The Uncertain Future of India-Pakistan-Iran Pipeline

re:#158 by nasah
The days when India was the leader of the third world, a leader and founding member of Non-aligned movement are truly over.
In today`s world, India is dependent on US, other western powers for its economic development. India was trying to forge a strategic relationship with Iran mainly for its gas reserves. As India continues to grow economically, its energy needs are going to be colossal. Iran could have fulfilled those needs.
But as Ranjit pointed out, Iran seems to be taking pleasure in antagonizing the west. It is not as if Iran is ready with the bomb. Israelis estimate that they are at most 1 year away. Other western powers think Iran is at least 4 years away.
Why is then Iran trying to antagonize West? May be it wants to be seen as one of the few nations that can defy the west and gain a leadership position. Already, muslims are praising Iran for its defiance!
India could not have sided with Iran without putting its own economic growth at jeopardy. Iran has little to offer India other than gas. Even gas is going to be tough to sell for Iran, given the developing political situation. India has of late turned to Saudi Arabia and is forging a special relationship with that nation. A democracy is not bound by ideology. I am not fond of SA but what the heck, if that nation can fulfil India`s energy needs, so be it.
Sridhar

Re various posts by Be-haram No. 1

This idiot`s posts are becoming so stale and unimaginative (just does not seem to get out of the shitting/squatting mode) that it is time to further revise his name. He should be now called ``Mr Lump of Stale Shit`` a.k.a. `` Janab Bansi Tatti``!

``Should we sacrifice our national interests and our economic well-being to support an idiot like Ahmedinijad?``(Ranjit)

Ranjit -- India`s national interests and India`s economic wellbeing will go into flames in case of Israeli and American attack on Iran`s nuclear facility any way.....

India must set it foot down as the major player of the region to prevent that MOTHER of all disasters.....despite that nincompoop Nejad...

Re:nasah#158

It is unfair to blame India too much in this matter. Iran has virtually solicited this international action by its reckless policies and the reckless actions of Ahmedinijad. If Iran wanted to build nuclear weapons, it could have done so quietly by keeping a low profile. But no!! This idiot Ahmedinijad has to go in front of the media and make absurd statements every day about destroying Israel and relocating it to Alaska. What was the need for this? Given the sensitivities in the world today in the face of terrorism, it was a very foolish strategy. On top of that if you consider Iran`s long-term support of Hezbollah and Hamas, is it surprising to see this oucome?

What can India do in these circumstances when the Iranians are desperately seeking confrontation and war? Should we sacrifice our national interests and our economic well-being to support an idiot like Ahmedinijad? Should we get into the cross-fire? So if Bush is stupid, so is Ahmedinijad and so was Saddam. It is our bad luck that all these morons have become heads of states at the same point in history.

Bidwai may be right -- this US administration may have successfully muzzled India before it takes out the nuclear facilities of Ahemednejad`s Iran by an air strike -- creating a mother of all disasters for the region especially for the energy supplies of the area and the world....

Is Bush that demented that crazy...? may be or may be not...

...but what about Raja Manmohan Singh jee maharaj and Queen Garibaldiella -- could the duo be that naive.....?...nah

``What is not in doubt is that a strike on Iran will open the floodgates to chaos and violence on an unprecedented and unfathomable scale in the entire West Asian region, with explosive consequences for the U.S., among other powers.

The U.S. controls the airspace that Israel would have to traverse to attack Iran. It would have to approve of such a strike, which risks inviting a strategic disaster of unbelievable proportions.

The West has not resolved its dilemma.

But that is unlikely to stop it from lobbying and bullying other states, including India, to isolate Iran and haul it before the Security Council.

There are signs that Washington has mounted renewed pressure on New Delhi on the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline. In December, U.S. embassy officials gave a demarche to the Union Ministry of Petroleum against the project, which the U.S. says it opposes ``absolutely``.

As a carrot, the U.S. is offering nuclear energy cooperation to India under the July 18 agreement. Condoleezza Rice on January 6 explicitly linked U.S. opposition to India-Iran energy cooperation with the nuclear deal.

THE Western, in particular the U.S., position on Iran is shot through with hypocrisy and double standards.

The U.S. insists on keeping its nuclear weapons arsenal, indeed on expanding it. It has embarked on a plan to extend its nuclear capability both upwards, through ``Star Wars``, and downwards, through bunker-buster nuclear weapons.

There could be no example that is more negative than Washington`s own addiction to nuclear weapons. So long as a handful of the world`s states continue to insist on possessing nuclear weapons, they cannot make a credible case for other states not having them.

This does not argue that Iran should have nuclear weapons or that its own nuclear intentions are honourable and entirely limited to peaceful purposes.

Iran too is playing a cynical game, although it cites its ``right`` to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes under the NPT. The trouble is that the same capabilities that would advance its civilian nuclear programme can be used to develop nuclear weapons in future.

That highlights the basic contradiction at the heart of the NPT, and more generally, of the unequal global nuclear order, which does not effectively compel the nuclear weapons-states to disarm.

Where does all this leave India? After its disgraceful vote at the IAEA on September 24, India has lost whatever little diplomatic leverage it had with Iran.

It has very little economic leverage either. Iran, with its huge oil and gas resources, is in no way dependent on India. India`s only conceivable leverage could be moral or moral-political.

But even that is compromised, indeed lost, by New Delhi`s desperate desire to have its nuclear weapons ``normalised`` and its refusal to accept nuclear restraint.

India could have set a positive example if it had returned to the global nuclear disarmament agenda as the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) promised in the National Common Minimum Programme (NCMP).

The power of this example would have been greatly reinforced if India had initiated bilateral measures of nuclear restraint with Pakistan.

But the nuclear deal with the U.S. has effectively closed this option. Unless India cancels this deal, it will be compelled to accept the legitimacy of nuclear weapons, including those of the U.S.

It cannot both crave acceptance as a nuclear weapons-state within the global nuclear order and demand a radical change in it.

New Delhi has reduced itself to the status of a prisoner through the disastrous nuclear deal. The agreement is not primarily about nuclear power. Nor is it a mere bilateral arrangement.

At its heart is a conversation about power, in its raw, cynical form, defined by the U.S. on its terms.

This means that India will be a passive, helpless spectator to the reshaping of the most volatile region of the world along even more violent lines -

the very opposite of what supporters of the Indian bomb had hoped nuclear weapons would help it achieve, by expanding the scope for influencing the world and enhancing New Delhi`s independence in security and foreign policy-making.

Crossing the nuclear threshold in May 1998 was a big blunder. Signing the nuclear deal with the U.S. seven years later was an even bigger disaster.``(Bidwai in Frontline)

Ref: #155

rsridhar:

{Ha, ha, ha. }

Plop, plop, plop. This was the muglai biryani that I had in the afternoon. It had meat in it. Sorry but there might be some meet in that plop. May your gandhi forgive your eating your sacred cow, albeit in a different form.

Enjoy the Persian plops.

And go into your version of yoga. You know the drill.

re: my post 153
Ha, ha, ha.
After Beharam reads my post 153, his chaddi will be on fire!
Lakshmi Mittal, BTW, was the proverbial hindu defecating on the railway track who has now made it big in the corporate sector and owns a multi-billion dollar empire stretching across Europe.
Next time Harrami comments on a hindu defecating on the railway track, he would do well to remember Mittal`s story.
Mittal, who started his life in penury in a small town in Rajasthan, can pay to have Beharam clean his A$$ everytime he defecates! Let Beharam not forget that.
Sridhar

Useless creatures like yourself must be cleared before any construction happens. Rubbish that you and that bipolar factoid junkie and other hindoo hate mongers are proof enough to get rid of your smelley selves from this site.

Take your hindoo fanatic @sses somewhere else. We have nothing to prove to the creatures that are hard for humans to understand anyway.

You who spew hate are a disgrace to humanity.

re:an Indian steel magnate`s take over bid
http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/article/0,13005,901060213-1156507,00.html
(Nerves Of Steel
Lakshmi Mittal`s brash bid for Europe`s largest steelmaker has roiled markets and infuriated governments. Here`s how he makes his own rules

By PETER GUMBEL

Sunday, Feb. 05, 2006
When one of the richest men in the world invites you to a private dinner at his gorgeous $128 million London home, who would be so churlish as to refuse, even if he is your biggest business competitor? Guy Dollé says he had no reason to suspect that the Jan. 13 invitation from Lakshmi N. Mittal would be the prelude to a hostile takeover bid that last week sent half of Europe into a frenzy.

Dollé, 63, is chief executive of Luxembourg-based Arcelor, Europe`s biggest steel company, measured by revenue, which was formed in 2002 out of what was left of the French, Belgian, Luxembourgian and Spanish steel industries. Mittal, 55, is the Indian-born chairman of the world`s biggest producer of steel, Mittal Steel, which he built up over the past decade with a slew of acquisitions, in the process making a fortune for himself estimated at $25 billion. The two men have known each other for years and, as board members of the steelmakers` international trade group, meet regularly to discuss industry-wide issues. But on Jan. 13, after predinner drinks in Mittal`s Kensington Palace Gardens mansion, the Indian popped the surprise question to his European rival: Why not merge their two companies?

Exactly what happened next is a matter of dispute. Dollé says he gave a noncommittal reply, and the two moved on to dinner and other business, leaving discussion about a possible merger open. ``I said neither yes nor no,`` he recalled last week. ``I just said 75% to 80% of mergers fail because of cultural differences.`` For his part, Mittal says Dollé immediately ruled out a deal. ``He gave several reasons why he wasn`t interested,`` he told Time. ``I told him I`d get in touch again, and called a few days later to say there was an urgent need to meet.`` The men never did re-establish contact and on Jan. 26 — less than two weeks later — Mittal called Dollé on his mobile phone at Frankfurt airport while he was checking in for a flight to Toronto. The message: Rotterdam-based Mittal Steel would be announcing the following day a formal $22.6 billion takeover bid for Arcelor, one of the largest hostile bids in European history.

He might as well have dunked a croissant in hot vindaloo curry sauce. In much of Europe, Mittal`s move was viewed as a rough attempt by ``new`` India to take on ``old`` Europe. France`s Finance Minister Thierry Breton accused Mittal of having ``a grammar problem`` and the Prime Minister of Luxembourg, Jean-Claude Juncker, declared: ``This hostile bid by Mittal Steel calls for a reaction that is at least as hostile.`` Dollé worked hard to encourage public opposition, dismissing Mittal as a low-grade operator specializing ``in buying up obsolete installations at low cost.`` Mittal himself insists that the deal amounts to the merger of two European companies to create a stronger one. ``The rationale for merging is very strong,`` he says.

While the rhetoric bounced from side to side, Mittal`s onslaught gave many Europeans a high-profile reason to reflect on how globalization is transforming the way their economies work and shifting the balance of power not just from West to East and rich to once-poor, but from government regulation to private-sector free enterprise. ``The state`s ability to prevent this takeover is extremely limited,`` conceded Patrick Ollier, president of the French parliament`s economic affairs committee.

Alongside agriculture, steel is arguably the most political of industries in Europe, and it has long been one of its most regulated. Back in the 1950s, the European Union itself was founded on the basis of an official scheme to manage steel and coal output and prices, and when the industry ran into trouble in the 1980s, governments across Europe poured in billions of dollars of state aid in an attempt to keep it alive. But times have changed. State aid is now banned, barring exceptional circumstances. And with the emergence of China, India, Brazil and Russia as fast-growing world economic forces, demand for all sorts of basic materials from oil to platinum has been on the rise. Steel prices have doubled in the past four years, and worldwide output of an industry once written off as moribund has risen by more than 30% since 2000.

In this new world, location is less important than cost efficiency, and highly mobile investors and entrepreneurs such as Mittal — an Indian national, based in London, with a company headquartered in the Netherlands — are making the rules. Even in Paris, amid the official fury and calls for the deal to be blocked, some acknowledged that the tide of history is turning against the old habit of looking at business in purely national or European terms. ``I understand the astonishment and emotion`` the bid caused, said Luc Chatel, a lawmaker from President Jacques Chirac`s ump party. But he pointed out that the French find it natural for automaker Renault to buy a controlling stake in its Japanese rival Nissan, and added: ``What do you prefer? To see European industries shift production to India, or to see Indians investing in Europe?``

Mittal`s bid could still be derailed. Financial markets bubbled over with rumors that Arcelor was looking for a rescuer, possibly a Japanese firm who would put in a higher offer, although no such ``white knight`` had emerged by the end of the week. Mittal also needs to convince investors that his bid, which consists mainly of Mittal Steel stock with some cash, is good for them. Mittal Steel has what many see as a financial weak point: its corporate governance structure, which locks in Mittal family control. Lakshmi`s son Aditya, 29, is president and ceo of the company, and his daughter Vanisha, 24, is also on the board. The family`s current holding of 88% of Mittal stock is set to drop to just above 50% if the deal is concluded. But the Mittals will continue to have a big controlling majority because of a dual stock structure.
It`s not hard to see why Mittal should feel so strongly about retaining family control. Money is in his name: Lakshmi is the Hindu goddess of wealth. But former neighbors say he was born almost penniless, growing up in Sadulpur, a small Rajasthani town in an area of thorn trees and sand dunes in western India, in a house built by his grandfather. The extended family of 20 lived on bare concrete floors, slept on rope beds and cooked on an open fire in the brick yard. ``They didn`t have any income,`` says Sushil Kumar Saraogi, 61, editor of the weekly Sadulpur Times. ``They scraped by on what the father had managed to rescue. They were very poor.`` Shankar Lal Saraogi, 78, Mittal`s uncle, adds: ``They weren`t considered a prestigious family. Very ordinary, in fact.``

The Mittals quickly moved on — and up. They belong to the Marwari caste, well-known in India for being traders and moneylenders who figure prominently in the leading business houses of India. The family left for Calcutta, a center of Marwari activity, where father Mohan Mittal became a partner in a steel company. Lakshmi graduated with a business degree from the élite St. Xavier`s College in 1969 and joined his father`s firm before branching out on his own. ``He was very strong in numbers,`` recalls Sisir Bajoria, a fellow Xavier`s student. Mittal split from his father and two younger brothers in 1994 for reasons they don`t discuss. He took the international arm, with interests in Indonesia and Trinidad and Tobago, and the rest of the family kept the domestic Indian business. Since then, Mittal has left the other side of the family behind. Over the past five years he has made about 20 acquisitions, buying up a network of steel producers in former communist countries including Kazakhstan, Romania and Ukraine, and pushing into the U.S. in 2004 with the $4.5 billion purchase of International Steel Group. His empire now has more than 175,000 employees and spans the globe. Last year, he set up shop in India for the first time, agreeing to build a new factory in the northeastern state of Jharkhand.

With business success has come wealth and opulence. He acquired the Kensington mansion, said to be the world`s most expensive home, from Formula One racing`s Bernie Ecclestone two years ago. And in 2004, he and his family made headlines around the globe when he threw a $50 million wedding bash for daughter Vanisha. It included an engagement ceremony at Paris` Tuileries Gardens featuring parrots and a tiger; an opera and banquet at the French royal palace at Versailles; and a Kylie Minogue concert and sit-down dinner at the 17th century Vaux le Vicomte Chateau, where chefs from Calcutta served 1,000 guests on china monogrammed with the initials of the bride and groom, hers in pink, his in blue.

While he`s a hero in his native country, Mittal had to move fast last week to counteract attempts in parts of Europe to paint him as a villain. He spent most of the week shuttling in his private jet from European capital to European capital, including three trips to Paris, to explain his motives and promise he wouldn`t cut European jobs. Governments have limited formal means to stop the Arcelor deal, as 85% of the company is traded freely on the stock market. Nonetheless, they and labor unions can make life hard for Mittal, who still needs to get E.U. antitrust clearance for the deal. The French government has used its political muscle to block takeovers in the past, including an attempt in 2004 by Germany`s Siemens to acquire some operations of its ailing French rival Alstom. But the government`s control over privately held companies is much more limited. On New Year`s Eve, Paris published a list of 11 strategic industries that it wants to protect from takeovers; they include some biotechnology research and casinos but not, surprisingly, steel.

Antitrust clearance may take several months, but early indications are that it may not pose a huge problem. The combined company would be three times the size of its nearest competitors, with a 10% share of the world steel market, but Mittal and Arcelor don`t have many territorial or product overlaps that could cause problems with regulators. Hermann Reith, analyst with BHF-Bank in Frankfurt, says he reckons the chances of the deal going through are now more than 50%. ``We will look at this issue, as always, very carefully on competition grounds only. The regulation gives us no power to question mergers for other reasons,`` said Neelie Kroes, the E.U.`s Antitrust Commissioner. She added: ``I am against national champions. And against European champions. But I am for global champions based in Europe.``

The irony of this fight is that Mittal and Dollé both share a similar vision about the future of steel. Both are trying to build themselves up as Europe-based global titans, believing that a worldwide consolidation is necessary to bring stability and sustainability to a volatile industry. Mittal has long argued that the industry`s future will brighten if several huge players emerge from the scrappy pack of smaller firms. ``Steel will always remain a cyclical industry,`` he told Time. ``But if we are strong in financial health and stick with our principles and vision, we will reduce the effect of the volatility.``

Despite the acrimony on display last week, Mittal says he remains ``good friends`` with Dollé. ``I admire him as a leader. It`s nothing personal.`` But dinner is dinner, and business is business.

With reporting by William Boston/Berlin, Sunil Mukhopadhyay/Calcutta and Alex Perry/Sadulpur)
Sridhar

Re: # 146

Abbay dhoti walla budboo daar kaala hindoo

Pakistanis have always been shoving sugar canes into India. And you did not know that until I made it fashionable for Hindoos of your types to get Pakistani sugar canes in all your openings.

{Beharam has reasons to cheer.
His constipated days will soon be over.}

You will still have to stand in line and keep your mouth open, when it starts to plop, plop, plop into your mouth.

re:#150 by behram1
Proves my point.
When Pakis have nothing much to offer, they start abusing. A typical Paki mindset.
Sridhar

Ref: #144

{When Pakis do not have an argument, they resort to abusive language.
Typical Paki mindset.}

Akkal ka phira huwa hindoo kiya jaaneh mindset kiya hota hai.
Mind ho to jaaneh mindset kiya hota hai.

Kuteh ki tarah railroad tracks per tatti karneh wallo ko izzat ki tameez ho to izzat say baat bhi key ja sakey.

Go do your early morning bowel movement as your phir sahib Gandhi ordered, and then turn around and shove that empty skull of yours close to between your legs where your tiny brains reside.

And BTW, bring some of your arsenals of your cut & paste crap.

You are the most shameless Indian creature that this chowk can do without.

#31 by dost-mittar


``Chinese think in long-terms and, in the long-term, they would like to reduce their dependence on the US economy which is now humming only because China and other Asian countries are willing to support the 8-trillion dollar debt-ridden US. ``

the japs and chinese are buying u.s. treasury bills because they are supported by the full faith and might of the u.s. gov. they are attractive too compared to other nations (with similar risks).


``But they do not have to care for the long-term prospects of India to collaborate in joint bidding because when two bidders compete against each other, the only winner is the seller of the item. As someone pointed out, Chinese are in all probability paying too much for their oilfields. ``

My point was it is too early to realsie the benefit of the indian-chinese MoU from indian perspective. What if the chinese have their cake and eat it too???? i.e. what if they get the oilfields (as it has been happening) at a reasonable price (instead of overpaying).

so india would be inadvertently helping the chinese.

``Who is to say that oil prices cannot fall again to $30 a barrel or lower, especially if the US goes into a deep recession.``

i really doubt it, the emerging economies hunger is driving the market. and even if the u.s. goes into recession how long will it stay there?

Dear Dost Mittar

Respected Sir,

I would like to salute you for writing such a article. I fully agree with you in case of hostility or war, Pakistan will turn off the tap or increase the price of gas therby making unusable or uneconomical. Actually talks for the India- Iran pipeline first started during the Benazir rule in the early 1980’s. The then Prime Minister of Pakistan was reluctant to go with the pipeline project. There were war like statements made by her. For the last 2 decades we only had talks and talks, that’s all. Not only that the pipeline lines are attacked daily by the tribal Sardars in Baluchistan. My question to you when Pakistan cannot protect their own gas pipeline despite the top class security infrastructure (on paper) what it the guarantee of India-Iran gas pipeline. Under these circumstances, I feel the so called peace pipeline is a dead issue. Like the Indians, the Pakistanis are too skeptical. Take the case of Baghaliar dam, Pakistan feel the dam will deprive Pakistan it’s share of water. However India says Pakistan’s concerns are unjustified and unwarranted.

Iqbal Singh (Amritsar) Indian Punjab
PS: General Mushraff plays his cards very weel. He says Kashmir first other things can wait. But the same does not apply to cricket nor the gas pipeline.

behram: yes indeed. no sooner did i post it that the Indian Minister for Propaganda (Sri Arjun Subramianiamjee) rushed to blanket it with a massive cut and paste. Just as the lullaby said he would!! :-)