What's new

Iran orders release of Indian tanker

Where the hell Saudi Arabia comes in between?

And, what do you own in Kashmir? please, explain?

You brought Pakistan into this thread and I bought your saudi master in it.
Now be a good boy and take a hike, this thread is for Iran and Indian issue not some insecure Pakistani who is about to have a heart attack over Iran-India ties.
 
Where the hell Saudi Arabia comes in between? Stick to the discussion.. do not go out of context as usual... some people have habit to jump to Saudi Arabia when they are out of arguments.

And, what do you own in Kashmir? please, explain?

Cut to March 1994. On a winter morning, with the Elbruz Mountains overlooking Tehran airport still under snow, braving cold winds, a special Indian military plane touched down. On board was an ailing Dinesh Singh, then External Affairs Minister, along with three others. Barely able to walk, Singh had been dragged out of a hospital bed to deliver an urgent letter from Prime Minister P. V. Narasimha Rao to Iranian President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. Incidentally, this was the last such tour in the 50-year diplomatic career of Singh. Having mortgaged its gold reserves two years ago, India was on the economic brink while Russia was still licking its wounds after the break-up of the Soviet Union. The Organisation of Islamic Countries (OIC), supported by influential Western nations, was pushing a resolution at the UN Commission Human Rights (UNCHR), later rechristened as Human Rights Council, to condemn India for human right violations in Kashmir. The resolution, with UNCHR approval, was to be referred to the UN Security Council for initiating economic sanctions and other punitive measures against India. As in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in the OIC, too, decisions are by consensus. Recalling how India was saved from disgrace, former ambassador and expert on Iranian affairs M K Bhadrakumar believes that Rao had shrewdly prevailed on Iran to abstain from voting. “Once there is no consensus in the OIC, the resolution was bound to fall through,” Bhadrakumar pointed out. The Iranians had no clue to the Indian Minister’s mission. Casting aside protocol, Iranian Foreign Minister Dr. Ali Akbar Velayati was at the airport when Singh alighted. Velayati, asked what on earth could be of such momentous importance for Singh to risk a perilous journey in his precarious condition. In reply, Dinesh Singh smilingly handed over a demarche. In the course of the day, he went through his “Kashmir brief” diligently in meetings with his Iranian interlocutors, namely, Velayati, President Rafsanjani and Iranian Majlis Speaker Nateq-Nouri. By evening, Singh retuned to his hospital bed in Delhi, but with an assurance from President Rafsanjani to Prime Minister Rao “that Iran will do all it can do to ensure that no harm comes to India.” What Iran gained by obliging India is an abiding mystery. Only after 72 anxious hours did Delhi learn that Iran had killed the OIC move to table the resolution. This marked a new chapter in India-
Iran relations with wider consequences. Iran distanced itself from Pakistan in the matter of Afghanistan; and, India joined hands with Iran to promote the Northern Alliance, which was inimical to Pakistani interests. Pakistan was shocked by what it termed as “backstabbing”. The Indian delegation to the UNCHR led by Leader of the Opposition Atal Behari Vajpayee comprised minister of state for external affairs Salman Khurshid and Farooq Abdullah. Basking in this diplomatic victory, Vajpayee and Abdullah were unaware that, three days ago, Dinesh Singh had laid the ground for it in Tehran; and Rao never tried to steal the credit from Vajpayee and Abdullah. Much later, it came to be known that when the Pakistani ambassador sought to move the OIC resolution, his Iranian counterpart in Geneva, under orders from Teheran, backed out. He argued that as a close friend of both India and Pakistan, Iran was ready to sort out their problems and there was no need to raise these in an international forum. That was the last time Pakistan tried to get a resolution on the Kashmir issue tabled in a UN forum
 
[Bregs];4732728 said:
Bro for that matter India has been armed liberally by Israel so it doesn't mean relations with Iran are less important

It is not meaning less either..... India and Iran both need to stop pretending, that there is no Iran/Israel overlap.
 
You are provocative bunch...... 'great fitna' as described in Islam.

If you have no objection to take 'slum dogs' as your masters.. than stop worrying about others.

Now as far Pakistan is concerned.... it is you who got hurt with every development of Pakistan.

Now tell us, how historic is your ties with India... can you give us a date/year?

I told you to take a hike. No one cares about Pakistan here.
 
Some thing is a miss here.. bit more than irritation... every one can realize that.

Relations between India and Iran date back to the Neolithic period. The existence of several empires spanning both Persia and northern India ensured the constant migration of people between the two regions and the spread and evolution of the Indo-Iranian language groups. As a consequence, the people of Northern India and Iran share significant cultural, linguistic and ethnic characteristics.
 
Some thing is a miss here.. bit more than irritation... every one can realize that.

Indians have no bad feelings towards Iran. A very close friend of mine has been to Iran multiple times and he has only the best of things to say about the country and its people. His exact words were "friendly, modern, Islamic and the most progressive country in ME for women."

India-Israel relationships will not be a hindrance for Iran-India relationships. This is something even the Israelis have realised. The only hindrance of greater co-operation is the fear in Indian companies of having trouble with the Americans, because they have a huge client base in the US. But, I expect things to change post 2014, as far as Iran-US relations go, for the better.

If you have no objection to take 'slum dogs' as your masters.. than stop worrying about others.

That's Pakistani foreign policy; to have masters. Neither Indian nor Iranian to have 'masters'.
 
That's Pakistani foreign policy; to have masters. Neither Indian nor Iranian to have 'masters'.

Unfortunately, this is true since Asif Ali Zardari took over Pakistan... he appointed slaves every where in foreign office.

:wave:

We must have paid for it, GOI is not disclosing...

Why could be the restrains for not disclosing...?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom