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.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Clinton Issues Another Warning to Iran

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/world ... 7iran.html
The confrontation with Iran over its nuclear program appeared to deepen Tuesday as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton escalated her verbal assault during a Persian Gulf visit and Russia joined the United States and France in bluntly questioning Iran’s ultimate intentions in enriching uranium.

...

“You have to ask yourself: why are they doing this?” Mrs. Clinton said. Referring to Iran’s insistence that it is not seeking nuclear weapons, she said, “The evidence doesn’t support that.”

...

At a news conference in Tehran on Tuesday, reports said, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad reiterated that Iran was ready to suspend enrichment if it could exchange its low-enriched uranium stockpile for processed fuel rods from abroad. But he said the swap should be “simultaneous” — a demand already dismissed by the United States and its allies.

“We are still ready for an exchange, even with America,” Mr. Ahmadinejad said, according to Reuters.

Mrs. Clinton’s comments seemed to amplify the verbal sparring that began Monday when she said Iran was drifting toward a military dictatorship with the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps gathering ever greater political, military and economic power.

By way of a response, the Iranian foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, said Tuesday that America itself answered to the description of a military dictatorship.

And as the exchanges intensified on Tuesday, Russia also entered the debate about Washington’s campaign to secure stricter sanction against Iran, saying penalties could not be ruled out if Iran did not persuade world powers that its intentions were peaceful.

Russia also joined the United States and France in signing a letter to the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations nuclear watchdog, asserting that Iran’s uranium enrichment and its failure to notify the I.A.E.A. beforehand were “wholly unjustified, contrary to U.N. Security Council resolutions, and represent a further step toward a capability to produce highly enriched uranium.”

...

Iran has reacted sharply to the latest American criticism.

Mr. Mottaki “raised questions about the United States military dictatorship in the region,” the English-language broadcaster Press TV said on Tuesday, and accused Washington of practicing “modern deceit,” using “fake words” to disguise its intentions in the Persian Gulf area.

“We are regretful that the U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tries to conceal facts about the stance of the U.S. administration through fake words,” Press TV quoted him as saying.

...

He also accused Washington of interfering in the internal affairs of other states by undermining their “scientific and technological achievements,” an apparent reference to Iran’s nuclear program which Iran says is for peaceful purposes permitted under international law.

“Those who have been the very symbol of military dictatorships over the past decades, since the Vietnam war until now, see everyone else in the same way,” The Associated Press quoted Mr. Mottaki as saying. Mrs. Clinton’s current visit to the region, he said, was “overflowing with contradictions and incorrect actions.”
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri: The Good Ayatollah

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... _ayatollah
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

x post

Pakistan extradites Jundallah terrorists to Iran
Pakistani security forces have captured several members of the Jundallah terrorist group and handed them over to Iranian authorities.

During a meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki on Sunday, visiting Pakistani National Assembly Speaker Fahmida Mirza said that a number of Jundallah militants have been arrested and extradited to Iran.

She went on to say that Pakistani security personnel are making serious efforts to apprehend the Jundallah members still at large.

Jundallah is a Pakistan-based terrorist group comprised of members of the Baluchi ethnic group.

It has been reported that Jundallah is closely affiliated with the al-Qaeda network.

Since 2003, Jundallah members have carried out over 50 terrorist operations in Iran.

The government of Iran has accused them of mass murder, armed robbery, kidnapping, carrying out bombings targeting civilians and government officials, and acts of sabotage.

Abdolmalek Rigi is the leader of the terrorist group.

In their latest attack, which occurred on October 18, more than 40 Iranians, among them 15 members of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), lost their lives when Jundallah terrorists carried out an operation in the border region of Pishin, which is located in Iran's southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchestan.

Shia and Sunni tribal leaders were also among the victims of the attack.

During his meeting with the Pakistani parliament speaker, the Iranian foreign minister said Tehran and Islamabad play significant roles in regional developments.

The two countries should endeavor to expand their strategic cooperation since there is ample potential to this end, he added.
Rigi and Jundallah were the creation of CIA, ISI funded by KSA. Something is happening, have relations with KSA soured for some reason? The taliban guys arrested are KSA GID links for negotiations. Now KSA just lost an asset against Tehran.

Abdolmalek Rigi, who heads Jundallah (Soldiers of God), was taken into custody in eastern Iran while he was en route from the United Arab Emirates to Kyrgyzstan, Press TV reported.

Al Qods forces have been active in Af-Pak region, and wanted to take on Jundallah in Balochistan. Looks like Iran was able to bear enough covert pressure against islamabad imo. Wonder what will happen to Indo-Iranian co-operation now.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

Just adding on from the above: Just realised that this could be a result of US-Iran negotiations that have been taking place in Vienna, that I have been reporting on in the West Asia thread
Carl_T
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2533
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 02:37
Location: anandasya sagare

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Carl_T »

abhishek_sharma wrote:Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri: The Good Ayatollah

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... _ayatollah
Montazeri was actually a higher authority on Shia Islam than Khameini. It is a shame it ended like that for him. If he was a political leader instead of Nasrallah or Khameini, things may have been different.
A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13528
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by A_Gupta »

Puzzle: why is Iranian uranium out in the open?

The New York Times reports that Iran has "moved nearly its entire stockpile of low-enriched nuclear fuel to an above-ground plant."
Malayappan
BRFite
Posts: 462
Joined: 18 Jul 2005 00:11

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Malayappan »

Cross Posting KP Nayar's piece in The Telegraph Iran shadow hangs over Singh’s visit to US Some Iran specific bits -
In a stunning display of diplomatic candour, which would have impressed Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi, Brazil last week defied American pressure to toe Washington’s line on Iran and showed the way for India which would once have done the same.

At a joint media conference with the US secretary of state Hillary Clinton, Brazil’s foreign minister Celso Amorim said in Brasilia that the situation which is now evolving on Iran was reminiscent “very much (of) what I heard back in 1998, 1999. I mean, smoke and mirrors” about Iraq
Nayar setting up MMS?
Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Johann »

Carl_T wrote:
abhishek_sharma wrote:Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri: The Good Ayatollah

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... _ayatollah
Montazeri was actually a higher authority on Shia Islam than Khameini. It is a shame it ended like that for him. If he was a political leader instead of Nasrallah or Khameini, things may have been different.
Carl,

What do you mean 'if' he was a political leader?

Montazeri was Khomeini's designated successor. He lost that position when he began to publicly question the bloody and totalitarian nature of Khomeini's rule and call for reform.

Montazeri's moral leadership, and inspiration to the reform movement from behind bars and from house arrest should never be underestimated.

Its not every day you have a grand ayatollah rejecting the 'Islamic' credentials of a self-proclaimed Islamic Republic he helped found, and calling for human rights and full democracy.

Khatami could not have gotten as far as he did without Montazeri to challenge the system from so high up on the inside.

The reactionaries control of the regime has rested on two pillars - coercion and intimidation, which they've used to prevent the reformists from electorally capitalising on their support. They've assassinated, arrested, tortured and exiled as many 'dangerous' voices as they can since the late 1990s when the reformist movement really took off. They've disqualified the majority of reformist candidates from running, shut down their newspapers and offices, and since 2005 the Revolutionary Guard has taken to stuffing ballot boxes.

What has held the reformists back is not just fear, but democratic principles as well as patriotic realpolitik. They want change, but they aren't willing to use the reactionary state's methods, and they are not willing to plunge Iran in to a bitter and destructive civil conflict. Many of them are serious students of history - not just Iranian history, which inspires a fear of a fragmented state, but also modern episodes such as the Spanish Civil War which set Spain back by decades and whose wounds from the massacres on all sides took even longer to heal.
Most of all the reformists are confidant that they will win out in the end because as Jim Morrison put it 'They got the guns, but we got the numbers'.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

It's all about who controls the Gulf
While it's true that Russia may be prevaricating somewhat, China will never agree to UN Security Council (UNSC) sanctions as long as it relies heavily on Iran for its oil and is invested to the tune of billions of dollars in the Iranian oil industry. This is the reason behind US attempts to persuade Saudi Arabia to offer China increased oil supplies.

China is in no mood to throw its current supplier over for one of America's closest allies. In any case, no amount of sanctions or isolation will bring Iran to its knees.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

Qatar signs security agreement with Iran
By DEUTSCHE PRESSE-AGENTUR

Published: Mar 9, 2010 21:06 Updated: Mar 9, 2010 23:59

DOHA: Iranian Interior Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar Tuesday signed a security agreement with Qatari Minister of State for Interior Affairs Abdullah Bin Nasser Bin Khalifa Al-Thani in Doha.

The agreement underlined the need to develop bilateral and international cooperation in security, the fight against organized crime and against terrorism, Najjar said in a press briefing after the signing ceremony.

"We agreed to increase cooperation in border protection between our two countries and fight drug and human trafficking ... as well as crime in both countries," he said.

The two countries also agreed to combat illegal immigration, fraud and money laundering.

"We are preparing for another agreement with Pakistan to be signed soon," said Najjar, who arrived in Doha on Monday for a two-day visit.

Najjar, who led a political and economic delegation, said Iran was keen on developing the security agreements it had previously signed with other Gulf Cooperation Council countries, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Oman, as well as Iraq, Turkey and Syria.
Qatar and Oman have similar foreign policy. Oman moved first and said they will not tolerate any moves by US/UK etc to attack Iran from Omani territory. Looks like same from Qatar.

Rigi was a watershed looks like.
Carl_T
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2533
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 02:37
Location: anandasya sagare

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Carl_T »

I am willing to bet money that the US will sit down and work out some sort of deal with Iran. Maybe even recognize a role in Iraq.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

Looks like Chinese are willing to settle with selected sanctions on IRGC individuals. they remain too heavily invested in the Chinese oil industry.
shravan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2212
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 00:08

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by shravan »

Final destination Iran?

Exclusive: Rob Edwards
Published on 14 Mar 2010
Hundreds of powerful US “bunker-buster” bombs are being shipped from California to the British island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean in preparation for a possible attack on Iran.

The Sunday Herald can reveal that the US government signed a contract in January to transport 10 ammunition containers to the island. According to a cargo manifest from the US navy, this included 387 “Blu” bombs used for blasting hardened or underground structures.

Experts say that they are being put in place for an assault on Iran’s controversial nuclear facilities. There has long been speculation that the US military is preparing for such an attack, should diplomacy fail to persuade Iran not to make nuclear weapons.

...

Contract details for the shipment to Diego Garcia were posted on an international tenders’ website by the US navy.

A shipping company based in Florida, Superior Maritime Services, will be paid $699,500 to carry many thousands of military items from Concord, California, to Diego Garcia.

Crucially, the cargo includes 195 smart, guided, Blu-110 bombs and 192 massive 2000lb Blu-117 bombs.

“They are gearing up totally for the destruction of Iran,” said Dan Plesch, director of the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy at the University of London, co-author of a recent study on US preparations for an attack on Iran. “US bombers are ready today to destroy 10,000 targets in Iran in a few hours,” he added.

The preparations were being made by the US military, but it would be up to President Obama to make the final decision. He may decide that it would be better for the US to act instead of Israel, Plesch argued.

“The US is not publicising the scale of these preparations to deter Iran, tending to make confrontation more likely,” he added. “The US ... is using its forces as part of an overall strategy of shaping Iran’s actions.”

According to Ian Davis, director of the new independent thinktank, Nato Watch, the shipment to Diego Garcia is a major concern. “We would urge the US to clarify its intentions for these weapons, and the Foreign Office to clarify its attitude to the use of Diego Garcia for an attack on Iran,” he said.

For Alan Mackinnon, chair of Scottish CND, the revelation was “extremely worrying”. He stated: “It is clear that the US government continues to beat the drums of war over Iran, most recently in the statements of Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.

“It is depressingly similar to the rhetoric we heard prior to the war in Iraq in 2003.”

The British Ministry of Defence has said in the past that the US government would need permission to use Diego Garcia for offensive action. It has already been used for strikes against Iraq during the 1991 and 2003 Gulf wars.

About 50 British military staff are stationed on the island, with more than 3,200 US personnel. Part of the Chagos Archipelago, it lies about 1,000 miles from the southern coasts of India and Sri Lanka, well placed for missions to Iran.

The US Department of Defence did not respond to a request for a comment.
Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4153
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Atri »

Pak, Iran sign pipeline deal sans India
Pakistan has signed a deal with Iran paving the way for the construction of a much-delayed pipeline pumping Iranian natural gas to the energy-starved South Asian country, officials said on Wednesday.

The $7.6 billion project is crucial for Pakistan to avert a growing energy crisis already causing severe electricity shortages in the country of about 170 million.

Pakistani Petroleum and Natural Resources Minister Naveed Qmar hailed the signing of the deal in Turkey on Tuesday as an historic achievement.

It's a milestone towards meeting energy needs of the country, a Pakistani government statement quoted Qamar as saying.

The pipeline will connect Iran's South Fars gas field with Pakistan's southern Baluchistan and Sindh provinces.

Iran has the world's second-largest gas reserves after Russia. But sanctions by the West, political turmoil and construction delays have slowed its development as an exporter.

Under the deal, 750 million cubic feet of gas will be pumped to Pakistan daily from Iran by mid-2015.

Qamar said he hoped work on the project would be started soon so that gas supplies to Pakistan could start on time.

PEACE PIPELINE

Dubbed the peace pipeline, the project has been planned since the 1990s and originally would have extended from Pakistan to its old rival, India.

However, India has been reluctant to join the project given its long-running distrust of Pakistan, with which it has fought three wars since they achieved independence in 1947.

Under the deal signed on Tuesday, Pakistan is allowed to charge a transit fee if the proposed pipeline is eventually extended to India.

The United States has tried to discourage India and Pakistan from any deal with Iran because of Tehran's suspected ambitions to build nuclear weapons. Iran denies any such ambitions.

India has invested in civilian nuclear reactors to help fulfill its increasing energy demand. It also signed a landmark civilian nuclear deal with the United States in 2008.

Pakistan has long called for a similar deal from the United States but Washington has been unwilling to make an agreement with its ally, which is battling an al Qaeda-linked Islamist insurgency.

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari reiterated Pakistan's demand in talks with Director of U.S. National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair on Tuesday.

(Zardari) called upon the U.S. to assist Pakistan in civilian nuclear technology to help the country overcome (the) energy crisis, on the one hand, and bridge the trust deficit between the two countries on the other, a government statement said.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by NRao »

US is Preparing to Strike Iran's Nuke Facilities: Report
Stepping up its preparations for a possible strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, the United States is transporting hundreds of 387 'bunker-buster' bombs to its air base on the British island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, a media report has claimed.

The US government signed a contract in January with Superior Maritime Services to transport 10 ammunition containers to Diego Garcia from Concord, California, Sunday Herald has reported.

The shipment includes 195 smart, guided Blu-110 bombs and 192 Blu-117 2,000 lb bombs.

The key Iranian nuclear facilities are said to be underground and both these type of bombs are effective against reinforced or underground facilities.

The United States and Israel have repeatedly asserted that they do not rule out a military action to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions and that they are keeping all the options on the table.

Contract details for the shipment were posted on an international tenders' website by the US Navy.

"They are gearing up totally for the destruction of Iran," Dan Plesch, director of the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy at the University of London, said.

"US bombers are ready today to destroy 10,000 targets in Iran in a few hours," Plesch, who is the co-author of a recent study on the US preparations for an attack on Iran, stressed.

The final decision on whether to launch an attack would be in the hands of US President Barack Obama. He may decide that it would be better for the US to act instead of Israel, Plesch argued.

"The US is not publicising the scale of these preparations to deter Iran, tending to make confrontation more likely,"Plesch said adding, "The US is using its forces as part of an overall strategy of shaping Iran's actions."

Diego Garcia is a British territory about 1,000 miles south of India and Sri Lanka but is used as a US military base as part of an agreement reached in 1971.

It has already been used in operations against Iraq during the 1991 and 2003 Gulf wars.
Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4856
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Neshant »

Pak, Iran sign pipeline deal sans India.
It won't be profitable without India. Perhaps if China participates, it could work but most of China's population is on the east coast.

Secondly US would definately not let its handouts be used for pipeline building to Iran so how will they finance it. Iran would have to mostly finance it.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34915
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by chetak »

Neshant wrote:
Pak, Iran sign pipeline deal sans India.
It won't be profitable without India. Perhaps if China participates, it could work but most of China's population is on the east coast.

Secondly US would definately not let its handouts be used for pipeline building to Iran so how will they finance it. Iran would have to mostly finance it.
This is a game of chicken.

They are hoping that India will now jump on board and also fund a major part of it. Too bad that MMS has just tied up something with the saudis.

We can depend on the baluchis to keep the pot pipeline well stirred!
Last edited by chetak on 18 Mar 2010 00:05, edited 1 time in total.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

You see they don't want to be over reliant on China. Thats why the IPI was being promoted by Tehran. Tehran is asking for a high rate on gas, not just with India but also with Oman so my sources tell me. Although Oman and Iran look like they are close on a deal.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34915
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by chetak »

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/587 ... -iran.html
India proposes trilateral talks with Iran, Pak for gas project
New Delhi, Mar 18 (PTI)

India today said it has proposed trilateral talks in May with Iran and Pakistan on the multi-billion dollar gas pipeline to address its security and other concerns, two days after Tehran and Islamabad went ahead with a bilateral deal for the project.


"... As far as India is concerned, we are in consultation with the government of Iran. We have certain concerns. Concerns about pricing, concerns about security, which have been taken up with the government of Iran," External Affairs Minister S M Krishna said here.
Pakistan on Tuesday signed a USD 7.5 billion deal with oil-rich Iran, paving the way for laying the much-delayed natural gas pipeline that was originally envisaged to extend up to India. However, it was not clear whether the deal was about Gas Sales and Purchase Agreement that allows gas sale at agreed terms and without which no transaction can take place.

"We have genuine issues that need to be addressed before we sign up for the (Iran-Pakistan-India) pipeline. We have proposed dates in May for technical level talks in Tehran to iron these out," Oil Secretary S Sundareshan told PTI here.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Gerard »

Carl_T
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2533
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 02:37
Location: anandasya sagare

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Carl_T »

:eek: :eek:

After all these years that the Iranians have hated the Taliban, they are now training them????

This sounds questionable.
pgbhat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4172
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 21:47
Location: Hayden's Ferry

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by pgbhat »

Psy-ops to up the ante, keeps the pot boiling. They would want Iran to strongly deny and then call them liars.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

The training taliban thing is quite old. These reports were coming out a year or 2 ago.

Well, if they were supporting the taliban, it makes sense, keep the US bogged down and escalate to prevent all out war against iran. Give the US a taster of what they can expect if Iran is attacked. They did it in Iraq successfully, why not afghanistan? It doesn't take much to switch sides against the taleban.
sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10205
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by sum »

shyamd wrote:The training taliban thing is quite old. These reports were coming out a year or 2 ago.

Well, if they were supporting the taliban, it makes sense, keep the US bogged down and escalate to prevent all out war against iran. Give the US a taster of what they can expect if Iran is attacked. They did it in Iraq successfully, why not afghanistan? It doesn't take much to switch sides against the taleban.
It might just be hedging of bets by supporting both the Talibs and the NA. When the US finally leave( after getting a @$$ whipping by the Taliban), turn full attention/funding towards the NA and start targetting the Taliban.

Im certain that even the Indians will have some sort of contacts with a few Talibs as a hedge. Anyways, there is nothing like a permanent friend in international affairs.
Karan Dixit
BRFite
Posts: 1102
Joined: 23 Mar 2007 02:43
Location: Calcutta

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Karan Dixit »

Iran is likely to invite India formally for the conference entitled 'Nuclear Energy for All, Nuclear Weapon for None', scheduled for April 17-18, diplomatic sources said here.

The Iranian leadership is also expected to discuss the nuclear issue when External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna visits Tehran, likely next month. Krishna was set to go to Tehran last week, but clashing engagements led to a last-minute postponement.

http://www.calcuttanews.net/story/616875
Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4856
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Neshant »

'Nuclear Energy for All, Nuclear Weapon for None'

sounds like a fair objective.
Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3513
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Rony »

The Iranians and the Pakis are pushing hard for inclusion of China in IPI pipeline and panda is obliging

China keen to replace India in Peace Pipeline deal
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by ramana »

Rony wrote:The Iranians and the Pakis are pushing hard for inclusion of China in IPI pipeline and panda is obliging

China keen to replace India in Peace Pipeline deal

Let them. All three deserve each other. Maybe US can also join in.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by ramana »

Pioneer op-ed on the cancelled visit by MEA to Tehran
The Pioneer Edit Desk

A gap New Delhi and Tehran need to address

The cancellation of Foreign Minister SM Krishna’s visit to Iran after Tehran changed dates twice and made its reluctance to play host obvious indicates an emerging challenge for Indian diplomacy. In a sense, the Iranian Government acted in bad faith. It initiated the process of the visit by inviting Mr Krishna for Navroz — traditionally marking New Year in that country — and then altered the dates. When the new dates were accepted, Tehran changed them again and this time it was inconvenient for New Delhi to play along, given Mr Krishna’s prior commitments. The Foreign Minister’s visit was supposed to be a precursor to a prime ministerial trip to Iran. Obviously, the entire time-table will now have to be revisited. Iran is making it clear that it is not going to forgive India easily for voting against it at the International Atomic Energy Agency and seeking sanctions and action against the regime in Tehran for its clandestine nuclear weapons programme. Iran has consistently violated its commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Its pursuit of the Bomb is worrying for not just Israel and the United States but also deeply disquieting in terms of India’s own security. A Shia nuclear-weapons state will be seen as a grave provocation by Sunni Governments in West Asia. There will be pressure, particularly on Saudi Arabia, to take counteractive measures. The secret — or perhaps non-so-secret — protocol between the Saudis and the Pakistanis whereby Riyadh funded and supported Islamabad’s development of a nuclear arsenal that would then provide umbrella cover to the paramount Arab kingdom could then become explicit. A larger arms race in the Muslim world would result and Pakistani’s diplomatic space as well as ability to leverage its nuclear infrastructure — aimed primarily at India — would increase. As such, particularly at a time when it was negotiating a civilian nuclear deal with the United States and the international community, and needed to provide evidence of its being a responsible stakeholder in the nuclear enterprise, India could just not have ignored Iran’s transgressions, much less approbated them.

This background is important and suggests a contradiction that will always remain. Nevertheless, India and Iran have a compelling medium-term congruence of interests in Afghanistan. In case American troops withdraw or scale back their presence in Kabul, in case the Taliban — or least a faction of the Taliban beholden to the Generals in Rawalpindi and deriving ideological sustenance from a particularly extreme version of Sunni Islam — takes change, both India and Iran are going to see a critical worsening of their security environments. They will have to work together, as they did in the 1990s and in the period leading up to 9/11, to build proxies and create capacities for alternative players in the Afghan polity. Unfortunately, Tehran’s blind antagonism to Washington, DC, a result of the limited, provincial world-view of its current President, is preventing it from taking a clear-eyed view of the Afghan situation. It wants Western forces to quit at once, not realising this is probably going to happen anyway in 2011 and that it will inevitably create a power vacuum in Kabul. In these circumstances, India and Iran need to discuss Afghanistan as well as perhaps the scenario in Pakistani Balochistan. However, this conversation cannot even begin if Iran decides to be bull-headed and seeks not tactical alliance with India but strategic subservience from it.
This is the problemif the others pervcieve India is soft state. They think they can get away too. Maybe India should let the US take care of Iran.
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3801
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Paul »

It has to happen.

That is the only way to make the world use those surplus Dollars printed to claw it's way out of the current financial crisis.
Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Johann »

The Obama administration is tightening the economic screws, but even with Hilary as hawkish as she is on the subject there will be no overt American attack on Iranian nuclear facilities.

Israel on the other hand....the Netanyahu government has less and less to lose given its differences with Obama on Jerusalem and peace negotiations. In fact a strike could even bring a surge of popular support in the US against current US foreign policy.

Ahmadinejad is convinced he can deter an American attack by threatening to impose massive costs on the world economy by scaring tanker traffic out of the Straits of Hormuz. However there are regime hardliners who believe a US or Israeli attack will give them excuse they need to really crush the Green Movement and neutralise the threat from pragmatic conservatives like Rafsanjani. Much like the Iran-Iraq war gave Khomeini the excuse he needed to crush the serious Marxist, liberal and ethnic opposition.

This is a very complex dance between the US, Iran, Israel, the pro and anti-American Arab states, the EU and Russia. If hostilities break out it will be because too many people played it right to the edge and someone's foot slipped.
Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4856
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Neshant »

Iran is making it clear that it is not going to forgive India easily for voting against it at the International Atomic Energy Agency and seeking sanctions and action against the regime in Tehran for its clandestine nuclear weapons programme.
India should have abstained rather than get involved in the issue.

Eyeran poses no imminent threat to India's security even with nukes.

India should not go along with any sanctions unless we have been consulted on it as its just damaging relations with them.

The reality for Eyeran is they have big ambitions that run counter to the interests of many big powers. In the end however, the cost of not having nuclear weapons far outweighs the short term costs of having it.
RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by RamaY »

^^^

What happened has happened. Every nation has to act in its interests. If Iran wants to act pricy so be it. India has to increase the costs for Iran. The world is not unnecessarily p-sec and peace-loving like India is. India may have many issues internally, but externally it cannot behave like a soft state.
Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4856
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Neshant »

From their prespective, India is a rather useless ally to have. Voting in favor of sanctions against them yet expecting cooperation to continue.

I don't recall them saying anything when India exploded nukes in 1998. At the very least, India could have returned the courtesy as far as the issue of sanctions go.

I fear a lot of Jairam Ramesh types are leading India's foreign policy.
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by somnath »

Neshant wrote:From their prespective, India is a rather useless ally to have. Voting in favor of sanctions against them yet expecting cooperation to continue.

I don't recall them saying anything when India exploded nukes in 1998. At the very least, India could have returned the courtesy as far as the issue of sanctions go.

I fear a lot of Jairam Ramesh types are leading India's foreign policy.
Our 1998 tests merely formalised our "unannounced" status..We had not signed the NPT (and hence had remained blacklisted for 30 years from nuke trade), hence our testing did not contravene any international law..Iran on the other hand has signed the NPT, gotten all benefits out of it..Development of weapons is in contravention of NPT obligations for Iran...

From a selfish perspective, we dont want another nuclear weapons power, not in our neighbourhood in any case..Therefore, preveting Iran from getting nukes is a desirable policy objective..On the other hand, Iran should be as paranoid about the Taliban as India - I doubt if they have any option but to remain "allied" to India on that point.
Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1341
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Nihat »

A strike on Iranian facilities seems more and more likely in the medium term. If the bull headed ahmedinajad keeps on going ahead with Weapons porgram he would be creating far too many enemies for Iran. Not to mention that they are signatories of NPT and it would be illegal to test and Iran would be in direct violation.

India would do well to just lie low in this situation (for a the next couple of years perhaps) and quietly work with Iran on issues which concern both including controlling Taliban and Economic development (within sanctions framework).
Carl_T
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2533
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 02:37
Location: anandasya sagare

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Carl_T »

While people talk about a potential strike on the nuclear facilities, I think the actual feasibility of the strikes is worth discussing.

I don't know how applicable the strike on the Osiraq reactor will be today as a model or precedent, because it was a singular reactor which may not even have been for producing weapons, and did not have the sufficient defenses required against an airstrike.

I think it would be foolish to pretend that Iran has not learned from the Osiraq, and I imagine they would have spread out systems throughout the country, with duplicate systems in other places. Many of them may be guarded, and there is always the chance of Iran retaliating in kind.

An airstrike may morph into a much bigger tumble IMO.
Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Iran News and Discussions

Post by Johann »

Chance that Iran will retaliate? Its a certainty! The oil weapon is what really worries people.

No one believes that airstrikes would fundamentally cripple the Iranian nuclear programme, only delay it. Unless backed up effective sanctions and inspections.

Given these factors, cost-benefit analysis of strikes has always been controversial in the US policy establishment, even though the Neoconservatives were all for it.

Israel's cost-benefit analysis is however quite different from that of the US, particularly since Ahmadinejad's election and his Nazi rhetoric of holocaust denial and calls for Israel's destruction only reinforced the sense of many Israelis (and members of the worldwide Jewish Diaspora) that Iranian nuclear weapons posed an existential threat.

Any strike by manned aircraft will require some measure of suppression of enemy air defences, since most sites are protected. That means making sure radars, SAM batteries, airfields, etc dont get in the way. Information/electronic warfare *could* reduce the number of strikes needed on those targets (important for any Israeli mission, which would be mounted with a fraction of what the USAF/USN could muster), but there's no getting away from it.
Post Reply