India should favour Iran at IAEA meet

India should favour Iran at IAEA meet on february 2- my view


U.S. ambassador to India David Mulford has come up with shock to Indo-US nuclear deal.
Though United States official spokesperson Sean McCormack said that it was U.S. ambassador to India, David Mulford’s personal view but it is a matter of concern, which India should note. Most probably there are fair chances that US may cancel the nuke deal with India signed on July 18, 2005.

US Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns after day-long talks with Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran in October on a range of issues including Indo-US nuclear deal, reassured that , "we are not adding any conditions. We Americans will meet the obligations we have undertaken and hoped India will abide by its obligations".
If these were the words from a US state official, then why is there confusion again. This again raises doubt on Indo-US relation.


This is not the first time US is trying to pull itself back, previous history also shows some bad experience of India with US.

India voted against Iran in IAEA on september24, 2005 at Vienna in order to develop and maintain better relation with U.S. and more for the nuclear deal. But a relation/deal on blackmail is never a fair deal.

Now there is but if we look at history, we find U.S.has remained loyal to none of the stable economies, except those who are under its hegemony.


If we give look at economic relations that US encouraged in the late 80’s also had been not complied
In the late 80’s U.S. had been advocating for globalization to developing countries in a bid to exploit the low –cost advantages inherent to such countries. At that time, the advocates of globalization did not realize how it could boomerang them and instead be advantageous for developing countries.
The developed countries had problems in the field of manufacturing, where there companies were losing out against low-cots producers from the east.
Developed countries believed that their core strength was in the services sector and therefore developed next strategy to pressure developing countries to open their services sector market by using the WTO platform .the GENERAL AGREEMENT OF TRADE IN SERVICES (GATS)

But soon their belief was awashed as their own people were not competent and are high-cost vis-à-vis their counterparts in the developing countries.

When competitiveness is the sole concern, patriotism and nationalism get secondary priority.
Why will a company hire those who are expensive and why will a company not prefer means by which it can reduce its expenses?
Some data –

Annual cost of full-time employee in U.S. - $42,927

Annual cost of full-time employee in INDIA -$ 6,179

Total expenses of onshore (U.S.) outfit- $ 58,598

Total expenses of outsourcing to INDIA -$11,854

According to Forrester research-

In the year 2000- 103,000
Expected job loss by the year2015- 3.3 million (half of it will move to India)

These data show that India is on its way to grab big bite in U.S. market, if the trend continues and there is no instability in Indian economy.

‘War against terrorism’ is just a façade which U.S. is using to deploy its forces against its target nation. It is well known fact that AL QAEDA was born under guardianship of U.S. India too had bitter experiences with U.S. in some important incidents.
Like after MUMBAI BOMB BLAST, MARCH 1993, Indian agencies recovered hand grenades of Austrian origin and a chemical timer of US origin from the blast sites. Indian agencies sought assistance of experts from Austrian and US agencies for examining them.

Austrian examined the grenades at the blats site itself & Austrian government gave India a signed official report that these grenades had been manufactured in a Pakistani ordinance factory with the technology and machine tools sold by an Austrian company to Pakistani defense ministry.
Adding that India was free to use this report to build its evidence against Pakistan’s INTER SERVICES INTELLIGENCE in the Mumbai blast. Whereas
US experts insisted that the chemical timer could be examined only in particular specialized forensic laboratory in the US, they repeatedly insisted that Indian forensic laboratory lacked the necessary technology and equipment. Indian intelligence officials became suspicious because the US claims were vehement and were, therefore, therefore reluctant to cede possession of the timer. The senior functionaries of the US government gave their personnel word of honor to their counterparts in Indian government that the timer would be returned intact to India after examination whereupon India permitted them to take it.
After several weeks, they send India an unsigned report admitting that the timer was indeed of US origin and was part of consignment given by US to Pakistan’s ISI for passing onto the mujahideen during the anti-soviet campaign in Afghanistan in the early 1980’s but the US specified that India should not use this unsigned report for any purpose.
Even the timer, which the US officials had promised to return, was destroyed in their laboratory

Indian intelligence officials were of the view that this timer was made around 1990-92 and would have exposed to India the close involvement of US agencies with the ISI. Further
US declared Pakistan Major non-nato nation ally (MNNA) on march17, 2004 means that ‘in case of aggression against Pakistan, the government of united states will take such appropriate action, including the use of armed forces as may be mutually agreed upon ’.
All the threats that US projects, from Iran, are very clearly observed in the case of Pakistan but despite of the intimidation US gave $1bn arms bonanza to Pakistan that included –
1. 8 more P-3C Orion maritime surveillance aircraft
2. 6 phalanx rapid fire gun systems
3. over 2000 TOW-2A missiles

Other than these Pakistan also received F-16 aircraft.
These weapons were given on argument that the weapons are being given to fight against terrorist group like AL QAEDA and Taliban. But nobody uses F-16 fighters and other weapon meant for big wars to fight terrorist.
The Orions, for instance, have the harpoon anti-ship missiles for use over the Arabian Sea. Is Osama hiding there?

View on Indian neighbours

Apart from this we know that India too has security threats from neighbouring countries. Pakistan had always been the root of all security problems.
In the recent years anti-Indian activities had been observed in the Nepalese soil. ISI often uses Nepal route to carry anti-Indian activities. Mirza Dilshad Beg was a very clear example of ISI support.
Bangladeshi forces has many time performed anti-Indian activities .one of their brutal action was against Indian troops at Pyrdwah in Assam .now BANGLADESH ISLAMIC MANCH(BIM) , a group of 9 terrorist organization , has announced formation of Brihat Bangladesh which in their agenda includes Assam and some part of Arkansas province of Myanmar.
In case of war between India and Pakistan, US is going to act according to its promise of MNNA that it will support Pakistan with its troops and weapons. Therefore, if we see from wider perspective it will not be Pakistan at war with India but it will be US fighting with India.
Geographically Iran is the closest which can help India in this type if crisis.As there is decade old relationship of US with Pakistan and if we give some sense the Pakistani functionary’s key lies in the hand of US. There is very rare chance that US will favour India and leave Pakistan.
Iran shares the same view on Pakistan as India and has anti-US perspective. Besides having oil benefit from Iran, there are security reasons where Iran can be of help for India. If we look at cultural perspective, India has worlds largest Shia Muslim population after Iran and because of good relations with Iran, India had no threat from Khomeini movement because of this realtion.
As it is better to have half bread than no bread so Iran should remain preference over US for India.



Reference:
1. Indian Express
2. the times of India
3. www.uniindi.com
4. India and its Neighbour- by CNF,New-Delhi
5. Press Trust of India