Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/
devesh wrote:^^^
think further.
Russia gains nothing from US mending fences with Iran. Russia also couldn't give a s*** about the effect of sanctions on Iran. if US reneges on the deal and re-imposes sanctions, that merely strengthens the Russian stance worldwide that US is a treacherous ally at best. that will be a godsend to Russia.
IMVHO, Iran is a "challenger" in the making against India. I think there is sufficient "preparation" within US establishment now for a future unraveling of Pakistan. They realize that Indian subcontinent is in unstable state due to Pak and that they cannot prop up Pakis forever. They are getting ready to sacrifice Paki pawns.
Iran is their next bet to ensure that India is checkmated in the IOR and also in CAR. they are planning for decades ahead.
With Porkis meddling in the Saudi-Iranian conflict, this is golden opportunity for India to recoup its lost standing with Iran. Most of the West Asian and Western powers are tacitly supporting Saudis, and even a small gesture by India like sending our NSA to Tehran or offering economic assistance will be a big confidence builder. I think Iran is the single most important country and opportunity for India in this half of the world. And there is no better example of MMS and UPAs terrible handling of foreign policy than Iran.A_Gupta wrote:http://www.outlookindia.com/news/articl ... off/889562
The breakthrough in a standoff between Iran and the West over its nuclear programme is likely to help major buyers of Iranian oil like India by lifting curbs on quantity of import and payment restrictions.
The US and its allies had blocked all financial channels in order to choke Iran to pressurise the countries like India to cut their oil purchase from the Persian Gulf nation.
This saw India cut its imports from over 18 million tonnes five years back to 11 million tonnes in 2013-14.
In 2014-15, US pressured India to maintain imports from Iran at 2013-14 level, which led to New Delhi not importing any oil last month.
Iran has informed India that the five-million-tonne a year liquefied natural gas (LNG) export deal, with deliveries scheduled to begin in 2009 for a 25-year period, is off. This was conveyed to Indian officials in Vienna soon after the anti-Iran vote cast on Saturday by New Delhi at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) governing board meeting.
In a communication to the Prime Minister's Office and South Block dated September 24, India's Permanent Representative in Vienna, Sheelkant Sharma, wrote that his Iranian counterpart had told him the LNG deal, signed between the two sides in June, was off.
The Iranian Ambassador in Vienna came up to Dr. Sharma after India's vote and conveyed a message from Ali Larijani, Iran's top nuclear negotiator, that Teheran was no longer willing to go ahead with the $21-billion deal.
Tuvaluan wrote:devesh wrote:^^^
think further.
Russia gains nothing from US mending fences with Iran. Russia also couldn't give a s*** about the effect of sanctions on Iran. if US reneges on the deal and re-imposes sanctions, that merely strengthens the Russian stance worldwide that US is a treacherous ally at best. that will be a godsend to Russia.
IMVHO, Iran is a "challenger" in the making against India. I think there is sufficient "preparation" within US establishment now for a future unraveling of Pakistan. They realize that Indian subcontinent is in unstable state due to Pak and that they cannot prop up Pakis forever. They are getting ready to sacrifice Paki pawns.
Iran is their next bet to ensure that India is checkmated in the IOR and also in CAR. they are planning for decades ahead.
^^^ No evidence for most of those claims. Where is the evidence for any of the following:
1) "Russia does not care about the effect of sanctions on Iran": Russia has been pushing for complete removal of sanctions on Iran, and was also willing to sell weapons to Iran while sanctions were in place http://www.timesofisrael.com/russia-off ... sanctions/. With sanctions gone, Russia can do business with Iran more openly and on many more fronts. You prove my point. Russia did business with Iran, sanctions or no sanctions. They didn't give two hoots about "Western" sanctions. In fact, part of the Russian narrative is that Russia is an ally to any who are victimized by the West. and there is plenty of evidence for this. Right from the days of the Cold War, Russian narrative has always been that the West is made of tyrants who want to inforce their diktat on other while Russia is the "proletarian power".
2) " strengthens the Russian stance worldwide that US is a treacherous ally at best. that will be a godsend to Russia." sounds absurd. what concrete benefits does Russia get from bad perceptions of the US? Negative perceptions of the US (or any country) are easily undermined by actions that provide concrete benefits to whichever country has negative perceptions. USA is perceived negatively in Pakistan, but that has not stopped either side from working together, and this continues even when Pakistan is negatively perceived in the US. There is nothing to support the above claim. Ehhh....I'm quite surprised you can't even understand this basic idea of perceptions. US narrative of Russia as an 'evil empire' is as much about how they want the world to perceive them, as it is how they perceive Russia. Similarly, since WWII, any nation which was hounded after by the "West" (aka USA-UK) has turned to Russia for diplomatic and military support: in short, geopolitical backing by Moscow. Even today, most of Latin America keeps Moscow on their good side primarily due to the vestiges of this Cold War legacy that still continues to provide a source of strength to any "leftist" nation which the US has went after. Pakistan and Iran are different cases altogether. Iran even now doesn't have diplomatic relations with USA. You cannot compare that to Pakis. such a comparison is meaningless and has no basis in reality. full-stop.
3) "Iran is a "challenger" in the making against India.": That assume Iran and India do not have mutual interests, which is false. India has been working with Iran, sanctions or not, though this suffered under the UPA regime which seemed to be following the US's diktats when it came to Iran. Iran and India have been working together on a secondary route to Afghanistan via chahbahar port, and all of this while sanctions were in place. Given Iran's history with the US, claims of Iran rising to be the US's pawn and challenge India (rather than KSA or israel) is ridiculous, without evidence to indicate such an outcome.What does India have to show for all the "work" on Chabahar? Further, without first securing the land routes through the Khyber, if India does go ahead with building this railway line, we should not at all be surprised if it eventually falls to Jihadis. How will we protect the line against Taliban and Jihadis? What is our politico-military strategy protect any Iron ore interests that we choose to develop in Western Afghanistan. In short, we are jumping about Chabahar without first securing the land routes through Af-Pak. This is an exercise in futility. I hope the Indian State has enough common sense to realize that if we build this line and start mining for Iron without any military control of the region, we'll be sitting ducks for Jihadi blackmail.
4) I think there is sufficient "preparation" within US establishment now for a future unraveling of Pakistan. " --- is that why the US continues to provide billion $ said packages along with China to Pakistan? There is nothing to indicate pakistan will unravel anytime soon, and definitely not as long as they are kept on life support by US and china. Stop being so simplistic. USA will try its best to keep Pak alive for as long as possible. But that doesn't mean that they don't realize that this is increasingly becoming more and more cumbersome, nuisance-ridden, and expensive. Especially now that they realize that India itself seems to have something of a knack for "developing stable markets", this calculation will very slowly but surely continue to have its own effect on the "deep State" in US. What I'm saying is that this is the first step that USA has taken which will eventually position Iran as the "balancer" to neutralize Indian advance and expansion. Make absolutely no mistake: Iran will have its own delusions about "imperial depth" in Afghanistan. They will have a vision for that region that runs counter to our interests and our vision of taking back those regions eventually.
5) "They realize that Indian subcontinent is in unstable state due to Pak and that they cannot prop up Pakis forever. " -- so basically, your claim is that Pakistan is being funded by the US to increase stability in the region? Seriously, and are you sure you have given sufficient thinking on this point? Pakis are being funded precisely because they keep the region unstable, not because they make the region more stable...one would think a few 100 paki threads on BRF would suffice to drum this reality into the skulls of forumites, but apparently not. I'll rephrase myself. They might not "realize" it, but instinctively, they might be realizing that they might not be able to prop up Pak forever. They will try their best to do it. But they will also be thinking of Plan B if Pak goes down. This is not so hard to imagine. Indian Foreign policy is quite stupid because we neither understand what our interests are, nor do we know what they will be in the future. Characters like Ajit Doval are extremely rare. All others are confined to the view that India's existing map will somehow remain this way into eternity. Doval represents more of an exception that the rule. Even though he hasn't openly indicated it, I think given his speeches, he perhaps realizes that the NW needs to be "taken back" into the orbit of India more "thoroughly".
6) "Iran is their next bet to ensure that India is checkmated in the IOR and also in CAR. they are planning for decades ahead": Yes, the US is so awesome and thinks decades ahead that hang around and allow pakis and other mortal enemies of theirs to acquire more capabilities to hurt them in the long term. Yeah, completely demonstrates awesome long-term thinking on the US's part. Weren't you just saying that US consider Pak an "ally"? now, you're calling Pak a "mortal enemy" of US. Confusion? When it comes to India, US plans should more aptly be described as Anglo-Saxon plans. We should fully expect that there are "desks" and "offices" about India that have a pretty deep level of interaction with the "mother ship" in UK. And UK will bitterly do all it can to make sure that India's current compromised State remains so. In this context, we should not be surprised if the UK games scenarios decades ahead. They have shown an unusual level of obsession with India for generations. And all recent actions show that this hasn't changed. the UK is the real source from where the US will get its ideas on India's future projection and how to check mate it.
Clearly a lot of thinking has been involved in making the above claims, especially the bit about the US making awesome long term plans to shape the world according to its whims and fancies, like it did in Afghanisthan and then planned to have paki/saudi terrorists take down the WTC, and then even more awesome planning to lie in the UN about Iraqi yellow cake and then go into a war in Iraq that seems to have culminated in the creation of ISIS as a replacement for Saddam Hussein. Obviously, the US has nothing but the interests of peace and stability of all regions in the planet.
It seems to be less about the Russian narrative than how Russia decides to project its power by aligning with certain states -- the question is whether Iran will continue to ally with Russia or not after this deal. I don't know the answer to that.In fact, part of the Russian narrative is that Russia is an ally to any who are victimized by the West. and there is plenty of evidence for this. R
Narratives and perceptions are irrelevant. As a country, you have what it takes to project your power, or you don't. Power politics is not about perception. It is about actually acquiring and using power. Whether or not USA (or Russia) is portrayed as an evil power, what really matters is whether they have the money and the goods to have other countries align with them. In the case of Russia, they do have technology they are willing to sell to Iran, which the USA will not do. That is what matters, not "perceptions". It is what you can do that matters, not what your image is, at least not any more. In the cold war, there was ideology to be sold, so for every "Amerika" there was some US counter propaganda to sell perceptions of communism/capitalism. No such thing requires to be sold these days, countries operate as swing states and take what they can get from relationships with adversaries like USA and USSR.Ehhh....I'm quite surprised you can't even understand this basic idea of perceptions. US narrative of Russia as an 'evil empire' is as much about how they want the world to perceive them, as it is how they perceive Russia.
This is not anything new. Please read up on the work already done with the Iranian government on theWhat does India have to show for all the "work" on Chabahar? Further, without first securing the land routes through the Khyber, if India does go ahead with building this railway line, we should not at all be surprised if it eventually falls to Jihadis
Don't believe everything you read...mining and iron ore extraction is yet to generate much revenue for the Afghan govt. or its chinese investors...would be glad to look at some actual figures if that is not the case.What is our politico-military strategy protect any Iron ore interests that we choose to develop in Western Afghanistan.
They might not "realize" it, but instinctively, they might be realizing that they might not be able to prop up Pak forever. They will try their best to do it. But they will also be thinking of Plan B if Pak goes down.
one of is certainly being naive. You really have nothing to support your above claim -- the US has continued and will continue to support the Pakistani army, and all these views of pakistan being "cumbersome etc." is just your own imagination, and certainly there is nothing to indicate the US State dept. shares your views. Not by a long shot.Stop being so simplistic. USA will try its best to keep Pak alive for as long as possible. But that doesn't mean that they don't realize that this is increasingly becoming more and more cumbersome, nuisance-ridden, and expensive.
You would have to understand what motivates Indian foreign policy before you can claim to pretend you know what India's interests are, better than those who run Indian institutions. There are plenty of indicators from the news and from the actions of the Indian govt., esp. relating to diplomatic relations with nations in Asia that say otherwise, but you are free to pretend you know better. Pakistan is no longer a priority in India's foreign policy, especially given the rise of a far more powerful and dangerous adversary, China. For example, [url]http://tuoitrenews.vn/politics/27252/vi ... ooperation[/ur] (from the ASEAN thread)Indian Foreign policy is quite stupid because we neither understand what our interests are, nor do we know what they will be in the future.
I am not confused, but you seem be. Check the deterrence thread to understand what I mean -- the pakis are tactically pretending to be on the US's side until the time when they no longer have to. But the US is betting on pakis turning their nuclear weapons away from them, and keep funding them. All this talk of US looking at pakistan as a deadweight etc. is just naive nonsense.. Weren't you just saying that US consider Pak an "ally"? now, you're calling Pak a "mortal enemy" of US. Confusion?
don't know why you are going on about Iron ore, that is not anywhere near the common interests shared by Iran and Afghanisthan. The real problem being solved here is to bypass Pakistan in the transit of goods to Afghanisthan and Central Asia. Using Pakistan for transit is untenable given its hostility to India and its refusal to allow India permission for transiting good to Afghanisthan or any of the CAR nations.My overarching point is this: Iran will have its own ambitions on NW-India. They will have their own vision of "strategic depth" for Afghanistan. This vision will run counter to Indian interests. (edited) In the future, if we get blinded by "profits" of Iron ore mining without realizing that economic benefits can only be secured for long-term if Politico-military dominance is achieved over Af-Pak, we will pay for it dearly.
IranCRamS wrote:Can someone list what Iran gains and Unkil gains out of this deal.
BBC Farsi - 8 Iranian border guards killed in SE Iran by armed attackersIran's official news agency is reporting that the country's powerful Revolutionary Guard has broken up a militant group linked to a "foreign intelligence" agency and killed its members.
The report Monday by IRNA did not identify the terrorist group, nor give any casualty figures. The report said the Guard confiscated a large amount of weapons and communication equipment from the militant group.
It said the raid happened in Iran's southeastern province of Sistan and Baluchistan near the Pakistani border. The area has been scene of occasional clashes between Iranian forces and militants groups believed to be affiliated with al-Qaida.
“We have announced readiness to accept Indian investment in the steel sector and they are planned to start activity in the country,” Iran’s ISNA news agency quoted Iran’s deputy industry minister Mehdi Karbasian as saying on March 24 .
“We are also negotiating with Kazakh companies to invest in our steel, zinc, and aluminum projects,” he added.
Wendy Sherman, has said India and other countries should “not rush” into doing business with Iran as Washington is yet to work out its nuclear deal with Tehran.
“…Every country that remains an importer of Iran’s oil and wants to do business and increase its trade with Iran…hold your horses. We are not quite to an agreement yet. We understand that nobody wants to be last in line; everyone wants to be first in line if the sanctions get relieved. But it will take some time even after an agreement for all the implementation to be worked out,” Ms. Sherman said.
Read more: http://sputniknews.com/politics/2015041 ... z3ZA4EG4V7MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Iran calls for cooperation with Russia, India and China to oppose NATO's plans for military expansion in Europe, the country's Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan said Thursday at a press conference in Moscow.
"We would like to support the idea of developing a multifaceted cooperation between China, Iran, Russia, and India to oppose the purposeful expansion of NATO to the east and placing a missile shield in Europe."
NATO has been boosting its presence in Eastern Europe which has caused concerns from Russian authorities. The process is taking place amid tensions between the alliance and Moscow, following NATO's accusations that Russia was providing Ukraine's southeastern militias with military assistance.
He emphasized that Iran was ready to begin consultations on the issue to secure stability in the region.
Iran and Russia suggest holding a three-way defense meeting with China, the Iranian minister said.
"Three-way talks of the Russian, Chinese and Iranian defense ministers were also suggested [at the meeting]. Both sides expressed their support for the proposal," he said.
Dehghan is in Moscow where he is attending a two-day conference on international security. The meeting has brought together military chiefs from Iran, Pakistan, Armenia, Belarus, Kyrgystan, Tajikistan, Argentina, Indonesia, Serbia, South Africa and its host Russia.
Iranian and Russian defense ministers discussed "mechanisms of cooperation within regional organizations," including between Caspian states, the Iranian official told journalists.
Following a breakthrough deal between Tehran and the world powers, Russia said it looks forward to enhancing cooperation with Iran in various spheres, including the implementation of joint defense, nuclear and energy projects, once the sanctions are lifted.
It also raised the possibility of Iran's full accession into the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which has both Russia and China as members.
India will push ahead this week with plans to build a port in southeast Iran, two sources said, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi keen to develop trade ties with Central Asia and prepared to fend off US pressure not to rush into any deals with Iran.
India and Iran agreed in 2003 to develop a port at Chabahar on the Gulf of Oman, near Iran's border with Pakistan, but the venture has made little progress because of Western sanctions on Iran.
Now, spurred on by Chinese President Xi Jinping's signing of energy and infrastructure agreements with Pakistan worth $46 billion, PM Modi wants to swiftly sign trade deals with Iran and other Gulf countries.
"Shipping Minister Nitin Gadkari will travel on a day-long tour to Iran to sign a memorandum of understanding for development of Chabahar port," a shipping ministry source with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters. The deal will be signed on Wednesday, he said. India's cabinet approved the plan to develop Chabahar port last year.
Encouraged by the prospect of a deal between world powers and Tehran by June 30 on Iran's nuclear programme, after which sanctions could be eased, India recently sent a delegation to Iran to scout for trade, energy and infrastructure deals.
The United States cautioned India and others last week against strengthening ties with Iran ahead of a final agreement. But Indian officials said New Delhi could not ignore its national interest and noted a report that a US energy delegation was visiting Iran.
"We don't want to miss this opportunity and will move as expeditiously as possible," the shipping ministry source said.
India wants to build the port as it would cut transport costs and freight time to Central Asia and the Gulf by about a third.
The port is also central to India's efforts to circumvent Pakistan and open up a route to landlocked Afghanistan where it has developed close security ties and economic interests.
India has already spent about $100 million to construct a 10-mile road in western Afghanistan to link up with Chabahar port.
Last week, PM Modi assured Afghan President Ashraf Ghani of India's commitment to building the port.
Chabahar is just along the coast from Gwadar port in Pakistan that is being developed with China's help, said Robin Mills, head of consulting at Dubai-based Manaar Energy. "So there is a strategic element for the Indian side".
Iranian trade negotiators have become more assertive with Indian counterparts as hopes rise of international sanctions on Tehran easing later this year, sources said, and Indian companies fear they may lose business as more countries bid for projects.
The push back from the Iranians came as a surprise to India, which has enjoyed special dispensation from Tehran as one of only a handful of countries willing to do business with it while it faced Western economic sanctions.
Under a tentative framework agreement reached between six major powers and Tehran in April 2015, Iran agreed to limit its nuclear activity in return for sanctions relief. A final deal could be reached by June 30.
That prospect appears to have emboldened Iran, said sources familiar with trade negotiations with India, including in its handling of a sizeable deal to import railway tracks.
The $233 million contract, signed in October 2014, was for India’s State Trading Corporation (STC) to facilitate exports of rail tracks from SAIL and Jindal Steel and Power to Iran’s railways.
But Iran told Indian negotiators that it had offers from other countries, including Turkey, to supply the equipment at a cheaper cost, the sources said.
Last month, New Delhi sent Commerce Secretary Rajeev Kher to persuade Tehran to adhere to the original terms, but he came back “empty handed”, according to one of the sources.
“They are no longer the same Iranians that came to us last year for signing the deal,” the source said. “They were polite this time, but had an upper hand in the negotiations.”
India has cut the value of the deal by about 7 per cent to $217 million, the sources said. They added that they worry the Iranians may seek further cuts, and could split the order with other countries.
STC chairman Rahim Khaleel declined to comment. Mr. Kher, Iran Rail, SAIL and Jindal Steel did not respond to requests for comment.
It was not immediately clear whether other countries that trade with Iran have seen a similar hardening in Tehran’s stance. Oil refinery sources in Japan said they had not seen any change yet.
‘Wait your turn’
Iran said it wanted to renegotiate the rail contract, because the euro had declined against the dollar and steel and iron ore prices had fallen significantly since the deal was first struck in 2014.
Indian negotiators said price and currency risks were incorporated into the original agreement, but they had to give in, the sources said.
It was a large order for the Indians and the spectre of competition from other suppliers loomed large, they added.
“Earlier they were standing in line to offer us deals,” one source said. Now, they ask the Indians to “wait in line and wait your turn”.
The supply contract is expected to kick off within six months, and, under the renewed terms, India will supply 250,000 tonnes of rails to Iran over 18 months through STC.
The shift in Iran’s stance has also been visible in the vital energy sector.
The National Iranian Oil Company has told Indian refiners, for example, that it would withdraw some of the discounts and free shipping it had been offering them on crude sales to maintain its oil output, oil industry sources said.
The sources added that the state oil firm anticipated ramping up exports once the nuclear deal was finalised, after which there would be many more buyers for its crude.
In 2013, the then Iranian Oil Minister Rostam Qasemi visited India to offer development rights for a gas field on a production sharing basis, after getting special permission from parliament on a deal that would normally contravene Iranian law.
India did not sign the deal for the Farzad B gas field, as international sanctions barred investment in Iran’s hydrocarbon sector, an Iranian diplomat said.
Now, Tehran has withdrawn the offer, according to Iranian media. Iran plans to auction the field instead, one report said.
Julian Borger in Vienna
Tuesday 14 July 2015
A global landmark agreement on the Iranian nuclear programme is expected on Tuesday morning, marking the culmination of 12 years of on-off diplomacy, and potentially the beginning of a new era in relations between Iran and the West.
An announcement on the agreement would come on the 18th day of almost uninterrupted negotiations in Vienna, involving foreign ministers from seven countries and the EU’s foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini.
The ministers – from Iran, the US, UK, Russia, China, France and Germany – are expected to issue a statement and appear for a photo mid-morning, followed some time later by a press conference.
At some point President Obama and his Iranian counterpart, Hassan Rouhani, will make statements from their capitals.
It is not clear how much of the estimated 100 pages of text, including five annexes, will be published on Tuesday. Much of the outline of the agreement is already known, having been provisionally settled in Lausanne in April.
It involves Iran accepting curbs on its nuclear programme in return for sanctions relief, but many of the critical, politically-charged details will only be made public on Tuesday.
In particular, it will become clear whether the arms embargo and missile programme restrictions on Iran will remain in place and at what point the agreement will be codified as a UN security council resolution.
The full agreement, known as the joint comprehensive plan of action, is likely to come under instant and ferocious attack from its opponents – mostly in the US, Iran and Israel – but its defenders portray it as one of the most important arms control accords of modern times and a rare diplomatic success in the Middle East.
On Monday, the Iranian president’s office was forced to delete a premature tweet in his name that appeared to welcome a nuclear agreement which had yet to materialise.
The deleted tweet on the English-language account under president Hassan Rouhani’s name declared: “#IranDeal is the victory of diplomacy & mutual respect over the outdated paradigm of exclusion & coercion. And this is a good beginning.”
Soon after, a new tweet was posted in its place, adding the word ‘if’ at the beginning.
As the Monday evening target came and went, Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, appeared on the balcony of the hotel venue and faced shouted questions from the journalists in the street below.
Asked how he was feeling, Zarif replied: “Sleepy and overworked.” Asked if there would be a deal on Tuesday, he said: “It is possible.”
Once an agreement is announced, it will not take effect for some time: it must first survive a trial by fire from its critics in Washington and Tehran.
The greatest hurdle will be the US Congress, where Republicans have a majority and are expected to vote against the deal after a review period of up to 60 days. They will seek to win over 12 Democrats in an attempt to defeat a presidential veto.
Wiki: the International North South Transport Corridor:Calling TAPI (Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India) project as a significant initiative in relationship between the two countries, PM Modi said possibility of land-sea route through Iran for the pipeline should be explored.
The project was envisaged to take gas from Turkmenistan, which holds the world's fourth-largest natural gas reserves, to India and Pakistan through Afghanistan.
A joint statement termed the TAPI project a "key pillar" of economic engagement between India and Turkmenistan and said both the leaders recognised that its implementation would have a transformational impact on trade.
It said they decided to take measures for early implementation of this important regional project.
The leaders reaffirmed their strong commitment towards timely implementation of this strategic project and noted that the selection of its Consortium Leader, to be finalised by September 1 this year, would mark a crucial step, it said.
PM Modi said also expressed India's readiness for long-term investment in the energy sector in Turkmenistan.
"I convey our interest in long-term investment in the energy sector in Turkmenistan," the Prime Minister said.
PM Modi also emphasised the need for enhancing connectivity, calling it a key aspect of the relationship. He also proposed that Turkmenistan becomes part of International North South Transport Corridor.
The International North–South Transport Corridor is the ship, rail, and road route for moving freight between India, Russia, Iran, Europe and Central Asia. The route primarily involves moving freight from India, Iran, Azerbaijan and Russia via ship, rail and road.[1] The objective of the corridor is to increase trade connectivity between major cities such as Mumbai, Moscow, Tehran, Baku, Bandar Abbas, Astrakhan, Bandar Anzali and etc.[2] Dry runs of two routes were conducted in 2014, the first was Mumbai to Baku via Bandar Abbas and the second was Mumbai to Astrakhan via Bandar Abbas, Tehran and Bandar Anzali. The objective of the study was to identify and address key bottlenecks.[3][4] The results showed transport costs were reduced by "$2,500 per 15 tons of cargo".[5] Other routes under consideration include via Armenia, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan.
RamaY wrote:My tweets on #IranDeal
@RamaY_BRF: #IranDeal means Paki Nuke didnt turn into a Sunni Bomb under pressure. explains recent Saudi-Pak dance.
@RamaY_BRF: #IranDeal means Sunni-Arabs are on their own. Also explains Turky's push into Arab lands thru #ISIS. Turky is EU's Pakistan.
@RamaY_BRF: #IranDeal kills Pakistan's Ummah dreams. Now at best it can be China's Turkey. Idea is to make it SCO's Turkey instead.
@RamaY_BRF: This is the logic behind China's trade corridor.
But India can't & shouldn't pay for this with its rights on POK.
@RamaY_BRF: Right strategy for India is to build capacity to recapture PoK by 2020.
Idev,ldev wrote:IranCRamS wrote:Can someone list what Iran gains and Unkil gains out of this deal.
Lifting of sanctions which means
Ability to trade and export oil freely
To use the SWIFT system
Approximately $100-150 billion in blocked Iranian funds in various banks will be freed and given back to Iran.
Enter into commercial transactions freely with other countries including investments by other countries in the Iranian economy i.e. petrochemicals, automobiles, etc.
Import arms from other countries?? Such as France??
Basically Iran will reenter the global economy.
US + others
Rollback and cap of Iran's nuclear program which means
Number of centrifuges cut back from 19,000 to 6000
Of the current LEU stock of 8 tons, Iran can only retain 300 kgs, the other 7.7 tons must be sold (Maybe India can bid for it and use it in IAEA safeguarded reactors)
IAEA monitoring at as yet unspecified Iranian nuclear sites
What it means is that the US can monitor exactly how far Iran is from producing its first nuclear weapon, at least that is what the US hopes. The Iranian's believe that if the West reneges that they still will be able to produce a weapon without any loss of time vis a vis today's status. That is why they are happy about the deal. There is obviously some incompatibility between these two positions of the US vs Iran.
The tentative life of this deal is 10 years (open to correction). What happens after that? The US believes that it will still be able to control Iranian nuclear progress. But the deal itself is tantamount to recognizing Iran as a threshold nuclear state. And that will always keep KSA and Israel on edge. KSA especially will also want to have the ability to declare itself as an overt nuclear state the moment Iran does at whatever time in the future.
Also lifting the economic sanctions (which supposedly will happen all at once after Iran implements the cutbacks, sale and monitoring regime on its nuclear program, could take 6-12 months) will make Iran stronger economically and hence able to fund/support its ventures in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen more effectively. This is another reason the Saudis/Israel are against this deal.
From a political US viewpoint, this deal allows the US to not get involved in yet another war in the Middle East/overseas, war fatigue has set in the US population i.e. Obama has basically kicked the can down the road. Also a side benefit is that it keeps the Sunni/Shia equation tautly balanced, with the two sides fighting each other via proxies all over the Middle East, Iraq, Syria, Yemen etc. And therefore a much lower propensity hopefully to export terrorism to the West and other parts of the world.
