I find these two sentences conflicting..If we yield for higher price, We are following TSP/UK. If we don't yield and follow our own interest, it is China [kinda] way..g.sarkar wrote:we should emulate China in this matter, and not smaller nations such as UK or Pakistan. If we must yield for the greater good, then a high price must be demanded.
Gautam
Opposition to the Indo-US nuclear cooperation agreement
if nixon was president of america now, cohen would have been his number one <whatever!>.
i wish some op-ed article completly brandish this guy, and make him a la paki. a little gene therapy would make him look one too [hello cia ?].
btw, if congress fails to authorize indo-us nuclear co-operation, then does it automatically mean other nsg nations should follow suit? all we need is few friends.
having technology does not mean, having relationships. we have to be doubly careful in extravagant relationships with new found nice looking people.
i wish some op-ed article completly brandish this guy, and make him a la paki. a little gene therapy would make him look one too [hello cia ?].
btw, if congress fails to authorize indo-us nuclear co-operation, then does it automatically mean other nsg nations should follow suit? all we need is few friends.
having technology does not mean, having relationships. we have to be doubly careful in extravagant relationships with new found nice looking people.
g.sarkar,
What have we yielded on exactly? A symbolic vote which would not have changed the outcome?
Also, you speak about short term gains. The Indo-US agreement is not a short term gain, and what is more important, it is in an area of crucial importance for India's economic growth-energy. Without enough energy, one can say goodbye to India's growth and ambitions.
The Iranians don't do us any favours when we buy oil and gas from them. We pay for everything we get from them, and they will sell it to us irrespective of a vote in the IAEA because they need our money. When it comes to Afghanistan, our strategic interests and theirs coincide which is why they offer us access to Afghanistan. As far as basing rights for aircraft go, I don't know how true it is that they have given us such rights.
Look at it this way-the Iranian president made India's position on the vote untenable and forced its hand by his talk of selling nuclear weapons technology. It must be made clear to Iran that India cannot support such ideas. Furthermore, all that India has done is cast a pointless vote to pass on the decision making to the UNSC where everyone knows both China and Russia will veto any anti Iran sanctions. This is one of the nice things of not being on the UNSC-one can maintain an equivocal stand. By doing so, it has signalled that while India generally supports Iran, it does not support any Iranian idea of proliferation, and maintained consistency.
AJay,
India is becoming one of the world's big energy and economic markets. The Indo-US agreement is good for the business sector in civilian nuclear power as well as other defence industry in the US and elsewhere in the Western world. This is a point of leverage and the US knows it. Furthermore, denial of access to nuclear fuel by the US would mean that India would have to consider other avenues, which may not be palatable to the US. At least this is the way I see it.
What have we yielded on exactly? A symbolic vote which would not have changed the outcome?
Also, you speak about short term gains. The Indo-US agreement is not a short term gain, and what is more important, it is in an area of crucial importance for India's economic growth-energy. Without enough energy, one can say goodbye to India's growth and ambitions.
The Iranians don't do us any favours when we buy oil and gas from them. We pay for everything we get from them, and they will sell it to us irrespective of a vote in the IAEA because they need our money. When it comes to Afghanistan, our strategic interests and theirs coincide which is why they offer us access to Afghanistan. As far as basing rights for aircraft go, I don't know how true it is that they have given us such rights.
Look at it this way-the Iranian president made India's position on the vote untenable and forced its hand by his talk of selling nuclear weapons technology. It must be made clear to Iran that India cannot support such ideas. Furthermore, all that India has done is cast a pointless vote to pass on the decision making to the UNSC where everyone knows both China and Russia will veto any anti Iran sanctions. This is one of the nice things of not being on the UNSC-one can maintain an equivocal stand. By doing so, it has signalled that while India generally supports Iran, it does not support any Iranian idea of proliferation, and maintained consistency.
AJay,
India is becoming one of the world's big energy and economic markets. The Indo-US agreement is good for the business sector in civilian nuclear power as well as other defence industry in the US and elsewhere in the Western world. This is a point of leverage and the US knows it. Furthermore, denial of access to nuclear fuel by the US would mean that India would have to consider other avenues, which may not be palatable to the US. At least this is the way I see it.
India just needs one NSG member states to do business(break the voluntary, self-imposed, guideline...remember not breaking any treaty or legal obligation, just a guideline...or fudging technicality) boldly with us.
I feel we squandered that when we did not utilise our IA-Air-Bus/Scorpene deal with France.
Before(so we were told in the past), France and Russia would show love for our nuclear program, but were reluctant, because of Unkil's pressure( that's how they used to convey us), that's was their excuse was in reality.
Even-though we "softened" unkil, in a written agreement, they(excusers) are now wanting NSG to authorise with a consensus...as per NSG tradition(Now, China, is a new member of the NSG consensus Club).
India(Dr. MMS met Chirac, he wont budge, fresh from hospital, very symbolic and promising though, wont commit. Ditto with Putin in NYC, @ UN-sidelines)
That has prompted TSP to approach NSG direct without signing with unkil, so when NSG decides "consensus" for india, it will have to accomodate TSP, on Chincom's insistence, thats consensus.
Britain has signalled positively for N-Co-op with TSP, and they will act as facilitators at NSG...that's their style since '47. They are loath what Dubya did in few hours, which they claim(rightly or not) disturbing their Geo-politic thinking, for their erst-while colonial back-yard(Commonwealth).
Similarity with recent membership of SCO.
Russia sponsered us, China sponsered TSP. Both were accomodated as new members.
Zero-sum game will be always played out.
Anyone getting hint?
I feel we squandered that when we did not utilise our IA-Air-Bus/Scorpene deal with France.
Before(so we were told in the past), France and Russia would show love for our nuclear program, but were reluctant, because of Unkil's pressure( that's how they used to convey us), that's was their excuse was in reality.
Even-though we "softened" unkil, in a written agreement, they(excusers) are now wanting NSG to authorise with a consensus...as per NSG tradition(Now, China, is a new member of the NSG consensus Club).
India(Dr. MMS met Chirac, he wont budge, fresh from hospital, very symbolic and promising though, wont commit. Ditto with Putin in NYC, @ UN-sidelines)
That has prompted TSP to approach NSG direct without signing with unkil, so when NSG decides "consensus" for india, it will have to accomodate TSP, on Chincom's insistence, thats consensus.
Britain has signalled positively for N-Co-op with TSP, and they will act as facilitators at NSG...that's their style since '47. They are loath what Dubya did in few hours, which they claim(rightly or not) disturbing their Geo-politic thinking, for their erst-while colonial back-yard(Commonwealth).
Similarity with recent membership of SCO.
Russia sponsered us, China sponsered TSP. Both were accomodated as new members.
Zero-sum game will be always played out.
Anyone getting hint?
Last edited by Jaikissan on 08 Oct 2005 07:56, edited 1 time in total.
IMO, there is a larger strategy of energy security at play here ...
If Indo-US collaboration in nuke is established, that is the best ... if not, and India has to fall back on greater dependence on oil, then a stable Iraq may become a better source than Iran ...
so, watch out for the entire playlist ... depending on how things play out with US Congress and with IRAN in UNSC etc etc, there may be a return to the play of Indian troops in Iraq ...
If I were looking for a Chankian ploy out of Bush/Rice, I would be tempted to say that they may be playing to put India in a corner by screwing up both Nuke deal and Iran oil/gas deal to the point that they can say, "Hey, if India needs oil very badly, why not come to Iraq and provide security for the Oil operations there?"
If Indo-US collaboration in nuke is established, that is the best ... if not, and India has to fall back on greater dependence on oil, then a stable Iraq may become a better source than Iran ...
so, watch out for the entire playlist ... depending on how things play out with US Congress and with IRAN in UNSC etc etc, there may be a return to the play of Indian troops in Iraq ...
If I were looking for a Chankian ploy out of Bush/Rice, I would be tempted to say that they may be playing to put India in a corner by screwing up both Nuke deal and Iran oil/gas deal to the point that they can say, "Hey, if India needs oil very badly, why not come to Iraq and provide security for the Oil operations there?"
Alok_N, Condy is in love with India. Thats the feeling i was told by big contributors to RNC.Alok_N wrote:IMO, there is a larger strategy of energy security at play here ...
If Indo-US collaboration in nuke is established, that is the best ... so, watch out for the entire playlist ... depending on how things play out with US Congress and with IRAN in UNSC etc etc, there may be a return to the play of Indian troops in Iraq ...
If I were looking for a Chankian ploy out of Bush/Rice, I would be tempted to say that they may be playing to put India in a corner by screwing up both Nuke deal and Iran oil/gas deal to the point that they can say, "Hey, if India needs oil very badly, why not come to Iraq and provide security for the Oil operations there?"
She has Changed old-time players in Foggy-Bottom, who shares her views( in line with Dubya), and no restrains from Gen. Powell(as before), who loved his Mil. Buddy in TSP.
Unlike Madeline Allbright, whose dad Joseph Korbell was the first UN appointed observer for J&K in '47-52 period, appointed by UNSC, and a very sympathetic Paki.
I was in a donor meeting, during Clinton-era, and, the Chairman, Benjamin Ben Gilman(R), House International Comm. was ignorant about this fact. he admitted to that fact. He even returned my donation check( I still, cherish his cover letter).
Eventhough, ironically Condy was a student @Colorado Univ., where Joe korbell was her teacher & mentor, she has an independent streak.
thank you jaikissan. I am not sure I understand this:
or, is it saty?
as I had explained to you earlier, we are all equipped with mekala-radars ... mine's making some mild chirping noises ...Jaikissan wrote: Despite my login name, and very little background to brag, i am inclined to share some of my past shared moments with you.
or, is it saty?
Alok_NAlok_N wrote:as I had explained to you earlier, we are all equipped with mekala-radars ... mine's making some mild chirping noises ...
or, is it saty?
The style is unlike either of them. Always possible for one to affect an internet persona for s hort time, but in the long run the real persona
will become apparent.
or, is it saty?
Lots of "been there, done all, got her T-shirt"
I-am-a-grizzled-grizzled-veteran types running around trying to peddle their agendas these days. Should see that Red Menace thread now..... looks like the ghosts of Sen. Mc Carthy and Rev.Torquemada p00ped all over it.
I fear we shall be the first ones to be lined up against the wall when the counter-revolution comes, my dear SDRE Comrades.
Gudakesa wrote:
g.sarkar,
"What have we yielded on exactly? A symbolic vote which would not have changed the outcome?"
Iran is only marginally important to India. Perhaps Iran can play a role in the field of how we can screw Pakistan. But in the larger scheme of what India will become, Iran is just a side show. What we have yielded is the perception that we can be easily pressured to subordinate our policy at the whim of the US. There was a give and take on the agreement with the US, and President Bush agreed to this deal. Now to say today: you have to vote this way or the agreement will not pass in the Congress, tomorrow vote that way to show that we are friends is not correct. US must not form a habit of getting further concessions on other unrelated fields by bringing up the same old agreement. Furthermore, any horse trading should be done privately, and not through Senators and Congressmen. Before agreeing to vote against Iran, we should have bargained with an iron will for some concession from the US. If India lets the current way of doing things to be the rule in our dealings with the US, then we will compromise more and more. The fact is that the US IS the 8000 pound gorilla, and India is the weaker partner, so we have to take a long term view of the situation or we might end up paying more than we can afford.
Gautam
g.sarkar,
"What have we yielded on exactly? A symbolic vote which would not have changed the outcome?"
Iran is only marginally important to India. Perhaps Iran can play a role in the field of how we can screw Pakistan. But in the larger scheme of what India will become, Iran is just a side show. What we have yielded is the perception that we can be easily pressured to subordinate our policy at the whim of the US. There was a give and take on the agreement with the US, and President Bush agreed to this deal. Now to say today: you have to vote this way or the agreement will not pass in the Congress, tomorrow vote that way to show that we are friends is not correct. US must not form a habit of getting further concessions on other unrelated fields by bringing up the same old agreement. Furthermore, any horse trading should be done privately, and not through Senators and Congressmen. Before agreeing to vote against Iran, we should have bargained with an iron will for some concession from the US. If India lets the current way of doing things to be the rule in our dealings with the US, then we will compromise more and more. The fact is that the US IS the 8000 pound gorilla, and India is the weaker partner, so we have to take a long term view of the situation or we might end up paying more than we can afford.
Gautam
India recognises need to woo US Democrats
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/arti ... 260256.cms
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/arti ... 260256.cms
Venable LLP, the second lobbyist firm that India has decided to hire in the US to push its case in Capitol Hill and the Beltway, has among its ranks Robert Garcia, one of the better known Hispanic American Democrat leaders.
GKGudakesa wrote:The Indo-US agreement is good for the business sector in civilian nuclear power as well as other defence industry in the US and elsewhere in the Western world.
I grant you that.
That said, the leverage US has on India is far greater than the leverage India has on US just because Indian response usually would be along rational lines when things worsen. IOW, India would not become irrational and go berserk a la N. Korea even if her energy suplies are constrained by US or NSG at the instigation of US. The scenarios painted by Sunil are of low probability. I am sure these scenarios, in one form or other, would have figured in US gaming and would have been given low weightage which would translate into lowered Indian leverage.
What would change the situation is a couple of acts by India to show that India can act irrationally when push comes to a shove. Then every body would back off. For example, as soon as the dust settles in Kashmir, India starts bombarding the terrorsist campls in POK on the slightest pretext (or even a manufactured one) would be such an irrational act. Of course, the powers that be in India might be constrained by some other problems.
Perkovich, Teresita Scheffer, Arunachalam, and Robert Galucci are talking on CSPAN about Indo US nuke agreement.
Schaeffer has come out on the the agreementand has refuted Perkovich's agreement that US does not need to acknowledge India's absention of nuclear exports as all countries are bound to do this under UN law.
Schaeffer has come out on the the agreementand has refuted Perkovich's agreement that US does not need to acknowledge India's absention of nuclear exports as all countries are bound to do this under UN law.
Arunachalam is giving a mooh-thod jawab to a lifafa type desi who supported Perkovich by belittling the Indian scientific community's contribution to India's development, also brought Gandhi into picture by saying science without humanity is a crime, and India's 127th position in HD indices. Thsi bchod also said 70% of India's people live in the villages and nothing is being done to improve their position.
Arunachalam said one needs to look at the calorific intake increase in just the last 10 years to see India's progress. Also gave a back handed compliement to the Gaddhar desi by referring to Indians tendencies to argue endlessly. wound up his answer by saying the villagers do not care about neutrons and plutonium and only worry about the power for their motors. and yes, the power for their motors is not made available completely as of now and India is focussing on solving this problem.
One more guy on the panel is Prakash Ambegaokar - Bridging nations CEO.
Arunachalam said one needs to look at the calorific intake increase in just the last 10 years to see India's progress. Also gave a back handed compliement to the Gaddhar desi by referring to Indians tendencies to argue endlessly. wound up his answer by saying the villagers do not care about neutrons and plutonium and only worry about the power for their motors. and yes, the power for their motors is not made available completely as of now and India is focussing on solving this problem.
One more guy on the panel is Prakash Ambegaokar - Bridging nations CEO.
I tried hard but cant find the Forum program in its archive.
Neither did it rebroadcast on CSPAN channeles later. I know Ramana was going to check for cable rebroadcast and tape it. Not sure if the program was broadcast again.
BTW I watched the live program on Internet. It had video feed as well as pure audio feed too. I cant figure out its archive system for Audio feeds. Will keep searching. This the url to its web site http://www.cspan.org/homepage.asp
Added later: OK here is how
U.S.-India Civilian Nuclear Cooperation
Product ID: 189303-1
Format: Forum
Event Date: October 12, 2005
Location: Washington, District of Columbia
Last Aired: October 13, 2005
Length: 2 hours
Media Format: DVD or VHS
Was aired at 4:30 - 6:30 PM Eastern time.
$60 for the video. Anyone willing to split it with me? More the better.
Neither did it rebroadcast on CSPAN channeles later. I know Ramana was going to check for cable rebroadcast and tape it. Not sure if the program was broadcast again.
BTW I watched the live program on Internet. It had video feed as well as pure audio feed too. I cant figure out its archive system for Audio feeds. Will keep searching. This the url to its web site http://www.cspan.org/homepage.asp
Added later: OK here is how
U.S.-India Civilian Nuclear Cooperation
Product ID: 189303-1
Format: Forum
Event Date: October 12, 2005
Location: Washington, District of Columbia
Last Aired: October 13, 2005
Length: 2 hours
Media Format: DVD or VHS
Was aired at 4:30 - 6:30 PM Eastern time.
$60 for the video. Anyone willing to split it with me? More the better.
Here is the link to the video on C-span in RealMedia Format [Real Player].
[url=rtsp://video.c-span.org/15days/e101205_india.rm]Panel Discussion on U.S.-Indian Nuclear Cooperation[/url]
Georgetown University School of Foreign Service Dean Robert Gallucci moderates a panel discussion on cooperation between the U.S. and India on civilian nuclear programs. The participants will review the July 18th agreement between Pres. Bush and P.M. Singh on achieving full cooperation in this area.
[url=rtsp://video.c-span.org/15days/e101205_india.rm]Panel Discussion on U.S.-Indian Nuclear Cooperation[/url]
Georgetown University School of Foreign Service Dean Robert Gallucci moderates a panel discussion on cooperation between the U.S. and India on civilian nuclear programs. The participants will review the July 18th agreement between Pres. Bush and P.M. Singh on achieving full cooperation in this area.
Hmmm...
One of the panel speakers Joan Rohlfing Sr VI - Nuclear Threat Initiative, stated very explicitly that she would support the supply for fuel and nuclear power equipment to India so that it would stymie India's quest for the Fast Breeder reactors using Thorium (as the by products are Pu and U 232).
My hats off to our Desi planners - go the fast breeder reactors!!!
One of the panel speakers Joan Rohlfing Sr VI - Nuclear Threat Initiative, stated very explicitly that she would support the supply for fuel and nuclear power equipment to India so that it would stymie India's quest for the Fast Breeder reactors using Thorium (as the by products are Pu and U 232).
My hats off to our Desi planners - go the fast breeder reactors!!!
I am capturing it, I can email to anyone who wants to host, it will take about 2 hrsArun_S wrote:I tried hard but cant find the Forum program in its archive.
Neither did it rebroadcast on CSPAN channeles later. I know Ramana was going to check for cable rebroadcast and tape it. Not sure if the program was broadcast again.
BTW I watched the live program on Internet. It had video feed as well as pure audio feed too. I cant figure out its archive system for Audio feeds. Will keep searching. This the url to its web site http://www.cspan.org/homepage.asp
Added later: OK here is how
U.S.-India Civilian Nuclear Cooperation
Product ID: 189303-1
Format: Forum
Event Date: October 12, 2005
Location: Washington, District of Columbia
Last Aired: October 13, 2005
Length: 2 hours
Media Format: DVD or VHS
Was aired at 4:30 - 6:30 PM Eastern time.
$60 for the video. Anyone willing to split it with me? More the better.
Some points that I observed from the event:
1. US NPAs are keen on stifling Indias FBR and Advanced fission reactor programs under the guise of preventing more fissile material production
2. Indian nuclear establishment has so far been inaccessible to NPAs, so some are supporting elements of this deal to gain toehold into Indian nuclear bureaucracy, perhaps with the aim to eventually establishing back channels to influence Indian nuclear policies.
3. The old school "South Asia" group in Washington, Teresita Schaffer, Karl Inderfurth, Dennis Kux etc. have come out in favor of this deal. Cohen is likely to join this group.
4. The NPAs are clutching at straws and are mostly resigned to letting this deal go through
5. GoI has so far played all its cards just right.
1. US NPAs are keen on stifling Indias FBR and Advanced fission reactor programs under the guise of preventing more fissile material production
2. Indian nuclear establishment has so far been inaccessible to NPAs, so some are supporting elements of this deal to gain toehold into Indian nuclear bureaucracy, perhaps with the aim to eventually establishing back channels to influence Indian nuclear policies.
3. The old school "South Asia" group in Washington, Teresita Schaffer, Karl Inderfurth, Dennis Kux etc. have come out in favor of this deal. Cohen is likely to join this group.
4. The NPAs are clutching at straws and are mostly resigned to letting this deal go through
5. GoI has so far played all its cards just right.
Some Indians like to present themselves as enlightened to the gora club by bad mouthing other Indians and showing how poor India is, etc. These same Indians also love the sound of their own voice and can't get enough of it. That's why even when asking a simple question or making a straightforward point, they will go on and on in tangents, like this guy talking about Gandhism, 70% poor, etc. This guy sounds so much like so many other Indian people I have met in various cultural and professional foras.
Guys, you can use megaupload.com to upload the file for free (up to 250 mb!) And people can download the file.
It downloads relatively fast (I avg about 6 kbps) compared to other free file hosting websites. And I do not believe there is a limit to the # times it can be downloaded
It downloads relatively fast (I avg about 6 kbps) compared to other free file hosting websites. And I do not believe there is a limit to the # times it can be downloaded
http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/oct/13az ... &file=.htm
Now the blunder our UPA friends did was not to read the english. voting against does not mean you can't abstain!!!!???making clear that if India voted against the US and European Union on their move to censure Iran, Congress would likely not approve the US-India nuclear agreement.
Even Perkovich wants the deal to come through but with the condition that India stop production of fissile material. He probably thinks it is too late to go back as failing would lead to Indo-US relations nose diving. They are hoping that deal falls through due to indian intransigence rather than US congress rejecting it. the hindu is burning midnight oil to make this happen on the indian side. IMO the US congress/senate vote is a red herring, we should watch the Indian left's moves on this very closely.Rangudu wrote:
Some points that I observed from the event:
1. US NPAs are keen on stifling Indias FBR and Advanced fission reactor programs under the guise of preventing more fissile material production
2. Indian nuclear establishment has so far been inaccessible to NPAs, so some are supporting elements of this deal to gain toehold into Indian nuclear bureaucracy, perhaps with the aim to eventually establishing back channels to influence Indian nuclear policies.
3. The old school "South Asia" group in Washington, Teresita Schaffer, Karl Inderfurth, Dennis Kux etc. have come out in favor of this deal. Cohen is likely to join this group.
4. The NPAs are clutching at straws and are mostly resigned to letting this deal go through
5. GoI has so far played all its cards just right.
Also cannot rule out the possibility of Schaeffer/Perkovich playing good cop bad cop routine.
Iran doesn't have to take India's concerns into account. India needs Iran a hell of a lot more than vice versa. India imports 75% of its oil. Where is this oil going to come from ? Straight from the planet Uranus?Rye wrote:Iran needs to stop taking India's support for granted, especially since they do not care much for India's concerns. Besides, the real vote is still a month or more away.
Your statements are very offensive. India needs a good reliable source of black gold, and if the US threatens a source of supply, better to do without the US. There is no alternative for Iranian oil and gas available to India. Until you understand the magnitude of how much oil India will need, I suggest keeping your opinion to yourself. India doesn't need USA. But it does need a reliable supply of energy. The US cannot provide this for India now or in any conceivable future. It cannot even provide enough oil for itself.
Rien wrote:
Who are they going sell to? the uranusians? Besides, what happens if there are UN sanctions, as there will be if they go down a path of confrontation? What is the value of the Iranian contracts when that happens?
Do we foreclose the option of potentially getting nuclear fuel from elsewhere because of the option of potentially getting oil from Iran, and signing contracts with Iran that may or may not be worth paper they are written on, due to Iran's troubles with other countries?
That's your opinion. Everything works on a quid pro quo basis, and if Iran wants to discomfort Israel more than listen to India concerns about forcing the NPT on all countries, well, India has to take a similar approach to Iran's concerns. Self-defeating policies based on pant-browning is not the answer.Iran doesn't have to take India's concerns into account.
Greasing up and bending over to Iran and stabbing ourselves in the foot by closing our other energy options is not the answer.India needs Iran a hell of a lot more than vice versa. India imports 75% of its oil. Where is this oil going to come from ? Straight from the planet Uranus?
Who are they going sell to? the uranusians? Besides, what happens if there are UN sanctions, as there will be if they go down a path of confrontation? What is the value of the Iranian contracts when that happens?
Do we foreclose the option of potentially getting nuclear fuel from elsewhere because of the option of potentially getting oil from Iran, and signing contracts with Iran that may or may not be worth paper they are written on, due to Iran's troubles with other countries?
Last edited by Rye on 14 Oct 2005 20:40, edited 1 time in total.
Rien wrote:
India needs energy, whether it is nuclear energy, black, brown, or green gold is secondary. If the US threatens India's oil supply without offering other options to India, then your views would be valid, but that is not the case yet.
Besides, if you think that a pipeline from Iran through Pakistan is going to give India energy security, you need to do some more thinking because that is just horse manure, and stands in the face of all evidence to the contrary, especially given pakistan's overall policy towards India. Again greasing up and bending over to Iran is not the answer. IF they want to do business with India, that is good, but since they have already decided that their foreign policy is going to be decided by their concerns, India needs to do the same -- anything less would be irresponsible.
Rien wrote:
Well, if you are offended, that is your problem, deal with it.Your statements are very offensive. India needs a good reliable source of black gold, and if the US threatens a source of supply, better to do without the US.
India needs energy, whether it is nuclear energy, black, brown, or green gold is secondary. If the US threatens India's oil supply without offering other options to India, then your views would be valid, but that is not the case yet.
Besides, if you think that a pipeline from Iran through Pakistan is going to give India energy security, you need to do some more thinking because that is just horse manure, and stands in the face of all evidence to the contrary, especially given pakistan's overall policy towards India. Again greasing up and bending over to Iran is not the answer. IF they want to do business with India, that is good, but since they have already decided that their foreign policy is going to be decided by their concerns, India needs to do the same -- anything less would be irresponsible.
Rien wrote:
India needs energy, not oil -- get that straight, specifically a secure long-term supply of energy, as you say so yourself. Also, if Iran is willing offer oil at a bargain to India, then I would lean towards going with Iran, but that is not the case, unless you have any sources that you have read which state otherwise -- India is not getting a bargain.Until you understand the magnitude of how much oil India will need, I suggest keeping your opinion to yourself. India doesn't need USA.
That is your opinion -- there are likely futures in which the US can open the door to the NSG, and that is nothing to sneeze at.But it does need a reliable supply of energy. The US cannot provide this for India now or in any conceivable future.
Huh? Care to elaborate?It cannot even provide enough oil for itself.