with Iran ?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 05 Aug 2018 13:41

Neshant wrote:
Austin wrote:U.S. Issues New Warning to Europe: End Business With Iran or Face Harsh Sanctions
US planning to start a war with Iran ?

The itch is there to start a War with Iran and the push is coming from Nutanyaho who has great infulence over Trump

But its unlikely Congress would give that permission to Trump , The IRaq was has brought many body bags in thousands at home in thousand and US end up spending ~ 2 Trillion on the War

India would be better advised to ignore US sanction on Iran lke China does and India is the 2nd largest importer of energy else we will have very bad effect on our FP for decades to come with every country gravitating towards China known India wont stand up for them.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 05 Aug 2018 14:26

Neshant wrote:
nvishal wrote:Iran is offering to insure oil cargoes to India after some local insurers stopped providing the service in the face of impending US sanctions
Iranian insurance may be the kind where they collect the premium but if the oil tanker gets wrecked, they may not pay up.

They have a hard time sticking to agreements.

Do you really think their insurance policies will be any different?

Thus it may be insurance in name only.

If this somehow turns out to be true, proven after some mishap, then I don't think that they will find many customers for anything they may want to peddle.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 05 Aug 2018 18:17

chetak wrote:
Neshant wrote:
Iranian insurance may be the kind where they collect the premium but if the oil tanker gets wrecked, they may not pay up.

They have a hard time sticking to agreements.

Do you really think their insurance policies will be any different?

Thus it may be insurance in name only.
If this somehow turns out to be true, proven after some mishap, then I don't think that they will find many customers for anything they may want to peddle.

This is the case with almost every deal India has had with them.

They unilaterally change terms of the deal expecting the other party to comply.

It's the single biggest hurdle to making any deal with them as they don't stick to the terms.

The irony - Trump is doing to them what they do to others. i.e unilaterally abandoning deals

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Aug 2018 10:40

EU will punish own companies if they comply with US sanctions on Iran, says Mogherini aide

https://www.rt.com/news/435352-eu-sanct ... nies-iran/

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 09 Aug 2018 09:34

sending a warning?

or they gone drop some.

-------

Aircraft Carrier USS George H.W. Bush Spotted Near Iran As Sanctions Kicked In

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 09 Aug 2018 22:22

Trump wants a bigger, better deal with Iran. What does Tehran want?

is is the way the most significant instrument of U.S.-Iran diplomacy in 40 years ends: not with a bang, but with a whimper. In accordance with President Donald Trump’s May decision to walk away from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, the administration on Tuesday re-imposed most of the sanctions originally suspended by the agreement. While the move produced a flurry of new headlines, for the most part the economic impact had already unfolded, and Iranian leaders took the opportunity to demonstrate cautious resolve, as they struggle to devise a viable strategy for managing an increasingly risky path forward.

The executive order issued on Monday to reinstate the full force of American restrictions on much of Iran’s economy did not come as a surprise. In his May announcement on the nuclear deal, Trump announced two deadlines for winding down various types of business with Tehran, and with a few important exceptions, most affected firms and financial institutions moved quickly to comply with the renewed restrictions. The only real question surrounding this week’s deadline was the psychological impact on Iranians—not a small concern at a time when the value of Iran’s currency seemed to be entering a death spiral and small-scale but intense protests have mushroomed across the country.

For the moment anyway, it appears that Tehran’s proven crisis management capabilities remain intact. With a few overdue steps—including a change in the head of the Central Bank and a tweak to regulations surrounding the foreign exchange markets—and a somber address by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani broadcast live on state television, the Islamic Republic seems to have staved off any immediate panic. Since the sanctions deadline passed, the Iranian rial has rebounded, albeit very modestly, and Iranian leaders took some comfort in the robust symbolic and rhetorical support from Europe for preserving the nuclear agreement. The next cutoff date arrives in early November, and will prove more consequential as a barometer of impact on Iran’s crucial oil revenues.

TRUMP’S WHITE WHALE

Still, even now, the American exit from the deal and intensification of economic pressure confronts both Tehran and Washington with an uncertain end game, complicated by the appearance, at least, of divisions within the political establishments in both countries. By demanding a blanket severance of its oil exports and all other trade as quickly as possible, Washington is seeking to apply maximum pressure on Iran with a sense of urgency that suggests a particular impatience for a quick result. But what, precisely?

For Trump himself, the lure of a bigger, better deal with Iran—or at least a camera-ready summit that lends the appearance of a breakthrough, as with North Korea—seems to loom large. Since he first jumped into the race for the presidency, he emphasized his unique capabilities to renegotiate “a new and lasting deal,” and the barrage of threats and appeals that he has directed at Tehran in recent weeks—to negotiate “any time they want” and with “no preconditions”—betray his exasperation that Iranian leaders have yet to take him up on the offer.

In that regard, it’s worth noting that the one venue where the American and Iranian presidents can be found on common turf—the annual U.N. General Assembly meetings in New York—is approaching quickly. Last year, Trump apparently sought an audience there with Rouhani, and there is already speculation about another try in September.

Trump’s foreign policy team surely has a more sophisticated understanding of Tehran’s particular blend of antipathy and defiance that has historically discouraged bilateral diplomacy. While National Security Advisor John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have publicly distanced themselves from past indulgences around regime change, their public statements emphasizing a dozen demands that sound suspiciously like preconditions and the “enormous changes” required of Tehran are tailor-made to reinforce Iranian aversion to direct dialogue with Washington. In the meantime, as Bolton pointed out in an interview with PBS NewsHour, the sanctions fuel “the collapse of the Iranian currency…and the protests we have seen all around Iran, from those in Tehran itself to small towns and villages, where the people are showing their enormous discontent with the regime of the ayatollahs.”

The president’s demonstrable determination to avoid another costly, protracted U.S. military engagement in the Middle East means that Washington will almost surely seek to avoid an escalation with Iran. But for a regime-changer, what’s not to like about continuing the status quo?

A SKEPTICAL TEHRAN

The menu of unpalatable options on offer from Washington leaves Tehran caught between a rock and a hard place. Waiting out the pressure is a possibility, as many Europeans have advised with an eye on the American political calendar or even the investigation into Russian election interference. And Tehran’s appetite for tactical escalation remains, if only to reinforce to Washington that its pressure comes at some cost. However, the mood on Iran’s streets appears volatile, and Iranian leaders appreciate from their previous ordeals that muddling through via sanctions workarounds doesn’t offer a sustainable formula for securing the revolutionary state through a period of anticipated transition, with a succession process for an aging supreme leader not far beyond the horizon.

In their public statements, Iranian leaders insist that no dialogue is possible with Washington until Trump reverses his abrogation of the nuclear deal and ceases the application of what they describe as psychological and economic warfare against Iran. The country’s ultimate authority, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has derided negotiations as “useless,” the commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) announced that Trump would take any hope of talking to the Islamic Republic “to his grave,” and Qasem Suleimani, the charismatic commander of Iran’s Quds Force, delivered a fiery speech threatening that Iran would end any war started by the United States and “destroy all that you possess.” In his televised statement on Monday, Rouhani advised: “If you’re an enemy and you stab the other person with a knife and then you say you want negotiations, then the first thing you have to do is remove the knife.”

Tehran’s public contempt for Trump and the current U.S. approach has bolstered a longstanding trope that Iranian leaders do not negotiate under pressure (see various interpretations on this theme from Iranian officials, their surrogates, and international analysts who advocate engagement with Tehran). In fact, this is pure posturing; on multiple occasions—including the diplomacy that produced the 1988 ceasefire with Iraq, a 2003 overture apparently endorsed by Iran’s Foreign Ministry for a “grand bargain” with Washington, and the 2013 interim nuclear agreement with Washington and its allies—the Iranian leadership has used negotiations to maneuver itself out of a dire predicament.

So too, it appears that Trump’s aggressive policies have provoked at least the rudiments of a debate among the Iranian political establishment, and perhaps equally importantly among the public, about whether and how to take the president up on his intermittent appeals for talks. Ali Akbar Nateq Nouri, an influential cleric and politician, argued publicly last week that the option should be considered by the country’s national security council, and a mercurial conservative member of parliament seemed to chide the IRGC for provoking the crisis in the first place. Still other members of parliament shot back at the IRGC for its leaders’ public rhetoric toward Washington. And despite his dismissive comments Monday, Rouhani took pains to emphasize his government’s readiness for dialogue and even seemed to set the table for a broader negotiation with Washington, including new demands such as U.S. “compensation to the Iranian nation from 1953 until now…for its intervention in Iran.” All while murmurs of backchannel proposals conveyed via intermediaries such as Oman percolate.

It’s hardly a certainty, but no one should be surprised if the Iranians decide to exploit Trump’s obvious eagerness for high-profile summitry and put his vaunted negotiating skills to the test. That outcome would likely puncture another false construct, that peddled by the president and other opponents of the nuclear deal who remain convinced that a vastly better bargain can be struck with Tehran. Engineering a genuine “grand bargain” that resolves the core differences between the two countries would entail an investment of diplomatic energy and political will that neither side appears ready to proffer, especially since the existing situation suits most of the U.S. political establishment just fine.

Cheers

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Aug 2018 08:28

As usual the French got Sissy and ran away and China took over from there

Iran Sanctions Fallout: China Takes Over French Share In Giant Iran Gas Project