What's new

Who is India's strategic partner of India? Iran or Israel

Who is India's strategic partner of India? Iran or Israel

  • Iran

    Votes: 2 3.6%
  • Israel

    Votes: 23 41.1%
  • Both

    Votes: 25 44.6%
  • None

    Votes: 6 10.7%

  • Total voters
    56
  • Poll closed .
Getting back to topic,

Here's some of what India and Iran have been working on..perhaps some members can post something about India-Israel relations.

For a quick run down,

Chabahar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also there are a number of threads about the Chabahar port and its implications for Pakistan. I'll add those to my post once I find them
 
.
Now, that's a news. A Chinese is talking about Human Rights. This is pure Hippocraticy and propaganda. You damn, care about dalit it is to derail the topic and bringing India in all your posts. :cheesy::cheesy:


What about the rights of:

- Muslims (Uighur)
- Tibetans
- Women (Worst sex ratio in the world, rapes, selling in brothels and other discrimination)
[/SIZE]

India have many problems but they don't crush peaceful students under the Army Tanks like China and they don't kills million's of own people in the cultural revolution or the giant leap.[/SIZE]:victory::chilli:

Stop derailing the thread. Ignore and report posts instead of taking it even further. Some members are genuinely interested in learning about the potential of India-Iran and India-Israel relations. Don't let others ruin it for them.

Here's an interesting read


Both Iran and Pakistan have developed strategies to create strong economic and transport ties with Central Asia and beyond. Anchoring these strategies are two new seaports: Gwadar in Pakistan and Chabahar in Iran. Spreading out from these ports are existing or planned transportation infrastructure that leads into their respective country’s economic center and importantly for Central Asia, northwards. Both ports are well towards becoming fully operable and are offering generous incentives for companies and governments to do business in their ports. However, serious political, economic and logistical problems remain. For Central Asia one of these two ports, or indeed both, will likely become important links to world markets.

Tip: look way down into the bottom left-hand corner to see the ports.
Chabahar and Gwadar

The problems with Karachi and Bandar Abbas

Karachi is already overburdened with severe congestion from commercial, fishing and military shipping. And from a strategic vantage point it is quite problematic. The Indian Navy targeted the port in 1971 and any blockade in the future would devastate Pakistan since that country has an overreliance on the port of Karachi. The port of Qasim, built in the 1970s was to relive some of that burden and the port of Gwadar is expected to further reduce the reliance on Karachi.

Bandar Abbas is of enormous strategic significance to Iran as it is located on the Strait of Hormuz leading into the Persian Gulf. But that is also a problem for Iran. The area is already burdened with high traffic and of course, the U.S. Navy. Iran wishes to have another port that is more conducive to trade and further growth.

Gwadar

Gwadar, being much further away from India than Karachi, makes obvious strategic sense. But it is its commercial potential that will provide the most benefits. Gwadar is not some long-term project. Its first phase, with 75% of the costs covered by the Chinese government, is already completed. The existing docks, built by the Chinese Harbor Engineering Company, are now being operated by Port of Singapore. Port of Singapore won the contract over Dubai Ports World, the company that was forced out of America by opportunistic xenophobes in both political parties there. Phase two will be completed by 2010, adding even more capacity. Ziad Haider, a researcher at the South Asia Program at the Henry L. Stimson Center, noted that Pakistan can make the project succeed if it maintains the financial and political support of China for the project and if it makes some concessions to the Baluchis near Gwadar, who have already carried out deadly attacks on Chinese engineers.

The problem with Gwadar, wrote Ammad Hassan in his thesis for the US Naval Postgraduate School, is that while the port has been built, “the supporting infrastructure of railroad link, industrial capacity, and civic structures at Gwadar is almost non-existent.” And of course, all analysts mention Pakistan’s extremely problematic relations with the ethnic Baluch in the area who, in addition to having been in a low-grade insurgency for some time, are not at all supportive of the port. And to understate another issue, southern Afghanistan is not quite ready to be a reliable transport corridor for Pakistan to access Central Asia, despite the Afghan government’s voiced support for the project. Nevertheless, the idea of further integrating Central Asian and Russian resources southward with the Asian and Middle Eastern market has others optimistic about the long-term prospects. The Asian Development Bank is somewhat cautious though, noting that initially the port will be significant only to Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan.

Chabahar

Gwadar’s competition for trade and transport will come from Chabahar, the new Indian-financed port in Iran. A port outside of the Persian Gulf makes sense from a strategic and logistical viewpoint for Iran. The port of Chabahar was part of a plan to develop transportation infrastructure in Iran’s east for many years. Initially put in hold in 1984 it was revived in 2002 with Indian help. And the financing and engineering assistance from India is not limited to the port. India, wishing to bypass Pakistan, is also cooperating on a highway system that leads from the port into Afghanistan as well as a planned railroad to Afghanistan. Iranian officials state that they wish to have Bandar Abbas remain as the port for Russian and European trade and have Chabahar become the port for trade with Afghanistan and Central Asia. Iran already has good relations with everybody along the route leading north (including the local “warlords”) into Tajikistan. And significantly, it is in Tajikistan where Iran has already been financing several transport projects including the Anzob tunnel. And luckily for the Iranians, the U.S. constructed a bridge over the Amu Darya that fits in nicely with the Chabahar to Khojent route.

Prospects for economic integration of Central Asia with the South

For energy and mineral resources to be sent south from Central Asia a much more expensive transport infrastructure will be required than what is being built at the moment. Another limitation is the lack of a business friendly environment in most Central Asian states. And consumer goods are already entering Central Asia from Russia and China. What more is there a demand for? Furthermore, many Central Asian leaders are obsessed over local issues and haven’t been overly enthusiastic about regional integration (with Uzbekistan being the worst offender).

What is a long-term prospect is Central Asia being a transport route from the ports to Xinjiang, Russia and Kazakhstan, all of them important markets. The routes to Gwadar and Chabahar cut off thousands of kilometers for certain trade routes.

Strategic considerations

Any transportation or military problems in the Straits of Malacca, the Straits of Hormuz, the Suez or anywhere along Asia’s southern coastline will further boost the importance of Central Asia as a transport and trade corridor. Beyond Pakistan and Iran, both China and India are seeking closer relations with Afghanistan and Central Asia. The planned transport and trade routes will have the obvious effect of building solid ties. Iran’s considerations are boosting trade, having secure borders, and avoiding “encirclement” by American proxies (no matter how much a figment of the Iranian government’s imagination). As for Pakistan, the governments there has hoped for better relations with Central Asia. However, their Afghanistan policy always got in the way. Now they hope to move away from that era.

Conclusion

The countries of Central Asia will likely benefit from both Chabahar and Gwadar. Diversifying its import and export routes is a logical economic and political step. Although one should not exaggerate the economic benefits to be reaped. As for the competition between the two ports, it will not be a “winner take all” outcome but rather one port earning the greater share of trade. And the “winner” in this respect will likely be Chabahar, at least in the short term. Iran is more stable than Pakistan, it has better relations with Afghanistan and the Central Asian states, and unlike the Gwadar route its proposed route goes through relatively stable parts of Afghanistan. As long as Iran avoids outright conflict with the United States or any sort of domestic turmoil it should come out of this competition with an advantage.

Primary sources:
Ahmed Rashid
Ammad Hassan (pdf)
Asia Times
Asia Times #2
Gwadar Corner
Jamestown Foundation
Rizwan Zeb
Iran Daily
Daily Times
 
Last edited:
.
I had to delete approx 50 of the off topic, pointless, irrelevant, troll, personal attack, derogatory etc etc etc posts in one go and I do hope no such posts are reported again.

Stick to the thread, Chinese guys stick to the topic and counter it with regard to the topic in hand, no need to derail it with BS kind of arguments which can be discussed in other forums too. Same advice for Indian members too.

Don't make us close the thread.

 
.
98e8eb24651c4891b25fa5e170ea0334.jpg


Our government has hedged its foreign policy around a "strategic partnership" with the United States.If this blinkered approach matures we will be forced to roll back our cooperation with Iran,further boost our relations with Israel and distance ourself from the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.But our govt may be starting to rethink the wisdom of cozying up with US at the expense of our own security interests (especially after 26/11).
 
.
I think Israel will remain more close than Iran to India in the coming decade also..though our government state that our relation with one country is not at all affect the realtion with another county..But common threats like terrorism bring Israel and India closer..now the co-operation include Anti terrorist training,sharing of Intelligence, selling and co-production of weapons etc etc
 
.
Our government has hedged its foreign policy around a "strategic partnership" with the United States.If this blinkered approach matures we will be forced to roll back our cooperation with Iran,further boost our relations with Israel and distance ourself from the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.But our govt may be starting to rethink the wisdom of cozying up with US at the expense of our own security interests (especially after 26/11).

India is certainly keen on deepening its ties with the US, we have our reasons and they have theirs, but we need Iran and the GoI understands that. I don't think they will be foolish enough to dump Iran. Its a delicate balance, but Indian and Iranian interests converge on some key issues like energy and Afghanistan so the relationship will continue, it will be tested, but it will continue.

Iran is really screwing up though, they aren't making it any easier on themselves. They tested a missile recently, they're issuing provocative statements, all they are doing is making the job a lot easier for their detractors. The easier it becomes for the west to paint them as crazy mullahs the greater the likelihood of an attack.

India will try to remain as neutral as possible, we haven't endorsed any military action or even sanctions for that matter but if they keep giving the west reasons to up the ante we will be under a lot of pressure reconsider our stand.

I think India's position overall is quite safe, the economy is big and its only getting bigger, the military has a lot of potential so the west will want to have an ally like us. Essentially we can bring enough to the table to resist external pressures on our foreign policy, maybe a compromise here and there, but India hasn't caved in on anything substantial so far.
 
Last edited:
.
Isnt it obvious by now, Iran is a probable trade partner and nothing more.
 
.
Actually it is a very important discussion. However, I would like to leave Israel out of it as the dynamics of the relation of both with relation to India is non comparable. India's realtionship with Israel can be termed more as strategic because its cooperation is mainly security oriented. Whereas our realtionship with Iran is more economic. The stand India is taking today vis a vis Iran, in my opinion is not its inteneded stand. At this point India is leaning heavily towards the US for reasons that will benefit India most and there is nothing wrong with that. To state that India would not get oil if it didnt support Iran. Please note that most of the oil exporting countries are wary of Iran and its hold over the region. That is why most of them have affiliated themselves with the US for security. This puts them in the same bracket as India, and will work towards Indias advantage.
Having said that, I think there is enormous potential for India to keep its relationship with Iran a working one. As Spitfire pointed out , the access to Central Asia and Afganistan has too much promise to ignore. India should also use its good offices with Iran and the US for raproachment and back door diplomacy.
 
.
for collaborations on defence purposes....and also due to terrorism...India will come close to israel.... also they are supporting us in the above two really well...so its really gr8... so that has to be appreciated...

as for Iran India's ties with Iran has been historical.... they are like brotherly ties... India might like a brother to another, might do something which it feels is right but not liked by Iran....

But India will never support any move which leades to destruction of Iran...but at the same time India will want Iran also to always live a peaceful life and not do anything which might hurt Iran itself....just like a brother doesnt want his brother to do anything wrong....

India's and Iran's historical relations will keep them close...
 
.
India just need to remember India can survive without fancy weapons but not without oil

Nobody is going to survive on "OIL" beyond 2050 my friend!!! If u think so, then u r looking at the wrong side of the future.

Now as far as the thread is concerned, its time for u guys to look at the epic, decade old question - "Israel or Palestine?"......Ask India, we will say both. Dont believe?? ask them straight then......they both WILL say India is their friend. I believe Im lound and clear.
 
Last edited:
.
Iran is from nowhere a India's strategic ... Israel perhaps could be called som sort of partner and Russia is as well.
 
.
In world of geopolitics, there are no permanent friends and no permanent enemies.

India is just as friendly with Israel as is it friendly with Iran.

India gains high tech weapons and US backing by befriending Israel. Israel gets one less enemy in its region where its neighbors are ready to kill all Jews because they are not Muslims.

India irks Israel when it condemns Israel for its aggressive behavior against innocent Palestines. Israel irks India when it sells any high tech weapons to its immediate neighbors.

India gains in relationship with Iran by getting cheaper gas/petrol as compared to from UAE, Oman and Saudi Arabia. Iran gets a friend where its neighbors hate it because it is Shia and where Saudi and Pakistan are in favor of Sunni movements.

India irks Iran when India does not like its neighbor(s) to possess nuclear weapons. Iran irks India when it wants to change the price of already negotiated gas lines and wants India to pay for delivery of the gas at Iran-Pakistan border rather than India-Pakistan border, especially when Pakistan cannot be called a friend of India.

Both countries will not have any determinental effect if they were to become enemies - I mean they do not have any power to invade India's sphere of influence. Israel's impact on India will still be larger than Iran. But if Israel and Iran goes to war, India will stay neutral.
 
. .
The triangle of feelings

India
/ \
/ \
Israel xxxxxx Iran


lolz yes we can have a good relation between these two countries..why a relationship with one country affects the relationship with another country?
 
.
lolz yes we can have a good relation between these two countries..why a relationship with one country affects the relationship with another country?

i messed up the triangle lol

but i see you got what it meant
 
.
Back
Top Bottom