India won't scale down petroleum imports from Iran: Pranab, page 1

India won't scale down petroleum imports from Iran: Pranab, page

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 6 times

Topic started on 30-1-2012 @ 01:58 AM by Ek Bharatiya

India won't scale down petroleum imports from Iran: Pranab

www.thehindu.com

India, which imports 12 per cent of its oil from Iran, will not scale down its petroleum imports from Tehran despite US and European sanctions against the Islamic republic, Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee has said.

“It is not possible for India to take any decision to reduce the imports from Iran drastically, because among the countries which can provide the requirement of the emerging economies, Iran is an important country amongst them,” Mr. Mukherjee told reporters.

(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 30-1-2012 @ 01:58 AM by Ek Bharatiya

“We (India) imports 110 million tonnes of crude per year. We will not decrease imports from Iran. Iran is an important country for India despite U.S. and European sanctions on Iran,” the finance minister said.

India is the second biggest oil client of Iran after China and has made a decision to not cut any trade relation with Iran on oil inspite of US-EU sanctions. I think India is also upset at the US interfering in the IPI (Iran-Pakistan-India) gas pipeline which will save India millions of dollars in energy and time and Iran being a long time steady and reliable trade partner may also be the reason behind India's decision.

I think this will not go down very well with US and EU but at the same time it also shows India follows it's own foreign policy not guided or influenced by others. India has always maintained that Iran has right to nuclear energy and they should also follow the IAEA rules.

This also does not mean India is against Israel, India has good trade relations with Israel i.e, weapons and technology.

www.thehindu.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 30-1-2012 @ 03:23 AM by Laurauk

Well now there us a turn up for the books.

India basically is sticking two fingers up to the US And Europe.

Well done India, it is about time someone done this.

Will be interesting to see what the US and Europe will do in regards to this.

India is no push over either.

reply posted on 30-1-2012 @ 03:32 AM by brommas

reply to post by Ek Bharatiya

Good for India, any sovereign nation should be able to make it's own decision on how and what it does without being bullied by the US, Europe or anywhere else.

India like the rest of the world has an infrastructure that has to keep running regardless, and it requires that amount of fuel therefore it should be able to buy it from whomever it chooses.

edit on 30-1-2012 by brommas because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 30-1-2012 @ 03:40 AM by Tw0Sides

India isn't exactly on the best terms with the US, what country is for that matter.

So I can see this response from them was not hard to make.

The have their country to look after and helping the US dominate the OIL flow, is not in their interest.

reply posted on 30-1-2012 @ 04:35 AM by Observor

This was completely predictable and, I believe, predicted by the US and EU. Even if the US and EU don't have enough hold over India to dictate terms (though they managed to get India to stall the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipe line citing differences in transport commission with Pakistan, while going ahead with the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India gas pipe line

), they certainly have enough clout to know what India would do.

So they knew India would not cut on her imports and India knows there won't be an interruption to the oil flow. Otherwise India would have been given the heads up by the US/EU to diversify her imports to avoid an interruption because of attacks.

So in all likelihood there is not going to be an interruption in supplies of Iranian crude to India, meaning there are not likely to be any attacks against Iran anytime soon.

So the immediate purpose of the sanctions seems to be cause world trade to move away from the US$ and Euro, a preparation for an international trading currency regime in the offing.

reply posted on 30-1-2012 @ 04:39 AM by Tifozi

reply to post by Ek Bharatiya

What is becoming more and more apparent is that countries in Africa, Middle East and Asia, are starting to refuse western guidance in several issues. For the most part, to be honest, the west has had such a strong influence in those areas due to corruption.

People with money started making business in those areas, and the people with money started getting in power, making decisions who would benefit the west, and not their own economies and countries.

That is changing because people are starting to get aware that it's more important to make decisions based on a sustainable future and long-term wealth, than to actually give in to western cries for obedience.

India has had enough with western countries messing with it's decisions and free-will. They will not obey to a campaign that is only meant to give more control and influence to countries outside the area.

I praise this sort of policy. It's when people start demanding the best for them-selfs that everyone starts improving their way of life, instead of what we have been doing all this time, that is mostly going to war in order to sacrifice one people for the good of other.

They are actually just being honest and true. They have no reason to cut down their imports, nor does China. Actually, they gain from it. Since the EU and the US are trying to hard to isolate Iran, what they actually accomplished is to cut them-selfs out of Iran's oil trade circle. Iran is not running out of clients, they are actually gaining support in areas that are not friendly (or at least under "command") to the US/EU policy.

So, what started out to be an action to isolate Iran, actually led to a further separation between nations. Which, personally, I don't agree with nor support.

reply posted on 30-1-2012 @ 08:47 AM by Xcathdra

reply to post by Ek Bharatiya

The US and EU have also maintained Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear energy. What we take exception to is the areas of that program that are dual purpose that they have been hiding from the IAEA / NPT.

edit on 30-1-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 30-1-2012 @ 09:38 AM by Tifozi

reply to post by Xcathdra

That would be fine and perfect, if there weren't any double standards. You shouldn't have rights or not based on who you support, or your ideology.

Iran has not made any serious effort towards hostilities that any other country hasn't done before, especially the US and EU. To me it's pathetic how Iran is seen as the greatest threat in human history one day, and the next day is labelled as "pathetic" because their sanctions response won't do anything good, and because they can't even close a narrow straight.

How does that work? How do you become one threat under certain pretexts, and under the light of others you aren't?

And don't we really have better things to concern ourselfs with, than what Iran does or doesn't? They provably would be developing their nuclear power, maybe making some money out of it, and why not get some nukes while they are at it? What's the freaking problem? It's like all the sudden nukes are bad again, while nobody gave a F where they were for decades.

Iran has to build missiles capable of deliver those nukes, if they intend to use them. Isn't the western propaganda tired of labeling Iran as "stupid" and "inapt"? How are they a threat if they can't even throw the stone? What about North Korea? They just have to throw the nuke over the DMZ and they are done, if we are going to analyze countries on their "mad level". And by the way, Iran isn't crazier than the US, on any standards.

Why aren't we seeing 3 US carriers and several international task forces parked outside South Korea?

This hypocrisy is outrageous.

I'm not on Iran's side, nor saying it's a heaven. It's not.

But one thing is to know how things are, and another completely different is to demonize countries to suit an agenda. Iran is no more dangerous than any other country out there, and provably wouldn't even be an issue if the US and EU wouldn't be so eager to wipe them out.

Funny thing that Iran only became a serious subject after Libya was taken out and it's oil supplies started to accommodate EU demands, isn't it? And I think it's hilarious that some of those countries that are now putting their claws on Libya are the same that are most affected by cut on Iran's oil.

Isn't this world great?

reply posted on 30-1-2012 @ 09:51 AM by Xcathdra

reply to post by Tifozi

Lets try this again...

The US and EU have stated Iran has a right to nuclear power.

The issue is the dual purpose of parts of their program and the failure of the Iranian government to comply with the NPT / IAEA requirements they agreed to when Iran joined those entities.

Its not a hard concept to understand. The problem is people are so consistently distorting the facts its not even funny. As an example your post, which focuses on the EU and US and aggressive actions and this and that, which is fine but has nothing to do with Iran not abiding by the treaty they voluntarily joined.

People are quick to compare the situation in Iran and the situation in North Korea, demanding to know why the US apparently has a double standard when it comes to the 2 countries.

Let me clarify for everyone -
We held North Korea to the exact same standard we are holding Iran.

Unlike Iran, North Korea withdrew from those agreements (NPT / IAEA). They opted to go forward with their nuclear weapons program.

If Iran wants nukes and wants the world to back off - then they can do what Israel does. Not be a members of the NPT / IAEA and pursue their own program.

problem solved.

reply posted on 30-1-2012 @ 11:47 AM by Tifozi

reply to post by Xcathdra

The US and EU have stated Iran has a right to nuclear power.

They have a very nice way to show it.

The issue is the dual purpose of parts of their program and the failure of the Iranian government to comply with the NPT / IAEA requirements they agreed to when Iran joined those entities.

Do you mind pointing me out which failures are you referring too? (honestly)

The problem is people are so consistently distorting the facts its not even funny. As an example your post, which focuses on the EU and US and aggressive actions and this and that, which is fine but has nothing to do with Iran not abiding by the treaty they voluntarily joined.

I'm not distorting anything, and you should be careful at what kind of judgements you make on other peoples words. I give you that I wasn't specific, but I wasn't distorting anything to my favor. I was just pointing out logical factors.

In your post I can only see rhetoric. The same type of rhetoric I see everyday in the news being played back and forth by governments.

Let me clarify for everyone -
We held North Korea to the exact same standard we are holding Iran.

Unlike Iran, North Korea withdrew from those agreements (NPT / IAEA). They opted to go forward with their nuclear weapons program.

If Iran wants nukes and wants the world to back off - then they can do what Israel does. Not be a members of the NPT / IAEA and pursue their own program.

Oh, so the problem is the treaty, not the nukes?

Basically you are saying, that the problem is that they signed a document compromising they wouldn't obtain nuclear weapons, but aren't fulfilling it.

BUT, if they actually gave up and resigned the document, they are free to do whatever they like with nuclear weapons?

I'm sorry, am I the only one to the how pathetic that argument is? Nukes are or aren't dangerous based on who signs what?

Again, isn't the world great?

Besides, as an example... What ever happened to the US stand on the Kyoto Treaty? Oh...........right.

edit on 30/1/12 by Tifozi because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 30-1-2012 @ 12:27 PM by Xcathdra

reply to post by Tifozi

If Iran is on the up and up then:

Why did they build a secret enrichment facility and fail to disclose that location to the IAEA as required?

Why have they refused the ability for inspectors to have full complete access to various locations?

Why were inspectors kept out of the country for over a year?

Why does Iran refuse to make scientists available to the inspectors as required?

Why did Iran get caught with software that allows the computer testing of unclear explosions?

All Iran is doing now is stalling for time in hopes of gaining the ability to build a nuke.

reply posted on 30-1-2012 @ 12:56 PM by Tifozi

reply to post by Xcathdra

Why did they build a secret enrichment facility and fail to disclose that location to the IAEA as required?

For the same reason the US has secret facilities. The US signed NPT, so did Russia. I don't see people arguing why Russian inspectors aren't visiting US secret facilities, and vice-versa. (yes, I'm aware they did, but it's not on the same level as with Iran)

Is it that wrong for a country to seek it's own safety? Even in it's darkest secrets? We are demanding them to show everything they have, while we don't give them such an example. Lead by example.

The US could have a beautiful role in the world. I love the US, and I wouldn't like to be ruled by islamic extremists or whatever.

But that isn't a strong reason to do witch-hunting.

Why have they refused the ability for inspectors to have full complete access to various locations?

Have you seen an iranian inspector/scientist visiting in detail a US "location"?

Why were inspectors kept out of the country for over a year?

Because Iran has a right for demands too. It's not only the US to boss around the world. The US has global responsibility, but that's not the same as saying other countries can't have their own businesses in closed doors.

Besides, I'm being honest in this and say I'm not totally informed, I was under the impression Iran refused to accept any more inspectors because they started to feel the sting of several sanctions.

the most recent sanctions are the latest ones, not the only ones.

Why does Iran refuse to make scientists available to the inspectors as required?

Looking at how fast their scientists die, I think it's wise they hide them. I bet they are having a "blast"... lol

Why did Iran get caught with software that allows the computer testing of unclear explosions?

So they can protect them-selfs? Have you consider that? I find it very reasonable that a country uses software for said tests, instead of doing like...let's guess....the US and Russia and whatever, that have multiple nuke sites for testing, some of which are anything but positive in the aftermath.

Earth is not a sandbox.

All Iran is doing now is stalling for time in hopes of gaining the ability to build a nuke.

I do respect your opinion, and your points, trust me. But I have yet to see any reasonable arguments to consider Iran a threat. At least, any bigger threat than most countries around the world...

edit on 30/1/12 by Tifozi because: added to first paragraph

Pages: ^^TOP^^