India--Iran--Afghanistan Finalise Agreement on Chabahar TRANSPORT and TRANSIT pact

[sankar]

there is no Tax on wet dreams in India

Dreams always comes true when we start work. For that you need to wake up first

 

[Spectre]

when the pakistani's want to make hell im sure they can make it. cpec is quiet early so theres time. who knows what will happen in the future, something bigger may happen which may distract the worlds attention.
other possibilities may include guaranteeing stability there in exchange for the land.
or slowly taking and threatening a huge response much greater than what they did when the soviets were there.
as oscar said they are interested in the strip of land the rest is irrelevant.

That is why Pakistan is in such a mess today, they believe their actions will have no consequences. I am sure even @Oscar will agree to this. Pakistan make Afghanistan hell but it sure ain't pretty to be a neighbor of hell.

As for your other point why would Afghanistan give up the biggest leverage it holds over Pakistan. What you are suggesting is essentially a blackmail and trust me blackmailers never stop, they keep asking for more and more until nothing is left but a dried up husk

 

[Max]

Dreams always comes true when we start work. For that you need to wake up first

again useless comment..

 

[bloo]

India, Afghanistan and Iran finalise Chabahar Agreement
By Dipanjan Roy Chaudhury, ET Bureau | 18 Apr, 2016, 03.45AM IST
Post a Comment
READ MORE ON » Sushma Swaraj | Narendra Modi | Iran | India | Chabahar Agreement | afghanistan

The announcement comes as foreign minister Sushma Swaraj is in Tehran, discussing India’s participation in Chabahar Port and other issues of connectivity and energy partnership.
ET SPECIAL:Love visual aspect of news? Enjoy this exclusive slideshows treat!
NEW DELHI: India, Afghanistan and Iran have finalised the Chabahar Agreement to operationalise the strategic port, giving New Delhi much-needed access to Afghanistan in the absence of transit rights through Pakistan.

The announcement comes as foreign minister Sushma Swaraj is in Tehran, discussing India's participation in Chabahar Port and other issues of connectivity and energy partnership. It is understood that Prime Minister Narendra Modi may visit Tehran in the near future.

According to a statement by the ministry of external affairs, the trio decided to expedite the transport and transit corridors agreement at a high level after completing necessary internal procedures in the three countries.

The second meeting of experts from India, Afghanistan and Iran was held on April 11 to finalise text of the agreement. "The draft agreement envisions trilateral cooperation for providing alternative access to seas to Afghanistan, inter alia for Afghanistan's trade with India," said the MEA.

"It will significantly enhance utilisation of Chabahar Port, contribute to economic growth of Afghanistan and facilitate better regional connectivity, including between India and connections to Afghanistan and central Asia. The agreement will be a strategic bulwark for greater flow of people and goods among the three countries, as well as in the region." Chabahar is being billed as India's gateway to Afghanistan and beyond, including central Asia, Russia and Europe.

Swaraj and Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif agreed that commercial contract on Chabahar, along with modalities for extending it a $150-million credit line for making of jetties and berths, should be finalised soon. MEA spokesperson Vikas Swarup said India will also supply $400 million of steel rails. A team from Ircon International Ltd will visit Iran for discussions on the Chabahar-Zahedan Railway link.

Oil minister Dharmendra Pradhan had announced $20 billion investment for the Chabahar port complex during his visit to Tehran last week.

Iran also said it fully supported India's desire to join the Ashgabat Agreement for connectivity and the two ministers reviewed progress made on the International North South Transport Corridor.

Zarif also evinced interest in Iran's participation in the Indian refinery sector. India has welcomed Tehran's decision to keep the Farzad-B gas field outside the auction basket while companies have been directed to complete contractual negotiations in a time-bound manner. An ONGC-led consortium had discovered Farzad-B in 2008 but was unable to proceed due to sanctions. Last year, ONGC submitted a proposal of $3 billion to Tehran for development of the field. Iran had earlier communicated their gas pricing formula and welcomed Indian investment in the Chabahar SEZ.

Swaraj and Zarif agreed that pending agreements on preferential trade, double taxation avoidance and the bilateral investment treaty be concluded on a priority basis.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...e-chabahar-agreement/articleshow/51867141.cms

 

[sankar]

again useless comment..

do you think yours useful ??

 

[kabooter_maila]

That is why Pakistan is in such a mess today, they believe their actions will have no consequences. I am sure even @Oscar will agree to this. Pakistan make Afghanistan hell but it sure ain't pretty to be a neighbor of hell.

As for your other point why would Afghanistan give up the biggest leverage it holds over Pakistan. What you are suggesting is essentially a blackmail and trust me blackmailers never stop, they keep asking for more and more until nothing is left but a dried up husk

Chabahar? Yeah, Chabahar. The 'Indian trade route' for trade with Afghanistan and CARs? How much Indians can export to Afghanistan and CARs? Where is the infrastructure to Afghanistan and CARs? The future route (if it ever comes to existence at all) will be lengthy, tough, and insecure. Massive trade makes this type of projects a success. But how much trade India can have on this route? You don't even need a deep sea port for 'Indian trade' with Afghanistan via Chabahar. We don't envy Chabahar route but Indians are burning in jealousy for Gwadar. Go ahead, start Chabahar; it might be good for you. We don't care. We believe Chabahar offers an economically infeasible route to Indians. If they think opposite and want to waste money on that, go ahead and no one would be happier than us.

 

[Paksanity]

Just two days ago in Dawn they said Gwadar will be operational by year end, now I am not quoting that Kamran Michael announced it will be functional in 5 months in 2013 and that its still not functional when the phase 1 was completed back in 2006. But what was notable in that article was that Gwadar capacity was 1 Million tonne cargo per year.

Now Visakhapatnam port of India (1 of 12 Major port and 200 ports in total) got the capacity of 130 Million tonnes per year. So technically speaking Gwadar is just 130 times smaller than one of the port of India. I dont think there is anything like burning or even jealousy for that matter.

You develop thousand port why does it matter to India. You develop, be prosperous and terrorism will vanish its a win for India but the problem is it passes through Kashmir for which India got the instrument of accession by the ruler. Now I dont want to go into the matter of who owns Kashmir but the only problem is duplicity of China, they are touchy when it comes to Arunachal Pradesh, Tibet, how come they not have same standards with Kashmir. India is just highlighting that duplicity by taking up the issue.

All those conspiracy theories of Indian sabotage to CPEC looks so childish, how can you "sabotage" a road? its a road, it will be build, no matter what India want or US want. Simple. If its feasible it will bring prosperity if not, it will be just another road/route. How can India sabotage? by planting IED's all over 3000 Km? How childish that claim looks.

Its always good to check facts a bit before making wild claims.



I wasn't aware this kind of degraded language is permissible. When it comes to wet dreams there many I can quote which will be very embarrassing for you.

How does a road change status of Kashmir? On what grounds India is objecting to an economic road? Especially when area is already linked to China through Karakorum Highway. What is it that hurts India precisely? A road does not change legal status of Kashmir. You guys have been building roads in Kashmir. Did we object?

 

[Paksanity]

Road does not change the status of Kashmir but when Chinese object to India on Infrastructure development in Arunachal or in South China Sea oil exploration with Vietnam they cant do same. It does not hurt India, its exposing they hypocrisy in Arunachal and SCS of China simple.

Road is in Pakistan and under Pakistan's control. China has no sovereignty or territorial claim on Pakistani side of Kashmir. How spat between India and China can be related to an area which is inside Pakistan even if disputed territory? Pretty lame argument by India. One could understand if it was a Defence project but it's not. It is purely economic and from the look of it economic prosperity of Pakistan hurts India.

 

[wiseone2]

Your Ships will definitely take big U-turn to avoid our EEZ that will help you evade Hefty sum to our Government

foreign ships have right of passage in the EEZ. They cannot fish or extract any minerals in the EEZ

 

[B+ Dracula]

foreign ships have right of passage in the EEZ. They cannot fish or extract any minerals in the EEZ

Thankyou very much, I think following extract supports your claim
.
As the work of the Conference progressed, the move towards a 12-mile territorial sea gained wider and eventually universal acceptance. Within this limit, States are in principle free to enforce any law, regulate any use and exploit any resource.

The Convention retains for naval and merchant ships the right of "innocent passage" through the territorial seas of a coastal State. This means, for example, that a Japanese ship, picking up oil from Gulf States, would not have to make a 3,000-mile detour in order to avoid the territorial sea of Indonesia, provided passage is not detrimental to Indonesia and does not threaten its security or violate its laws.

===
The treaty establishes that all nations have the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea of another nation and that, outside certain conditions, the nation laying claim to the territorial sea cannot hamper innocent passage of a foreign vessel
http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/156775/

 

[Max]

do you think yours useful ??

another useless comment

 

[SQ8]

That is why Pakistan is in such a mess today, they believe their actions will have no consequences. I am sure even @Oscar will agree to this. Pakistan make Afghanistan hell but it sure ain't pretty to be a neighbor of hell.

As for your other point why would Afghanistan give up the biggest leverage it holds over Pakistan. What you are suggesting is essentially a blackmail and trust me blackmailers never stop, they keep asking for more and more until nothing is left but a dried up husk

The issue with trying to make a hellhole from a neighbour is just that; they are your neighbour and the spillover will happen.
Moreover, there are smart ways to make a place a hellhole and then there is the route Pakistan took

that's very naughty but who am i so say that we did much a lot more that a tiny strip of land but when will it happen? not anytime soon?

As mentioned to @Spectre , the issue is not the idea of what needed to be done but the bumbling about in its execution.
One has to remember, the idea was to get Haqqani in power at the end of the war..but the bloody early 90's in Afghanistan are testament to how well that plan worked out.
Then the Taliban happened and everyone was left thinking what to do next.

With Haqqani, there was direct influence; the Taliban were like a mischievous child you had to try and coax and prod into doing anything.
The most powerful years of the ISI were in the 90's, and were also the most non-cohesive and disjointed. You had various sections playing their own game without any semblance of what was to be done on a strategic level.

 

[Spectre]

The issue with trying to make a hellhole from a neighbour is just that; they are your neighbour and the spillover will happen.
Moreover, there are smart ways to make a place a hellhole and then there is the route Pakistan took

There is no smart way with all due respect. If you have some interest in history - I would like for you to consider US-Mexico relations. How Mexico was systematically undermined, it's waterways diverted, industries destroyed all so that it remains the moon to USA's sun. Well US had it going good for a long time but ultimately it has come back to haunt them

All the money, power and mightiest military mankind has ever known can't save kids of US from the menace of drugs. We talk about war on terror but before that there was a war on drugs which failed as a result of which US has the highest per capita prison population. Drugs finance the gun culture leading to thousands of dead each year.

Even CIA has given up on fighting the war and stopping the drug supply from across the borders. Consensus among all enforcement agencies including DEA is that there is too much money in it to stop. So they instead try to manage and direct the flow. They try to cultivate relationship with cartels so that flow can be directed. What a mess!

Point of this rant is that even US which supposedly took the smart way ended up with thousands dead every year and hundreds of thousands of lives ruined. So there you go Sir

P.S. Plans are excellent on paper but law of unintended consequences is a bit ch!

 

[Blue Marlin]

The issue with trying to make a hellhole from a neighbour is just that; they are your neighbour and the spillover will happen.
Moreover, there are smart ways to make a place a hellhole and then there is the route Pakistan took


As mentioned to @Spectre , the issue is not the idea of what needed to be done but the bumbling about in its execution.
One has to remember, the idea was to get Haqqani in power at the end of the war..but the bloody early 90's in Afghanistan are testament to how well that plan worked out.
Then the Taliban happened and everyone was left thinking what to do next.

With Haqqani, there was direct influence; the Taliban were like a mischievous child you had to try and coax and prod into doing anything.
The most powerful years of the ISI were in the 90's, and were also the most non-cohesive and disjointed. You had various sections playing their own game without any semblance of what was to be done on a strategic level.

or go back to the old idea install a puppet government. and once that happens then im sure terror will decline.

 

[SQ8]

There is no smart way with all due respect. If you have some interest in history - I would like for you to consider US-Mexico relations. How Mexico was systematically undermined, it's waterways diverted, industries destroyed all so that it remains the moon to USA's sun. Well US had it going good for a long time but ultimately it has come back to haunt them

All the money, power and mightiest military mankind has ever known can't save kids of US from the menace of drugs. We talk about war on terror but before that there was a war on drugs which failed as a result of which US has the highest per capita prison population. Drugs finance the gun culture leading to thousands of dead each year.

Even CIA has given up on fighting the war and stopping the drug supply from across the borders. Consensus among all enforcement agencies including DEA is that there is too much money in it to stop. So they instead try to manage and direct the flow. They try to cultivate relationship with cartels so that flow can be directed. What a mess!

Point of this rant is that even US which supposedly took the smart way ended up with thousands dead every year and hundreds of thousands of lives ruined. So there you go Sir

P.S. Plans are excellent on paper but law of unintended consequences is a bit ch!

The war on drugs is a consequence of not knowing them. Drugs arent all financing the prison culture, a lot of it has to do with ridiculous laws and a systematic targeting of poor communities which is also evident if you go into history.
The problem lies with the overstretch of any strategy. Mexico needed to be kept down because history shows that it can rally and become a threat to the US, the same goes for Afghanistan.

A stable Afghanistan under anyone else other than religious extremists is one that is lost in its Pushtoon unity ideals and a threat to Pakistan. Better to keep that place a hell hole than a consistently hostile nation. There is greater hostility in Afghanistan to Pakistan from our inception than there ever was or will be from India.
To that end, Afghanistan can remain as it is for eternity; it is still better off for Pakistan.