Differences over Iran threaten to undermine the progress made on U.S. relations with India. Can New Delhi be persuaded to apply more pressure on Tehran?
Iran is the crisis of the hour in Washington, and for the first time in recent memory talk now routinely turns to military action. In an effort to forestall Tehran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapon, the United States has launched a worldwide effort to limit Iran’s oil exports and increase the economic stress on the Iranian regime. Where sanctions on Iran were once seem as a somewhat quixotic American campaign, they are about to go worldwide; the United States will soon sanction firms that do business with Iran’s Central Bank, which now processes a large percentage of oil transactions. The European Union, meanwhile, is poised to embargo Iranian oil and Asian countries, including South Korea and Japan, are enlisting in the effort to economically isolate Iran.
As this effort proceeds, Americans will inevitably look to India, the fourth-largest importer of Iranian oil. But they will see a view of Iran that looks very different in New Delhi than it does in Washington. This difference over Iran poses a genuine problem to the two countries and, unless it’s bridged, it could throw a tremendous spanner into the machinery of U.S.-India relations.
It’s difficult to overestimate the importance of the Iranian nuclear threat in the minds of most American policymakers. They see in Tehran a regime that pursues an atomic weapon capacity at the same time that has aided American enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan, supports Hizbollah, Hamas and the thuggish regime in Syria, allegedly tries to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States, and threatens to close the Strait of Hormuz, all while denying the Holocaust and threatening death to America. An Iranian nuclear weapons capacity, many policymakers fear, could hand Tehran a deterrent behind which to pursue an even more aggressive drive for regional domination, set off a regional arms race, and threaten the stability of the Middle East.
In New Delhi, the picture looks very different. India imports roughly 12 percent of its oil from Iran, and because Pakistan blocks Indian commerce through Afghanistan to Central Asia, Iran forms a key transit Indian transit route. Indian Shia comprise a relatively small percentage of the population, but represent an important swing vote in elections. India and Iran have long cultural and population ties, and in 2006, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh went so far as tell an American interviewer that, “Our relations with Iran, we cherish a great deal.”
Yet this has begun to change around the edges. The talk of cherishing ties has faded, and India has begun increasing its purchases of Saudi oil. Singh has said explicitly that India opposes an Iranian nuclear weapon, and New Delhi voted to censure Iran at the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Still, the new U.S.-led sanctions push may put Washington and New Delhi on opposite sides of this critical issue. Asked about America’s new sanctions, Indian Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai said this past week: “We have accepted sanctions which are made by the United Nations. Other sanctions do not apply to individual countries. We don’t accept that position.” Indeed, he went further, noting that an Indian delegation would travel to Iran to “work out a mechanism for uninterrupted purchase of oil from Iran.” And India and Iran have reportedly agreed to settle some of their oil trade in rupees to avoid restrictions on dollar-denominated trade.
Photo Credit: White House
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
latsar
Each country has to put its national interest first. India should put its national interest first with regarding to Iran. A growing India is highly dependent on gulf oil. Before US invaded Iraq,Iraq was a reliable supplier of oil to India. Due to American misadventure in Iraq, that country has become highly unstable (but I am sure Americans have secured all the oil fields for their own interests). The only other reliable place for oil to India is Iran. Of course, India imports oil from Saudi as well, however Saudi Arabia is not a reliable supplier, as it has many times in the past indulged in anti-India activities; an example of this is Saudi Arabia funding wahabi fundamentalists mhadrasas which has become a specialist in training terrorists. Even though O.B. Laden is a Saudi and most of 9/11 terrorists are Saudi nationals, America blatantly wants to close it’s eyes and sell billions of military equipment (land, sea and air) the Saudi’s and making the region very unstable. The US has also persuade its own interests vis a vis Pakistan providing military aid, F16s and billions in monetary aid, which it is going to use directly in anti-India activities; further it is known fact ISI aided Taliban, have killed hundreds of US soldiers; not to tell about safe haven provided to O.B. Laden for many years, at the same time fooling the US. In these matters US has taken decions which is contrary to India’s interest, (Pakistan is the most dangerous country in the world with more than hundred WMD and has a poor record on nuclear proliferation. Pakistan has the most religious fundamentalists who are anti-India and the US in the world). the Americans are expecting India to follow their line Vis a Vis Iran. If there is a war between India and Pakistan Saudis would immediately stop oil supplies to India so it is in Indias national interest to have a good relation with Iran. Further, Irans strategic location as an exit point Vis a Vis Afghanistan and oil rich central Asia makes India’s relation with Iran indispensable. India having strongly stated it’s position on Iran’s nuclear program, should try to leverage it’s influence on Iran to come clean on their nuclear issue and should abide all the conditions set by the IAEA but at the same time tell Americans emphatically that it cannot join it’s band-wagon on it’s misadventures
sona
if the US wants poodles for allies, then it need look no further than europe – even japan is asserting itself – asia is not going to be a willing colony of the US and asia does not and should not give a whit about a dysfunctional US congress
US needs to redefine diplomacy beyond the parameters of arms twisting, threats, loads of cash, remote controlled drones and spying on foreign diplomats at the UN
btw, iran is nowhere near to nuclear weaponisation nor does it have the missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads – it also has a right to engage in civil nuclear research and the iaea has not a shred of evidence that its nuclear program is anything but
perhaps if facts get in the way, we can have less insanity than we have experienced throughout this century
pm
The US has got to realize that when dealing with countries like india, turkey, brazil and so on, this kind of bluster just isnt going to work. As some of the comments here indicate most indians find it despicable that the US funds Pakistan and is an ally of Saudi Arabia. Both of these countries have created 10x the damage caused by Iran, in terms of terrorism and creation of worldwide islamist extremism. India has been deeply harmed by these countries and the gulf states who fund hardline salafist and wahabis in india.
The indians arent going to play, PERIOD. As the indian govt guy says – India will follow UN sanctions, as for anything else, the western powers are on their own.
capitalist77
Man…yanks are so hypocritical..almost as blind as the Islamic fundamentalists. So let me understand, the US can do things blatantly immoral and against Indian interests, but India can’t protect its interests with Iran? Iran is a bad country, but no worse than your pals in Saudi Arabia or Kuwait, who practice and protect deliberately modern day slavery. More hypocrisy – here are worse things the yanks have done to us, and then call us “friends” its better not to have? You haven’t given us much apart from:
1. Clinton admin willfully turned a blind eye to Chinese transfers of Nuclear and Missile Technology to Pakistan in order to provide continued MFN status to them. Now India has a fundamentalist military controlled nuclear regime on our borders?
2. The US can give billions of dollars of military aid, including f-16s capable of delivering nuclear weapons, to a country that specifically has aided and abetted terrorists through: finance, refusing to prosecute them (Hafiz Saeed), giving shelter to terrorists and hijackers escaped from Indian jails (Omar Shaikh, killer of Daniel Pearl and Masood Azhar). You can give billions to an organisation that sponsors terrorism in India and expect us to play ball on Iran?
Get real…when you’re ready to be absolutist on terrorism instead of convenient about your short term goals, let us know and we can talk about a partnership. In the meantime, enjoy your friendship with the lovely Saudis while we do with the bad bad Iranians.
Capitalist
PacRim Jim
As usual, Americans are warned about disrupting relations with India.
Yet India shows no concern about its relations with American, when it buys oil from Iran.
Enough of these phony one-way international relations.
Gimme friends like India the U.S. does not need.
Barry Soe
The Thais say if you see a snake or an Indian in the road which do you kill first?
Obviously, we know the answer, but the meaning goes deeper for the Thais
America with its policy of give and give deserves the kick it gets in the rear.
Girish
@Barry Soe
Pretty immature comments about Indians.
Anyways I still believe thai people are nice and we see them as a friends.
Varun
@ Barry Soe, you do know that US supplied military supplies to Pakistan when the 1972 Indo-Pak war happened?
Imposing sanctions in 1998, despite the fact India was already a Nuclear weapons state from 1974 onwards, India is not a signatory of NPT or CTBT, the ban was stupid.
US military supplies to India was negligible and of incredible price ranges.
We imported our weaponry from USSR and then Russi and now have military partnership with them in new weapons development(like supersonic & hypersonic Brahmos missiles and PAK/FA 5th gen fighter).
Only thing that you can argue for is the recent nuclear waiver, it was nice for India sure, but people weren’t dying if we didn’t get it, in fact most people in the Govt and opposition didn’t want it, it was the PM’s individual decision call.
Oil is more important and immediate commodity.
Plus India has incredible Thorium reserve and next-gen nuclear technology will be Thorium based so we never needed the deal that desperately, it was Bush who was adamant and Indian PM seized upon it.
And look whats happening, France and Russia has already singed lucrative long term deals for Multiple Nuclear Plants across India, US companies are whining about legal terms and conditions, you guys can’t even work properly on this opportunity.
Your assumption that US has given & given to India is the height of propagandized brainwashed individual lacking any sense of history & reality.
Get real buddy.
India is a democracy and if its seen as India is being directed by US or any other country, the Govt will fall and the embassy will see massive & hostile protests.
Not everyone in India is in love with the US, in a country of billion people there are enough hundreds of millions who don’t like it. Don’t test their guts.
Varun
*1971 Indo-Pak War, not 1972.
peace for all
where did you heared the thai’s saying that?In your dream world…lol..
vineet
@Barry Soe
Dude do you seriously think we Indians are so naive that we’ll do anything US wants us to.We may not be as powerful as you guys are but we do have our self respect.We will support US in only those decisions which benefit us & sanctioning Iran won’t do any good to our nation.You guys get cheap oil from your stooge’s like Saudi,which is the hub of terror.You aid Pakistan and supply them with F16′s, stil you dont’s hear Indians complaining,so wat ru complaining about.
I don’t know wat u think of India cuz if thats wat India was all about then Obama wouldn’t have come begging for Jobs to India.
Dude Get this straight, if India wasn’t buying those planes , you or some one from ur familly would have gone broke by now.
Indian
First I’d like to mention that this American hegemony over the world is very short lived, may be for a decade or two. So don’t take any stupid decisions (from now on) that will make you regret forever. I afraid at the end of the day you may find yourself isolated from this very world.
It is human nature to be selfish, agree, but there got to be some limit. Your selfishness is abysmal. This puts you in the category of animals to be précised.
On the name of weapon of mass destruction (WMD) you guys invaded Iraq, created whole lot of mess there. Did you find anything there? How come your intelligence agency failed in this operation? The real reason for invasion is that Iraq wanted to trade in Euros rather than Dollars which was, of course not in your interest. How come then you dominate the world? ‘Libya invasion’ doesn’t have any different reason (here they wanted to trade in gold).
You Americans create this mess everywhere (away from your mainland) and make others suffer! Don’t you guys have enough manners to clean your shit? You left Iraq. Now you are planning to leave Afghanistan (and planning to repeat Iraq with Iran). Who is going to clean your shit? If you cannot finish your business then why do you start at first place? The fact is that you guys always want to rule the world. You really don’t care about ‘world peace’. These regions are now more dangerous than before, possessing credible threat to its neighbors and ultimately to the whole world.
You stupid morons, the main source of this WMD is Pakistan. You guys were quite aware of Pak’s clandestine nuclear program. Why didn’t you stop them then? Why don’t you stop them now? It is well known that Pak is the source of proliferation of Nuke tech to North-Korea, Iran and “would be” Saudi Arabia. No action against the main culprit! Hmm…that’s funny! You guys are well aware that the 21st century belongs to Asians. Hence you want this Asian region unstable and dangerous as much as possible so that you can continue your hegemony.
What makes you guys think that you are bigger than UN? Giving large donation to UN does not mean that you owe UN. India is following all UN’s rules and regulations. India doesn’t, LET ME REPEAT, doesn’t give any shit to any other country’s sanctions.
Dear author, you mentioned about jeopardizing defense cooperation with the US. What cooperation are you talking about? Is this C-30J, P-8I, C-17, Apache-III, stinger and harpoon missiles, etc? Even if you guys cancel, some or all of these deals that won’t hurt India much. All those goodies are available in the market, may not be of the best standard but still good enough to cause harm to ANY adversary severely.
Dear Indians, all these defense equipments offered to India are neither best-in-class nor there is any transfer of technology, as India has not signed CISMOA, BECA, and LSA agreements (India knows very well that she is not puppet of the US like Japan, Australia, Europe except France, etc). Whatever they are selling us is not their front line technology. They have removed many high tech components from those goodies. Also these are prone to sanctions if our views don’t match with them on some sensitive issues. Also since we have signed EUMA (due to the nuke deal) we need take permission from the US for “ANY” and “EVERY” mission (EUMA is subjected to all defense equipments too). That is the main reason India did buy big ticket deal (F-16 and F-18) from these guys. We really know how pathetic you guys are!
You may cancel Nuke deal. That’s also Okay with us. Slowly but steadily we will get what we want as we did for other projects eg. LCA, Arjun, etc. But believe me jeopardizing relations with India is not in your interest. It will harm you more than India. I can certainly give many reasons but I’m really not in a mood now.
About trade cooperation, it is in your interest to keep things running. It’s your economy that is shivering not ours. Our bilateral trade with China is much more than yours. You are the ones who are begging to remove certain restrictions on FDI in India. Believe me it’s not in the US interest to go south against India.
Dear author, it is always good to have pride for one’s prowess but as soon as ego replaces that one needs to consider that his/her downfall is imminent.
Girish
@PacRim Jim
“India shows no concern about its relations with American, when it buys oil from Iran”
look who is talking..
How about selling Weapons like F-16 and other sophisticated weapons etc to Pakistan despite issue being consistently raised by India?
Who doesn’t know these weapons have no role against fight against Taliban but rather to be used against India?
Did you ever thought of India’s concerns?
Why is complain when India is pursuing its own interest when US does the same, ALWAYS.
India is altogether a different type. And it is proven to US every-time. Only way to deal with India is to cooperate as equals and not like a client state.
Of us, our interest are the priority as US follow its own.
India and US are natural partners but rule of the game is to be set cooperatively and not by US alone.
NPegasus
The US, without much hesitation, aids and arms among the most dangerous countries – notably Pakistan and Saudi Arabia – because it serves American national interests at the expense of the interests of regional countries, including India, and the world at large.
Ironically, there are no alarms of the Indo-US train wrecks, when the US gifts billions of dollars in military aid to Pakistan to buy F-16s and frigates in the name of fighting the Taliban; a portion of that aid Pakistan gladly spends on reinforcing the terrorist infrastructure. Nor do we see similar anger, when the US shields the corrupt Saudis who are the fountainhead of extremist Islam setting up madrassas.
So it comes down to energy; more specifically availability of crude oil. Like the US imports its oil from the Saudis & others, India imports bulk of its crude oil from the Iranians. The Indo-US nuclear deal will take years, if not decades, for the mutual benefits to kick in. In the end, unless the US has crude oil to sell at a price that Iran is selling to India it should, for the lack of better word, shut up.
Lnrds
The world needs a world police. Who else would police the world?
India will buy Iranian oil with gold. Simple solution for them.
As for US-India relationship, its to contain both Pakistan and China as they are alies. It s nice strategic containment wall encircling Pakistan which US can’t trust no more and China for expanding their influence westward.
I’d rather US contain China than to fight China causing another world war. It could cause another world war but highly unlikely comparing to the conditions of how WW1 and WW2 started (assassination and revival of Germany as a superpower)
Mazo
The US-India relationship is more than just taking a position on Iran. The relationship is more than the sum of its parts even. Economically, politically and strategically India is valuable. Indian companies are creating jobs in America and Europe while Indian customers are importing more and more goods from Europe and America.
Despite the differences over Iran, the relationship is in no way close to being considered a “train-wreck”. While there may be some senators and Congressmen who would be disappointed, it would not infect the wider relationship because there is too much to gain for both sides. Further, India was not included nor was it consulted on any course of action over Iran. It was purely an internal US decision to levy sanctions. The US can’t reasonably expect the world to operate at its beck and call. The US Congress and Administration will have to get used to disappointments if they choose to act unilaterally.
John Chan
Saddam Hussein took order from the USA and fought a war with Iran on the back of a lot of Iraqis lives. When he went to Kuwait to collect his reward he thought he deserved it, he did not realize he did something that disappointed USA administration, senators and congressmen. The punishment to Saddam’s non-lackey-like behaviour was severe, his death and the destruction of his country.
India has not made any contribution to the USA empire as significant as Saddam Hussein, and expects to be treated leniently when it disappoints USA Congress and Administration; India’s expectation is rather unrealistic.
Mazo
There are several flaws in your theory. For one, India has never been a lackey of the US and the US has never actually provided any substantial help in any Indian conflict. Also, India has never needed or invited help from the US for fighting wars or handling emergencies. ( The only exception to this was in 1962 when the American’s air dropped supplies to Indian troops but nothing more. ) Your premise that Kuwait was “Saddam’s prize” is against factually incorrect. The Iraqi’s moved towards Kuwait nearly aa decade after their war with the Iranians was over due to some historic claim over the region as well as disputes over oil. The Iraqi invasion was sudden and brutal and the US and the UNSC called for Iraq’s immediate withdrawal, which Iraq refused. Thus the ensuing conflict against Saddam. India’s position is different. It isn’t an aggressor nor is it doing anything illegal according to International law. Any Indian move away from buying Iranian oil would be “favor” done to the US, not an obligation. Only substantial political benefits or some ameliorating economic alternative would compensate for India’s loss from trading Iranian crude. Plus, India has a large Shia population and current political sensitivities might not enable India to participate in any sanction regime if it seen as hurting the average Iranian citizens adversely.
John Chan
When US goes to punish India for refusing doing USA’s bidding, USA will engineer a pretext as elaborate as the one for Iraq. UNSC, EU, Japan, S. Korea, Philippines, Vietnam and Australia will all line up to back up USA’s accusation like they back up USA’s accusation of Iraq possessing WMD as a pretext for invasion, all those nations sent troops to Iraq too.
Neil
I am unable to understand why is it that the whole world should comply to US demands and stop dealing with countries that US does not like or have problems with. My question to the author in this regard is does the US bother about India’s objections in the way US deals with the countries India is not comfortable with ? If not why should India comply. Even China has suggested that they will only follow the UN imposed sanctions and not any other sanctions imposed by a country. They are right in doing so. Why do we have UN if the world has to follow what US says. Please do not forget the fact that in the given geo-political and economic situations US move will hurt the world economy more. If India China needs oil to run their economy and continue with their progress they are right to show their middle finger to any such diktats that has the slightest possibility of derailing their progress.
gopal panicker
this stuff about the iranian nuclear program is ridiculous…everybody knows they are trying for a bomb…the usa has thousands…israel has hundreds…let them deter the iranians…it worked during the cold war…why wont it work now
TOM UFERT
WHILE THE ISSUE OF A NUCLEAR ARMED IRAN IS OF MONUMENTAL WORLD CONCERN, WITH REGARDS TO U.S.-INDIAN RELATIONS, A MAJOR HISTORICAL POINT MUST BE CONSIDERED. INDIA, SINCE IT’S BIRTH AS AN INDEPENDENT DEMOCRACY, HAS BEEN THE RECOGNIZED STANDARD BEARER FOR THE 3RD WORLD NON-ALIGNED COUNTRIES. FURTHERMORE, THIS POSITION IS ENHANCED AS THE PREMIER NUCLEAR POWER FOR THE NON-ALIGNED WORLD OUTSIDE OF THE P5 OF THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL. AS SUCH, INDIA TAKES THIS POSITION VERY SERIOUSLY AND COULD BE DEFENSIVE OF ANOTHER NATION WANTING TO JOIN THE NUCLEAR CLUB. HAVING SAID THAT, IT IS DOUBTFUL, CONSIDERING INDIA’S CLOSE GEOGRAPHICAL PROXIMITY TO IRAN, THAT SHE WOULD BLINDLY DISREGARD THE RADICAL TENDANCIES OF THE ISLAMIST THEOCRACY. HOWEVER, AMERICA MUST NOT TAKE INDIA’S FRIENDSHIP FOR GRANTED AND IGNORE HER HISTORICAL FERVOR TO VOCALLY REPRESENT THE ASPIRATIONS OF THE NONALIGNED NONNUCLEAR WORLD.
Mazo
First stop using Capitals and learn to type.
Second, this has nothing to do with Non-alignment or 3rd world leadership or geographical proximity. The primary concern for India is the impact of raising oil prices on India’s economy due to US and European sanctions. India has just recently struggled with aggressive inflation and has fought hard to bring inflation under control, US and European interests cannot take precedence over India’s domestic self-interest.
Why should India stop buying Iranian oil when it would be cheaper to do so than buying from the regular market, especially with US and European sanctions ?? Plus this is an election year in India and higher oil prices would mean an increased pressure on oil subsidies by the Indian government – not something palatable. Economically, there is very little rationale to support these sanctions.
Ultimately, while India does care about Iranian nukes, they are hardly a priority and frankly far less dangerous than North Korea or Pakistan having nukes – both of which have happened. Sanctions didn’t work with Iraq, they won’t work with Iran and the whole world will pay through our nose, especially the most vulnerable people in the third world for the failed aggressive policies of the West.
Anon
We are not asking India to do what is not in its interest, but just as India has its own interests we have ours. It may be that our actions will eventually lead india to conclude that buying oil from Iran is not in its best interests, but dear god India don’t make it a point of independence, cause these aren’t aimed at India.
Mazo
It’s not about these sanctions being a point of independence. It’s about the cost-benefit analysis of this on India. It is a matter of economics and numbers. The cost of being part of the US sanctions regime would be too high for India and even with the Saudi crude alternative, the price of oil is bound to rise as supply side pressures mount. Plus, with the EU and American sanctions in place, there is every likelihood that Iran would be more than willing to price its oil below market price and sign long term contracts at fixed prices, making such deals extremely lucrative. This decision isn’t about being unco-operative or about waving the flag for India but it’s about hard economic realities that are magnified in a politically volatile time.