Posted on 01/28/2006 3:35:54 AM PST by Raj13008
Unreliable Iran reneges
For those painting Iran as a valuable Indian ally and heroic underdog whom India must support against US imperialism, we have news.
Iran has just declared bluntly that if the price of oil exceeds $80/barrel —something that looks certain in the foreseeable future — then Iran will renege on its agreement to supply India 5 million tonnes of liquefied natural gas per year.
This is not the act of a friend or ally, or even of a disinterested commercial supplier. It is the bullying tactic of an arrogant oil power using energy as a commercial and diplomatic weapon.
India seeks long-term LNG contracts to ensure energy security for gas-based power plants and chemical plants costing thousands of crores. Teheran has put India on notice that those thousands of crores of investment will be at the mercy of Iranian whim on LNG supplies.
The Ahmedinejad regime that came to power after the LNG agreement was signed has constantly made excuses to avoid inking a formal contract. We now know why. The Ahmedinejad regime has proved irresponsible on more than one front, and cannot be regarded as a reliable supplier of energy.
ndia needs to shift to Saudi Arabia (which has been far friendlier) and Qatar. The proposed Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline should be put on the back-burner till the Ahmedinejad regime gives way to a more reliable one. This also puts in perspective India’s diplomatic choices on Iran’s uranium enrichment plans.
US Ambassador David Mulford said in a press interview that an Indian vote favouring Iran in the International Atomic Energy Agency would be found “devastating” by US Congress, which would kill Bush’s initiative to change US non-proliferation laws to allow nuclear supplies to India.
This is undoubtedly true but predictably led to protests in political circles. The Ambassador was pulled up by India’s foreign secretary, and the Bush administration dissociated itself from Mulford. This is diplomatic theatre.
India is indeed free to choose, but let nobody pretend that choices do not have consequences. Should India align itself with the mullahs or the US, warts and all? Only hare-brained ideologues would opt for the mullahs.
pong
Not to forget that the mullahs aren't any happier about Hindus than they are about Christians.
200 million (out of a population of 1.1 billion) Indians are either muslims or communinists you know. They hate USA , but not half as much as they hate India. Anti-national to the core.
Since India is a "pure" democracy, how can they have such a disproportional impact?
Welcome to FR.
Welcome Aboard.
When something goes down in I ran I have little doubt that India will be on the side of the other democracies. India has come too far economically in the last decade or so to want to return to the bad old days.
Like they have been in Iraq? India needs to put up or shut up ...and not just when it benefits their economy.
Or at the very least then please lets hear them stop b*tching about Musharraf in Pakistan.....who has in all reality....at least done more for us (U.S.) in the GWOT.
India was not with us over Iraq.....and they are now foolishly emboldening an already reckless Gov't in Iran.
What has Musharaf done for US ?
Hindus are a divided bunch in India. Or too busy with earning a livelihood or with their daily life to have an opinion on world affairs. Naturally the vocal leftist minority - which dominates the media , enjoys control over the polity , getting their support from the 160 million odd Indian muslims.
"India needs to put up or shut up..."
Put up what?
He is a leader who clearly was changed by Sept 11th (for a variety of reasons....nor do we (U.S.) have the luxury of time or need for that matter to see if every one of those changes have come from motives that are altruistic).
Short on time at the moment....but the reality is Musharaff to a large degree has done about as well as can be expected of him.
Do we wish he would (could) do more within the Pak border regions? Of course we do. But then again we wish a great number of our long-time "allies" would do much more in this GWOT. (Hell we wish our very own Democrats here in our own Country would see the need to do more).
Musharaf did what he did because if he hadn't , Pakistan would have been bombed to stone age by US. Who were the Taliban ? Pakistanis. Which country financed, armed and trained the Taliban ? Pakistan. Where do the majority of all these Islamic terrorists yelling 'death to amrika' come from or atleast get their training from ? Pakistan.
So it is rather obvious what would have happened to Pakistan if Musharaf didn't obey orders from US.
It doesnt matter if Iran is a friend or a foe. Who cares about Iran anyway.
We are likely to get the same treatment from the US as we receive from the Islamic world. If US wants to built alliance with Pakistan let them go ahead and do it. They still want to befriend losers, no problem. Go ahead. It hardly makes a difference for us.
And whatever we do, we do it keeping in mind our own interests. US doesnt matter.
So it is rather obvious what would have happened to Pakistan if Musharaf didn't obey orders from US.
Some of what you say above is true....some is slightly exxagerated.
With that said....both my prior posts on this thread still remain true as well.
Thanks for the laugh. I needed that this morning. Very late hours last night......couldn't sleep enough and here I am up here this morning.
I needed that.
Keep laughing, and have a nice day.
Check this for some more laughs. It'll brighten up your day.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1564843/posts?page=64#64
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.