'Govt should abstain if no consensus on Iran'

Gautam · 01-28-2006, 05:53 AM

Quote:

Making their stand clear, Left parties on Saturday demanded the Government to abstain from voting if consensus eludes next week's crucial IAEA meeting on Iran's controversial nuclear programme.

"Our considered opinion continues to be that in consonance with the UPA Government's commitment to the pursuit of an independent foreign policy, if a consensus is lacking on the issue at the IAEA meeting, India should abstain," they said in a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

The parties, which provide key outside support to the Government, said a "principled Indian position" that calls for talks within the ambit of IAEA for resolving Iran's nuclear issue will help in averting a spurt in tension in the region, where millions of Indian nationals live and work.

"A principled Indian position that upholds the need to seek a resolution of the Iran nuclear issue through negotiations within the framework of the IAEA will contribute towards averting an escalation of tensions in an already volatile region," CPI(M), CPI, Forward Bloc and RSP said in the letter.

Asserting that a consensus is lacking on the issue, they said there was "profound disquiet" among the international community, especially Russia, China and the Non-aligned nations, that the US instead of supporting efforts to explore various avenues to resolve the matter is precipitating a United Nations Security Council referral.
"The US strategy holds disturbing parallels with the Iraq crisis in the 2002-03 period in so far as a calibrated build up of confrontation was eventually seized as pretext for making unilateral moves against Iraq's sovereignty and territorial integrity," the letter said.

They said the Russian-Iranian discussions in Moscow on February 16 should be allowed to proceed without hindrance and moreover the IAEA Director General's report on cooperation with Iran is still awaited.

"Apart from these considerations, India cannot but factor in traditionally friendly ties with Iran, which has immese potential of expansion in various mutually benefical directions, expecially in the field of energy cooperation, that will also strengthen regional stability on the whole," it said.

The Left parties had on Friday asked the Government to not vote in favour of any resolution that proposes referral of Iran's nuclear issue to the UN Security Council.

About time we played the abstain game

667medic · 01-28-2006, 13:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gautam

About time we played the abstain game

and damage Indo-US relations

Neo · 01-28-2006, 13:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 667medic

and damage Indo-US relations

The demage will be temporary as India simply can not be ignored as emerging power.
If you don't ship-in in time, you'll be left behind coz everybody wants to have a piece of cake there.
So I agree with Gautam.

667medic · 01-28-2006, 15:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neo

The demage will be temporary as India simply can not be ignored as emerging power.
If you don't ship-in in time, you'll be left behind coz everybody wants to have a piece of cake there.
So I agree with Gautam.

You can see it this way. India abstains and Iran gets sanctioned anyway. Then we have a problem of "neither having the cake and nor eating it" because Unkal is going to be pissed off and Iran can't sell oil anyway....

Gautam · 01-29-2006, 06:30 AM

It's a much bigger question that just Indo-US relations.

One should not forget that inspite of all the offerings of US, energy is one thing US can't offer India and when everyone including the US has played each another since WW2, why would the US find it hard if the same treatment was dished out 2 itself i.e. India abstaining from a vote.

It's about time we thought in a manner "ME FIRST ME FIRST"

Samudra · 01-29-2006, 07:45 AM

Blame David Mulford and sit quiet.

Neo · 01-30-2006, 13:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samudra

Blame David Mulford and sit quiet.

Whatever Mulford said or was 'misquoted'saying, one thing is clear to me.
US wants Indian vote against Iran.
"Either you're with us or you're against us"-Bush '2001 should ring a bell.

Dreadnought · 01-30-2006, 13:56 PM

The question is whats it going to be...

Can you except the fact that Iran may get a nuclear warhead to threaten other nations with because few countries are afraid that they wont get oil from Iran if they vote against it?

If they are willing to trade the safety of any country that Iran deems religiously unacceptable because of oil then all of these countries that accused the U.S. of going into Iraq for oil it seems will be living in their glass houses while they throw rocks from the inside out. Hmmm go figure.

Either way if we allow them to have one no country in that region will remain safe for too long with that man in power. All that man will do is use them to threaten others himself and his religious boss's disagree with.

Sameer · 01-30-2006, 14:09 PM

Why does India have to consider politics in this matter.

If the IAEA report says that iran broke rules and that negotiations with iran are going nowhere, then india should simply vote against iran, plain and simple, why all this fuss, what does the US have to do with it?
nada, we vote based on our responsability as a member of the IAEA.

Iran is an Islamic fundamentalist state that openly calls for the destruction of another state, why should we ever support such a pathetic country?

This gas pipeline was too costly anyway and there were major security issues on where the pipe was going to go... Saudi Arabia and other central asian states can provide us with gas as well.

In any event sanctions that will be imposed on Iran will not be oil export sanctions, that will hurt Uncle as overall supply will fall and price will go up and Uncle's last quarter gdp growth was merely 1.3% vs an expected rate of gdp growth of 2.6%.

Neo · 01-30-2006, 14:11 PM

True, a nuclear Iran would destabalise the region and should not be allowed to gain the knowhow nor the means to go underground with the project and develop the bomb sectretly.
But however you can't deny any country to exploit the techonology for civil purposes, specially when they are a signatory of the NPT.

Imho, by all means the US should try to overthrow the regime instead.

Neo · 01-30-2006, 14:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sameer

Why does India have to consider politics in this matter.

If the IAEA report says that iran broke rules and that negotiations with iran are going nowhere, then india should simply vote against iran, plain and simple, why all this fuss, what does the US have to do with it?
nada, we vote based on our responsability as a member of the IAEA.

Simply coz the opposition is linking the deal with US's desire of Indian support on the matter. That puts Indian souvereignity on risk.
Even outside India, I've sensed the same sentiment in the media.

Samudra · 01-30-2006, 14:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neo

Whatever Mulford said or was 'misquoted'saying, one thing is clear to me.
US wants Indian vote against Iran.
"Either you're with us or you're against us"-Bush '2001 should ring a bell.

Neo,

That was said for a specific purpose.
Ask Musharaff.
He should know.

Anyway we are not voting against Iran this time.
Mulford is to blame and there isnt much India can do about it.

Sameer · 01-30-2006, 14:31 PM

What opposition?

The left parties? they are idiots, who in their right minds will ever listen to them?

oops i forgot what party was in power.,...

NDA?
lol those lalus were busy getting cosy with the US themselves a few years back, Indian opposition parties are funny, it does not matter what they believe in, they will simply oppose whatever the ruling party says or does. They are not too bright

Uncle Sam though should learn to shut up and not talk so much, sometimes talking too much screws everything up, had they just shut up, everything would have worked out for them but this is what happens when American education system does not teach enough about the rest of the world, ie you get people who have no idea about geopolitical realities.

Neo · 01-30-2006, 14:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samudra

Anyway we are not voting against Iran this time.
Mulford is to blame and there isnt much India can do about it.

No Sam, he's not to blame nor resposible for any consequences coz at all times it will be your and only your desicion to go thru or to quit with the deal.
The matter is way to delicate and both Bush and Singh should have calculated the risks and I think they have, including quotes and misquotes.
If India quites the deal coz of Mulford, I think you're not ready for a serious relationship with unkil.
Just my opinion...

Gautam · 01-30-2006, 15:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

The question is whats it going to be...

Can you except the fact that Iran may get a nuclear warhead to threaten other nations with because few countries are afraid that they wont get oil from Iran if they vote against it?

If they are willing to trade the safety of any country that Iran deems religiously unacceptable because of oil then all of these countries that accused the U.S. of going into Iraq for oil it seems will be living in their glass houses while they throw rocks from the inside out. Hmmm go figure.

Either way if we allow them to have one no country in that region will remain safe for too long with that man in power. All that man will do is use them to threaten others himself and his religious boss's disagree with.

Well Well when the americans could turn a blind eye to the Pakistanis being helped by CHinese ( M11 Missiles & nuclear help) the North korean dealings with Pakistani's than I find it highly unlikely that US should object to India's stance here.

After all since when did anyone play by the book

01-30-2006, 13:56 PM	#8 (permalink)
Dreadnought *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 05-12-05 Posts: 5,310 Country:	The question is whats it going to be... Can you except the fact that Iran may get a nuclear warhead to threaten other nations with because few countries are afraid that they wont get oil from Iran if they vote against it? If they are willing to trade the safety of any country that Iran deems religiously unacceptable because of oil then all of these countries that accused the U.S. of going into Iraq for oil it seems will be living in their glass houses while they throw rocks from the inside out. Hmmm go figure. Either way if we allow them to have one no country in that region will remain safe for too long with that man in power. All that man will do is use them to threaten others himself and his religious boss's disagree with. Last edited by Dreadnought : 01-30-2006 at 14:03 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Iran Is Playing a Growing Role in Iraq Economy	xerxes	Current Affairs	0	03-21-2007 13:00 PM
What War With Iran Would Look Like	astralis	Political Discussions	0	09-17-2006 16:52 PM
Iran And Possible Developments	Gazi	The Iranian Question	2	02-26-2006 12:02 PM
Why use force when talk works so well?	Leader	International Defense Topics	54	12-05-2005 04:29 AM
A Preemptive Attack on Iran's Nuclear Facilities: Possible Consequences	lulldapull	International Defense Topics	14	11-20-2004 16:27 PM

01-29-2006, 06:30 AM	#5 (permalink)
Gautam Banished Join Date: 08-28-05 Location: London Posts: 903	It's a much bigger question that just Indo-US relations. One should not forget that inspite of all the offerings of US, energy is one thing US can't offer India and when everyone including the US has played each another since WW2, why would the US find it hard if the same treatment was dished out 2 itself i.e. India abstaining from a vote. It's about time we thought in a manner "ME FIRST ME FIRST"

01-29-2006, 07:45 AM	#6 (permalink)
Samudra *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 09-01-04 Location: North London Posts: 4,306 Country:	Blame David Mulford and sit quiet.

01-30-2006, 14:09 PM	#9 (permalink)
Sameer Banished *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 07-12-05 Posts: 2,541	Why does India have to consider politics in this matter. If the IAEA report says that iran broke rules and that negotiations with iran are going nowhere, then india should simply vote against iran, plain and simple, why all this fuss, what does the US have to do with it? nada, we vote based on our responsability as a member of the IAEA. Iran is an Islamic fundamentalist state that openly calls for the destruction of another state, why should we ever support such a pathetic country? This gas pipeline was too costly anyway and there were major security issues on where the pipe was going to go... Saudi Arabia and other central asian states can provide us with gas as well. In any event sanctions that will be imposed on Iran will not be oil export sanctions, that will hurt Uncle as overall supply will fall and price will go up and Uncle's last quarter gdp growth was merely 1.3% vs an expected rate of gdp growth of 2.6%.

01-30-2006, 14:11 PM	#10 (permalink)
Neo Silent lurker *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 04-06-05 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 7,920 Country:	True, a nuclear Iran would destabalise the region and should not be allowed to gain the knowhow nor the means to go underground with the project and develop the bomb sectretly. But however you can't deny any country to exploit the techonology for civil purposes, specially when they are a signatory of the NPT. Imho, by all means the US should try to overthrow the regime instead.

01-30-2006, 14:31 PM	#13 (permalink)
Sameer Banished *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 07-12-05 Posts: 2,541	What opposition? The left parties? they are idiots, who in their right minds will ever listen to them? oops i forgot what party was in power.,... NDA? lol those lalus were busy getting cosy with the US themselves a few years back, Indian opposition parties are funny, it does not matter what they believe in, they will simply oppose whatever the ruling party says or does. They are not too bright Uncle Sam though should learn to shut up and not talk so much, sometimes talking too much screws everything up, had they just shut up, everything would have worked out for them but this is what happens when American education system does not teach enough about the rest of the world, ie you get people who have no idea about geopolitical realities.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)