Eye On India

[indian_blues]

Damn when they are going to come for an settlement... its been dragging for long time. first we weren't sure abt pakistan commitment then it was crossed when pakistan too wanted gas, then it was americans and now price problem. I think this is the right time to sort out the differences. I feel it would be a good starting point for the Indo-Iranian economic partnership.

[donsaeid]

but the thing is now that iran wants to punish india because of their yes to senctions and sending the iranian issue from iaea to un! try to see a more bigger perspective

[indian_blues]

lol maybe.

this is a multi billion dollar agreement a big business, it would be a tragedy for two parties if it fails. Iran would consider it a big win if the agreement is sealed bcoz US wants to isolate the country and they never wanted India to do business with them. It would be a Win-Win strategy for both parties and i think this is a mere price bargain.

[indian_blues]

Indo Iran Relations and News

Military Intelligence, IB send teams to interrogate two Iranians

RAMANATHAPURAM: The Military Intelligence (MI) and Intelligence Bureau (IB) have sent expert teams to interrogate two Iranians, who clandestinely arrived here from Sri Lanka last week.

While the MI was represented by Colonel, Mayan George, the IB was represented by Asim Alam, a Persian expert from New Delhi.

The Iranians — Aziz Ullah Kushnishin (75) son of Izzadullah and Mohamud Hussain Zadar 58 son of Mohamud Jalal — landed at Arichamunai on Thursday along with a group of 12 refugees from Sri Lanka.

They initially told the intelligence agencies that after reaching India through the Pakistan border by illegal means, they stayed in a few cities in Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, Maharashtra and others. They said they went to Sri Lanka through an illegal boat journey from Rameswaram for their treatment. However, they retracted their statements later.

Accompanied by the local officials, IB and MI officials conducted a daylong enquiry with Aziz Ullah Kushnishin on Sunday at Rameswaram.

Highly placed sources told The Hindu that the Iranians had claimed that they belonged to ‘Jihad Feef Sabiphullah,’ a banned religious hardcore party in Iran. Mr. Kushnishin was one of the leaders of the party. Since their opponents “killed” some of their prominent leaders, they fled Iran, fearing for their life.

The interrogation had, so far, revealed that accompanied by two more Iranians, Shanaz Vezari 28 and Mohamed Ali Jedda (40), they spent several months in cities such as Colombo, Kalpitia, Mannar in Sri Lanka. It was not clear whether they had any connection with the LTTE during their stay in Sri Lanka.

Mr. Kushnishin claimed that they took shelter in Sri Lanka for a “peaceful life” and to get treatment for his ailing health.

However, the officials said a clear picture would emerge only after a thorough investigation of their claims, as they gave different versions to their illegal arrival to India.

Source: http://www.hindu.com/2008/04/07/stor...0758810900.htm

[indian_blues]

India to partner Iran on Russia rail link

DUBAI: India and Iran have signed an agreement that would help establish a new rail link between Iran and Russia.

According to the Iranian daily Tehran Times, the agreement implies greater cooperation with the International Union of Railways — the global body involved in establishing trans-national rail linkages.

The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed by the Indian Railway Board Chairman, K.C. Jena, and Hassan Ziari, the managing director of Iran’s Railway Company. The MoU addresses issues such as technical training of the personnel, railroad signalling projects as well as the supply of locomotives and spare parts.

Analysts say a rail link between Iran and Russia can be seen as an elaboration of the North-South corridor, which begins with Indian ports such as Mumbai on the Arabian Sea.

Ships then head towards Bandar Abbas in Iran on the Persian Gulf. From there, cargo is moved to the Iranian ports of Bandar Anzali and Amirabad on the Caspian Sea.

The final leg of the route begins from Astrakhan on the Russian side of the Caspian and reaches Moscow and St. Petersburg across the Volga corridor.

The MoU envisages the construction of a new track, which will connect the Iran’s strategic port of Chabahar with the city of Fahrej in Central Iran. It will complement the proposed road link between Chabahar and Afghanistan.

This corridor can become a gateway for trade with Central Asia, in case it can hook up with Afghanistan’s proposed garland road system, which envisages the construction of a web of inter-locking roads throughout Afghanistan.

[indian_blues]

Ahmadinejad to visit India

New Delhi: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will pay his first visit to India on April 29, National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan said here on Sunday.

Though Mr. Ahmadinejad will be in New Delhi only for a few hours — he will essentially be stopping on his way back to Tehran after a two-day official visit to Sri Lanka — he will meet President Pratibha Devisingh Patil and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Among the bilateral issues to be discussed are the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline, the technical negotiations for which have almost concluded, and India’s desire to execute a contract for the import of LNG (liquefied natural gas) that was struck three years ago but never implemented as the price of oil rose dramatically soon after.

Mr. Narayanan announced the visit while answering a question on India’s Iran policy at the IISS-Citi India Global Forum.

“There is a great deal happening between India and Iran which is not in the public realm; what we have avoided is getting involved in any conflict diplomacy,” the NSA said when asked whether the big powers were taking India for granted by excluding it from their efforts to find a negotiated solution to the nuclear standoff with Tehran.

“We are not involved in the P5+1 and we don’t wish to be,” he said, referring to the group of five permanent United Nations Security Council members and Germany. India, he added, would never thrust itself into any process. At the same time, India did not believe that the only dialogue should be between the P5+1 and Iran. “We have capabilities and capacities. We believe that we understand Iran better.”

[indian_blues]

New Delhi: National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan said here on Sunday that “India and Iran have civilisational and economic ties.” India’s sizeable Shia population gave a certain vantage point to engage with Iran.

“Iran is a big country and you need to deal with them diplomatically and with erudition.” As a neighbour and with a large Shia population, “any mishandling will impact negatively on us,” he said.

He was speaking at the IISS-Citi India Global Forum here.According to Iranian diplomatic sources, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during his visit to India on April 29 will spend seven hours in New Delhi.

During his visit to Sri Lanka, he will lay the foundation stone for a 100-MW hydropower project to be built with Tehran’s financial assistance. Prior to arriving in Colombo, the Iranian President will visit Islamabad for talks with President Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gillani.

The last time an Iranian head of state visited India was in 2003 when Mohammad Khatami was chief guest at the Republic Day parade that year.
Binary choice

In his address to the IISS-Citi forum, the former U.S. Ambassador to India, Robert Blackwill, acknowledged that Iran had the potential to be a divisive issue in Indo-U.S. relations in the second half of 2009 as the next administration moved to mount pressure on Tehran over its nuclear energy programme.

“It is my impression that although India very much wants Iran not to acquire nuclear weapons, if it faces a binary choice of either that or an American military attack on Iran it would choose to try to deal with a nuclear Iran, without the attack,” said Mr. Blackwill. “But [that] is not the view that is now dominant in Washington.”

On Friday, Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon criticised the idea that the U.S. and its allies could find a solution to the Iran issue without talking to Tehran.

“Ultimately, you need to have in place a system in which Iran is a party to whatever you agree on her own programme. Otherwise, whatever you do, any of the alternatives or the other options — sanctions, military action — none of them is a lasting solution. In fact, it is only likely to exacerbate the problem,” he said in reply to a question by a French parliamentarian at the IISS forum.

[indian_blues]

India rejects U.S. advice on Iran

NEW DELHI: India has rejected the United States’ advice on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s brief visit to New Delhi on April 29.

Reacting strongly to State Department Deputy Spokesman Tom Casey’s observations in Washington on Tuesday, the spokesman of the Ministry of External Affairs said India could do without any guidance in the matter.

Refuting the official American presumption to advise New Delhi, the spokesman said : “It is important that the genius of each nation living in a particular region is respected and allowed to flower to meet the expectations of enriching relations with neighbours.”

Mr. Casey said Washington wanted India to talk tough with Iran during Mr. Ahmadinejad’s visit, hoping it would ask Tehran to suspend its uranium enrichment activities in line with the U.N. Security Council’s demands.

“Washington would also encourage New Delhi to ask Iran to “become a more responsible actor on the world stage” by ending its “rather unhelpful activities” regarding Iraq and support for terrorism, Mr. Casey told reporters. He, however, said it was up to India to decide how to manage its bilateral ties with Iran.

The spokesman said:

“Both nations are perfectly capable of managing all aspects of their relationship with the appropriate degree of care and attention. The situation in the region has always drawn the attention of both the nations and it can be seen perfectly well that these have been managed through continuous dialogue and exchange of delegations at various levels.

“Neither country needs any guidance on the future conduct of bilateral relations as both countries believe that engagement and dialogue alone lead to peace.”

[indian_blues]

Ready to sign gas pipeline project, say Iran, Pakistan

Inclusion of China

in the project

discussed

“Pipeline will promote peace and friendship”

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan and Iran are of the view that all outstanding issues relating to the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline have been resolved and a final agreement on the project can now be signed, Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said after a meeting between President Pervez Musharraf and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday.

The two leaders also discussed the inclusion of China in the project, and the Iranian leader “welcomed” President Musharraf’s proposal that China could join the project, a Foreign Ministry release said.

Mr. Ahmadinejad was in the Pakistan capital for a brief official stopover en route to Sri Lanka, after which he is due in New Delhi. He also met Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gillani.

The Foreign Ministry said both Presidents decided that the agreement on over the IPI gas pipeline project would be signed soon. According to the Ministry’s release, Prime Minister Gillani, in his meeting with President Ahmadinejad, emphasised that the signing of the agreement would add a new dynamic to cooperation between Pakistan and Iran in the energy sector.

“It was agreed that the Foreign Ministers of the two countries would meet soon to discuss and fix dates for its signing,” the release stated.

Tehran will also supply 1100 MW to Pakistan to mitigate an acute power shortage which has led to unprecedented loadshedding in all parts of the country, including the privileged capital city.

President Musharraf and Mr Ahmadinejad in their hour-long talks discussed the pipeline project, bilateral issues, the situation in Afghanistan and other issues faced by the region, the official release said.

“The good thing that came out of the meeting is that both sides reiterated that the gas pipeline will promote peace and friendship between the two countries,” Mr. Qureshi told reporters later.

“They recognised that all outstanding issues have been resolved and the Iranian President will soon invite the Pakistan President to Tehran where an agreement will be signed,” he said.

The Foreign Minister said Iran gave a positive response to the Pakistani proposal for allowing a gas pipeline through its territory to provide gas to China, along the historic Karakoram Highway.

The Iranian President said his country would provide 1100 MW to Pakistan. Iran at present provides 35 MW to areas in Pakistan near the shared border.
Economic ties

Pakistan and Iran also agreed to improve their economic ties in order to take their bilateral trade to the $1-billion mark

Mr. Qureshi reiterated Pakistan’s position that “we support Iran’s use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, under the IAEA guidelines.”

[indian_blues]

India and Iran: looking beyond energy

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to India today, however brief, presents the two countries with a golden opportunity to clear the air and impart a positive momentum to their vital relationship.

Despite the damage caused to the bilateral ties after India voted twice against Iran’s nuclear programme in the International Atomic Energy Agency, New Delhi and Tehran have shown commendable maturity, keeping their lines of communication active. They have not allowed their differences over the nuclear issue to obstruct dialogue at other levels. Tehran has continued to push for the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline deal. Despite occasional statements by some of its officials which could be interpreted as an ultimatum to New Delhi to sign the deal, seasoned practitioners within the Iranian establishment, led by the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, have continued to underscore India’s importance in the project.

Both countries have shared geopolitical interests in Afghanistan, and the recent difficulties in their relationship have not clouded this realisation. Apart from sharing common historical bonds and people-to-people contacts with Afghanistan, India sees it as the gateway to Central Asia. Afghanistan borders Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, which are intertwined with a larger Soviet-era road and rail system. This network encompasses Russia and extends into parts of Europe. Besides transit along what was once part of the ancient Silk Route, India has a major stake in ensuring that its security is not undermined by extremists concentrated along the Afghanistan-Pakistan borders.

Iran too has deep historical, cultural, linguistic and commercial ties with Afghanistan. It is not only worried at the prospect of re-emergence of a hardline Sunni extremist regime across its borders but has also to contend with the hostile presence of American troops there. Iran exercises considerable influence over the Tajik, Hazara and Shia communities of Afghanistan.

Keen on safeguarding their vital interests in Afghanistan, India and Iran continue to work together in building a transit corridor that will connect Afghanistan to Iranian waters. India is building the road link between Zaranj and Delaram. This corridor will connect Afghanistan’s garland road system to the Iranian port of Chabahar. Goods from Afghanistan will cross into Iran across the Malek bridge, before heading for Chabahar using a road and a rail network. With the emergence of Chabahar as a future option, Afghanistan will no longer have to depend solely on the Pakistani ports for its trade. As custodians of a vital transit route, both India and Iran will be empowered to defend their interests in Afghanistan.

Expanding on their intent to develop transit routes in the area, the Indian and Iranian railways agreed about two weeks ago to construct a link between Chabahar and Fahrej in Central Iran.

The worsening of the security situation in Afghanistan and the difficulties NATO forces face there have been noted with concern not only in New Delhi and Iran but also farther away in Moscow. Two recent developments in this context are significant. First, NATO is seeking Russia’s help to stabilise the situation in Afghanistan. This promises to radically change the complexion of the military coalition in Kabul. Given NATO’s desperation and the tying-up of American troops in Iraq, Russia is bound to drive a hard bargain before it agrees to help in Afghanistan.

So far, Russia appears inclined to back a proposal by Uzbekistan’s President Islam Karimov, made at the recent NATO summit at Bucharest. Mr. Karimov proposed that a “six-plus-three” format address the situation — that is, apart from NATO, China, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Iran, Pakistan, Russia and the United States play a lead role in Afghanistan.

Americans and their European partners may have little choice but to accept Russia’s involvement on its terms. A realignment of forces in Afghanistan is likely to undermine the U.S. influence in the new military pecking order that is likely to surface there. The Russians, Europeans and the regional countries are expected to emerge as heavyweights. With the Bush presidency in the last leg and international calls for engaging Iran growing, the stage may be set for the emergence of a genuine, broad-based coalition to address the turbulence across Afghanistan. Given Iran’s leverage with a large population in Afghanistan, it will be difficult to exclude it from the arrangement if durable success in the country is to be achieved. With the situation evolving rapidly, India, on its part, may soon have to make a choice on a possible military role in Afghanistan.

Secondly, India and Iran are consulting each other on the complex Afghan situation. A report in the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) said India’s ambassador to Afghanistan Jayant Prasad and his Iranian counterpart Fada-Hossein Maaleki have met to discuss the issue. The report adds that both countries have emphasised the importance of “regional cooperation” in resolving the Afghan crisis.

Mr. Ahmadinejad’s visit is expected to involve discussions on the IPI pipeline. “Of all the issues involved, the IPI pipeline is the most crucial for taking the India-Iran relationship to a new level,” said a diplomat, who did not wish to be named. Talks during Mr. Ahmadinejad’s visit will also cover the 2005 annual contract for supply of five million tonnes of gas, which India and Iran have signed but have not implemented. Iran is expected to raise the situation arising from U.S.’ efforts to manoeuvre the international banking channels to stifle its overseas trade. India’s trade with Iran has been hit as the State Bank of India decided not to provide basic financial services to serve exports and imports.

As India gets ready to engage Iran at the highest level, it is acutely conscious of Tehran’s links with its large Shia population. National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan said as much in his reply to a question at a major international conference in New Delhi. “Iran is a big country … it is a major country with tremendous influence, and you need to deal with it diplomatically. The negotiations should be done at the level of erudition and understanding of an evolved mind. Otherwise, the world will have to pay a heavy price. Since we have a very large Shia population, we are concerned that the mistakes others commit will impact on us.”
Clear message

Within days of Mr. Narayanan’s observations, the External Affairs Ministry rebuked the U.S. for its advice on how New Delhi should conduct itself with the visiting Iranian President. Using unambiguous language, its spokesman said: “India and Iran are ancient civilisations whose relations span centuries. Both nations are perfectly capable of managing all aspects of their relationship with the appropriate degree of care and attention.” He added: “Neither country needs any guidance on the future conduct of bilateral relations as both countries believe that engagement and dialogue alone lead to peace.”

While there is a clear realisation in India that a top level re-engagement with Iran will go down well with the Indian people, an appreciation of Iran’s role as a regional power in West Asia might still be found wanting.

Iran’s footprint now extends over neighbouring Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Palestinian territories. It exercises enormous influence over Iraq, especially in the oil-rich areas of the south and the northern Kurdish enclaves. Its clout and prestige rose impressively in Lebanon after the Iran-backed Hizbollah blunted Israel’s summer offensive in southern Lebanon in 2006. Iran also has a close relationship with the Palestinian Hamas and is a major player in Gaza. Besides, its Shia network extends to Bahrain, oil-rich Kuwait and parts of Saudi Arabia. It would therefore be advantageous for India to explore bonding with Iran beyond the bilateral level in order to open tracks in parts of West Asia where it wishes to promote its security, and cultural and energy interests.

Known for their deep sense of history, Iranians are likely to view Mr. Ahmadinejad’s visit as yet another episode in Indo-Iran relations which go back thousands of years. While trade links between Afghanistan and coastal Iran can be traced to the Indus Valley period, the relationship bloomed in the 16th century, coinciding with the rise of the Safavid dynasty in Iran and the Mughal empire in India. Befittingly, Mr. Ahmadinejad’s visit coincides with a cultural festival in India, marked by events that have taken centuries to evolve. It remains to be seen whether India and Iran take the tough decisions during Mr. Ahmadinejad’s visit that will help to challenge a fraying, but nevertheless stifling, unipolar international system.

[indian_blues]

Iran has addressed India’s concerns on gas pipeline project

Among India’s worries, the point at which Iran has to deliver gas is the most important one. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has agreed that the gas should be delivered at India’s border with Pakistan, says S. Rahim Mashaee.



S. Rahim Mashaee, who holds the rank of Vice-President of Iran and heads the Iran Cultural Heritage, Handicraft and Tourism Organisation (ICHHTO), is part of a new breed of young leaders that are increasingly holding positions of authority following the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as Iran’s President in June 2005. Mr. Mashaee also heads an apex committee on the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline, and was directly appointed to this post by President Ahmadinejad. In his tastefully decorated office, close to Iran’s iconic Azadi Square in Tehran, he spoke extensively to Atul Aneja of The Hindu about the Iranian perspective on the project. He highlighted that Iran had addressed the concerns about the project that India had raised in the form of a non-paper. This non-paper had been handed over to the Iranian side during President Ahmadinejad’s visit to New Delhi on April 29. Iran had responded to the non-paper and its response has been conveyed to the Indian authorities. “Among the concerns raised, the point at which Iran has to deliver gas to India was the most important issue. The President has agreed that the gas should be delivered at India’s border with Pakistan,” Mr. Mashaee observed.

He added that Iran was now awaiting an expeditious response from India so that a new round of negotiations in a trilateral format, involving Iran, Pakistan and India, to finalise the project could commence at the earliest. “The Indian side has said it is willing to pursue the case, but the timeframe is very important to expedite and finalise the project at the earliest.” He also spoke about the Iran’s inclination to later extend the IPI pipeline to China, with India providing a transit corridor as the preferred option. Excerpts:
While the importance of the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline to meet India’s growing energy demands is apparent, India has raised concerns about the security of the pipeline. There is also a view in India that as a confidence building measure, Iran could take responsibility for the delivery of gas at the Pakistan-India border. Some of these concerns were raised in a non-paper, which was handed over to the Iranian side during President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to India on April 29. What is the progress in addressing these issues so far?

Iran considers the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline as a trilateral project whose main importance lies in its potential to expand Iran’s relationship with Pakistan as well as India. We give this project importance not only on account of its economic aspects but also because of its political and strategic attributes. At first the progress on the project had slackened a bit, when the export of Iranian gas to Pakistan was in focus. Later President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad emphasised the need for expanding Iran’s relationship with India. A decision was taken then to pursue the project in a trilateral format. As a result a committee was formed that included representatives of the foreign minister and the minister of petroleum. I was appointed to head this committee following a direct order from the President. So far several meetings at the level of experts have been held, and good progress has been made. The President subsequently paid a visit to Pakistan and India, nearly three months ago. During his stay he reiterated Iran’s commitment to a trilateral format. This could become a four-cornered arrangement by not only involving Pakistan and India, but also with the inclusion of China at a later stage. Upon Dr. Ahmadnejad’s visit to India, it was decided that in case India faced obstacles (involving Pakistan), Iran would deal with such issues with Pakistan and later with India. During the visit, the President of India, Pratibha Patil, the Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, as well as the Minister of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Murli Deora stated that India had a great demand for energy and New Delhi was very keen to finalise the project. During the President’s visit, the Indian side suggested some points that Iran needed to review. These included questions about the source of gas, security of the pipeline through Pakistan and possibilities of Indian companies becoming joint venture partners, mainly in Pakistan. After returning from the visit, President Ahmadinejad said that the case should be finalised at the level of experts within a timeframe of 45 days. Consequently a (separate) expert committee was formed, which reviewed all the issues raised by the Indian side. Its response has been communicated to the Indian side. Among the concerns raised, the point at which Iran has to deliver gas to India was the most important issue. The President has agreed that the gas should be delivered at India’s border with Pakistan. The second point was about the source of gas supplies. The sources have been specified, and this information has also been communicated. Further details regarding finalisation of the IPI trilateral project needs to be negotiated. We are waiting for the Indian authorities and the Indian government to express their readiness for holding trilateral meetings.
Does Pakistan have any objection to Iran’s decision to deliver the gas at the Indian border under the new format, and the possibility of Indian investments in Pakistan?

Apparently Pakistan has no objection to the delivery of gas at the Indian border. But they prefer to have further negotiations at the expert level. So far Pakistan is ready for further negotiations. It is waiting for the Indian government and the Indian authorities to express their readiness for further trilateral negotiations.
What are the prospects of trilateral negotiations to advance the project to its next level?

The Indian side has said it is willing to pursue the case, but the timeframe is very important to expedite and finalise the project at the earliest. We believe that India has been made aware about Iran’s negotiations with Pakistan and therefore it is fully in the picture. So far the reply from the Indian side is awaited. If no reply from India is received, the case will be pursued bilaterally with Pakistan and finalised at the first stage. Meanwhile, an avenue will be kept open for the Indian side to enter the project at any stage or at any time that it is willing do so. Since the project has been under consideration for over 12 years, and still not been finalised, we are really keen to expedite this case.
Could you elaborate on your comment regarding extendingthe pipeline to China?

We are looking at the possibility of exporting gas to China via India. It is better for India to seize this opportunity as this would mean that India will be in a position to avail transit charges, which will be a good source of revenue. It will also provide India an opportunity to create more jobs and also raise investments. It is therefore better for India to wrap up negotiations at the earliest and move forward. But if India does not expedite the case, and the committee (in Iran) comes to a point to when it becomes necessary to finalise (the project) with Pakistan, in that case the issue of gas pipeline transiting from Pakistan and China will come into play. In such an eventuality, India could lose the opportunity of benefiting from transit rights.
Has China been sounded or have any talks been held with China about the extension of the gas pipeline?

There have not been any negotiations but the Chinese have been sounded about the possibilities a long time ago. We are delaying (involving Chinese) intentionally since we are waiting for the Indian side to finalise the case.
There have been reports that after hard negotiations, it is now possible that India could get gas at around $5.68 per million British Thermal Unit. This includes the price charged by Iran and the transit and transport ation fee that would have to be paid to Pakistan. How far have we progressed on prices?

Prices are not a big issue and should be resolved soon. We will have consensus over it. Since the export of gas is a long-term issue, it has to be updated in line with the market price. The issue is not the price but the finalisation of this project. The IPI is a very important project and it would yield economic and strategic benefits of the three countries. Naturally we have enemies. We have to recognise our enemies and do not let them influence our decisions.
Have any negotiations been held to modify the route of the pipeline to minimise the security risk to the project on account of the turbulence in Baluchistan?

It all depends on the commitment of the three countries. These are rather technical and economic issues which needs further trilateral negotiations. The main objective of this committee (in Iran) is to convince and assist India to become an active partner in this trilateral project. The Iranian government has been emphasising the active role and participation of India. In general, we were not satisfied with the performance of India in the past. However, after the visit of President Ahmadinejad to India and negotiations between Iran’s Minister of Petroleum with his Indian counterpart, we hope that the things will improve.

Source: http://www.hindu.com/2008/08/06/stor...0651731100.htm

[indian_blues]

India opposes Iran’s ‘nuclear weapon ambitions’

India opposes Iran’s ‘nuclear weapon ambitions’

Harish Khare

MARSEILLE: India declared on Monday that it was not appreciative of Iran’s “nuclear weapon ambitions.”

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told a joint press conference of Indian and European journalists after the India-European Union summit that India would not like “another weapon state emerging in our neighbourhood. India was opposed to Iran’s nuclear weapon ambitions.”

The issue of Iran’s nuclear programme came up in the discussion at the summit between the EU and India. The joint press communiqué called on “Iran to take steps to re-establish confidence in the nature of its nuclear programme, as required by the IAEA Board of Governors.”

The two sides affirmed their support for “the current diplomatic efforts and steps in order to find a satisfactory solution to the nuclear issue.”

French President Nicolas Sarkozy thought there was “a good identity of views” on Iran.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said he was repeating India’s familiar stand. “Iran is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT); as such it is entitled to all cooperation in its civilian nuclear programme; at the same time, as NPT signatory, it had undertaken all the obligations.”

In response to a question on American air strikes in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border areas, Mr. Sarkozy replied that he was impressed with Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari’s determination to help out in Afghanistan. “If Pakistan did its bid, non-Pakistan armed forces will no longer be needed.”

[indian_blues]

Nuclear deal not at the cost of pipeline: Pranab

Nuclear deal not at the cost of pipeline: Pranab

“India’s energy requirement is substantial and we have to locate various sources of energy”

Tehran: India said on Sunday that the India-U.S. civil nuclear deal was not at the cost of the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline.

“Nuclear power is one source of energy. The other important source is the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline. One is not exclusive to the other,” External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee said at a joint press conference with Iranian Economic Minister Shamseddin Hossein.

They were interacting with reporters at the conclusion of the two-day Joint Commission Meeting of the two countries.

The nuclear deal with the U.S. would have no impact on the IPI gas pipeline, Mr. Mukherhee said. “India’s energy requirement is quite substantial and we have to locate various sources of energy, including civil nuclear cooperation with countries like the U.S., France and Russia or any other country willing to cooperate with us.”

Asked about the implementation of the Liquified Natural Gas project, Mr. Hossein said there were several financial and technical issues that had to be considered.

India and Iran and signed the LNG project in 2005. But the project could not be implemented after Tehran raised issues of pricing citing rise in global prices.

Mr. Mukherjee, who met Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other senior leaders, said he got positive indications about expanding the political relationship between the two countries.

The two sides signed an Extradition Treaty and a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, four Memoranda of Understanding, including a working plan on agriculture and sister port arrangement between the Shahid Rashid Port in Iran and Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust near Mumbai.

The two sides also finalised the text of the Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (BIPPA) which Mr. Mukherjee hoped would be signed soon.

The leaders initialled the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement and a pact on civil aviation. These would be signed after the Union Cabinet approved them.
Trilateral mechanism

The two countries decided to set up a trilateral mechanism at the Petroleum Ministers’ level to resolve the differences over various aspects of the IPI gas pipeline project, including pricing. A meeting of the Petroleum Ministers of India, Pakistan and Iran will be called soon to discuss the matter.

This was decided after the Indian side made the proposal at a meeting between Mr. Mukherjee and Iranian Oil Minister Gholam Hossein Nozari on Sunday. Mr. Mukherjee reaffirmed India’s intent to implement the $7.4 billion project, External Affairs Ministry spokesman Vishnu Prakash said.

In an interview to Iranian news agency IRNA ahead of his visit here, Mr. Mukherjee said Iran had every right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, in a manner consistent with its international obligations and commitments. — PTI

[indian_blues]

Iran to Fund Hyderabad Heritage Project

The Iranian government will fund a Rs. 200-crore project in Hyderabad, the capital city of India’s Andhra Pradesh state, to renovate seven famous tombs of the Nizam period as well as Premamati Mosque and Badshahi Ashur-Khana as cultural heritage sites.
Iran has agreed to this project since all of these structures were built under the supervision of Iranian architects in the past, IRNA reported.
Deputy Foreign Minister Seyyed Mohammad Ali Shahidi made the above announcement to reporters after a meeting with State Minister for Minorities’ Welfare Mohammad Ali Shabbir in Hyderabad on Thursday.
The proposal for the project was lying with the Indian central government and sought the state government’s intervention to facilitate its clearance at the earliest.
Shahidi noted that Iran’s ties with India date back to thousands of years.
Immigrant Iranians largely settled in Bombay and Hyderabad. The first consulate in Hyderabad was established by Iran 38 years ago.
“Iranian families here are happy with the Hyderabadi hospitality,“ he said.
“Our love for India is such that when India is developed, we feel our own country is developed. We always want to strengthen our age-old ties with India. To achieve this goal, the Iranian president visited New Delhi six months ago.“

Source: http://www****an-daily.com/1387/3259...ty.htm#s341658

[donsaeid]

hello mr. indian