Why Is The West So Hypocritical?

Actually, the question asked is:  

Why is the West silent about Algeria?

Johan Galtung, Feb 13,2012, IPS:

Since the military seized power, a quarter million people have been killed in Algeria.

The killing of nonviolent demonstrators and civilian bystanders is escalating in Syria. Assad should resign immediately, a coalition government should be formed, and hundreds of mediators should hold dialogues with the many parties, to try and form a federation.

But the situation in Algeria is even worse. Since the military seized power and cancelled the second round of elections in January 1992 — with Western consent — when the Islamic Salvation Front was headed for a victory, a quarter million people have been killed.

Why is there no Algerian Spring?  Maybe because the repression is too atrocious. Why have there been no protest from the West? 

The answer is not pretty.  From the same article:

Maybe because the Algerian government did what the West wanted: granted access to oil and gas, to bases, and a made a promise of possible recognition of Israel. Syria did none of this.

Thus, the real question is:  Why Is The West So Hypocritical?  Especially the US which never stops going on about supporting democracy and opposing repression against the citizenry when it suits it.

India Will Continue Gas Ties With Iran

Nice to see that we've finally grown up.  

India wants to keep getting oil from Iran: Pakistani daily

India intends to keep importing oil from Iran and it appears that Indians, and even Chinese, will explore paying Tehran ''with gold, the Japanese yen or even in part with their own national currencies'', said a Pakistani daily.

An editorial in the News International Monday said that the US wants Pakistan to drop the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project altogether. 

"It has stepped up efforts to lobby Pakistan to abandon not only the IP gas pipeline project but also liquefied natural gas purchases from its western neighbour in return for cheaper gas from the US," the editorial added.

Pranab Mukherjee confirms that: India won't scale down its petroleum imports from Iran: FM

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," Mukherjee told reporters here.

Speaking at the end of a two-day visit aimed at wooing US investment, Mukherjee yesterday said: "Some other countries, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, the other Gulf countries they also contribute but Iran contributes substantially."

"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 US and European sanctions on Iran," the finance minister said.

India No To US' Iran Sanctions - Why So Late?

After kow-towing to the US for the better part of UPA-I and II terms, we seem to have suddenly decided to go against its wishes.  India rejects US embargo, to import oil from Iran

NEW DELHI: Even as China cuts down drastically its oil imports from Iran, which is soon likely to run into fresh sanctions from the US and the EU, India on Tuesday declared it will continue to import crude oil from the country. 

Brushing aside US sanctions that prevent financial institutions from doing business with Tehran and its central bank, foreign secretary Ranjan Mathai stated that India will only accept sanctions imposed by the UN. 

Refreshing, but what took us so long?  And can we get going on the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline while we still have the gumption?

Iraq, Libya... now Iran?

 UK softening up its population for a possible war with Iran

Many in the UK swore that it would never happen again. A hugely unpopular decision to go to war at the time, Tony Blair is still vilified to this day by large sections of the British public for his decision to support the Bush administration and illegally invade Iraq.

Fast forward eight years, and the now British prime minister David Cameron and foreign secretary William Hague are spewing out a similar brand of finger pointing bravado that we once heard from Blair towards Iraq, but this time in the direction of Iran. 

The ransacking of the British embassy in Tehran has served to ratchet up existing tensions between Britain and Iran a few notches more. 

Hague, the blood on his hands not yet dry from Libya, has used the embassy episode to exploit to the full what have become ‘common sense’ perceptions of a demonic Iran that have become prevalent among the British public. And the British media can always be relied on to fuel such beliefs and then cheer-lead the public into supporting aggressive actions and policies towards other states, as it did over Iraq and Libya. 

During the past few years, the British public has become used to media stories about  Ahmadinejad ‘the crazy man’ and the ‘mad mullas’ in Tehran, as well as the Iranian regime being hell bent on wanting to acquire a nuclear bomb that would only threaten the ‘peace and stability’ of the region.

We are all democracies in name only.  Otherwise these things wouldn't happen.  And what a topsy-turvy world we live in:

What peace and stability? Look what the meddling and carnage by the US has done to neighbouring states, such as Afghanistan and Pakistan. And why single out Iran over the nuclear issue? Iran is a nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) signatory, and there appears to be no firm evidence that it is in breach of it. 

Nuclear armed Israel and India are not NPT signatories, yet it’s Iran that has been subject to economic sanctions and nuclear inspections for years, while India basks in the warm glow of US ‘favour’, if that’s what compliance with US hegemony can be termed.

Iran Shoots Down a Drone - Bloodless War

Beastly Affair:

From a military point of view, three things become apparent other than that electronic warfare has arrived as the norm rather than exception. One, US has lost the monopoly of a military technology it developed at great cost. 

Tehran proposes to do ‘reverse engineering’. But, will it do so all by itself or with friends from, say, Beijing or Moscow – or Pakistan? Two, Iran seems to possess reserve capabilities, which it has been chary of publicising, and in turn would leave the US and Israel guessing what all Tehran might ultimately do by way of retaliation if attacked. 

Three, there is laughter echoing in the hills and valleys of North Waziristan. The Haqqanis are laughing. With US being evicted from Shamsi air base and Pakistan threatening to shoot down anything in the sky crossing its border, and Iran showing how to do it, is the drone saga of the Afghan war ending? 

Not to worry, drone manufacturers, you have a new market: US.  See The growing menace of domestic drones.

Bombing Them Into Submission?

US faces Pak fury after Nato kills 28 troops

US asks Pak to shun Iran pipeline, open up to India

And relatedly, Iran was on the regime-change list just ten days after 9/11: Wes Clark and the neocon dream.

This is one out-of-control regime indeed.

We Learn

At least, that's the message I take away from this news:

Hopes revive on pipeline deal

Sujay Mehdudia

NEW DELHI: In a major initiative that could culminate in the clinching of the 2,300 km. trans-border Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline, Union Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Murli Deora is likely to visit Pakistan in February first week to sort out issues relating to the transit fee.

Highly placed sources on Tuesday said Pakistan’s Minister for Petroleum and Natural Resources Amanullah Khan Jadoon invited Mr. Deora to pay a visit for sorting out issues pertaining to the project during their meeting in London late last week.

The Pakistan Minister told Mr. Deora that Islamabad was ready for talks some time in the first week of February. Both discussed the possibility of settling the transit fee issue and also the price revision clause sought to be introduced in the contract by Iran.

In a related development, Iran has suggested February 12 or 13 as dates for holding talks with India and Pakistan in Tehran to settle the $7 billion deal.

The U.S. is pressuring India not to go ahead with the project.

Wake Up

Wake up our foreign policy est., 'cos the world is changing:

New Delhi needs to think hard about the shifting templates of the Middle East’s geopolitics. All indications are that Russia and China anticipated, months ahead, the inevitable collapse of the U.S.’ containment policy toward Iran. How such wisdom eluded our government, remains a question mark. If the U.S decides now to march towards a constructive engagement of Iran — which seems likely — where does that leave the UPA government? The latter must first unscramble the omelette.

That is to say, it must rapidly deconstruct what it precipitated under American pressure — and then try to rebuild. Not an easy task.

The LNG deal with Tehran negotiated by the National Democratic Alliance government has all but perished following the UPA government’s somersault under American pressure at the International Atomic Energy Agency over the Iran issue. No one talks anymore about our grandiose plans of a “north-south” transportation corridor via Iran. The gas pipeline project languished while the government used one lame excuse after another to drag its feet.

The State Bank of India’s curb on normal trade with Iran is completely illogical. Evidently, Washington pressured us. While doing so, the Bush administration kept us in the dark about the NIE sailing into view. Now, what sort of a “strategic partnership” with the U.S. — and what sort of a “friendly” President in the White House — are we talking about? Washington took our government’s naiveté for granted.

It is plain common sense that India has a congruence of interests with Russia and China in optimally exploring the primacy that Iran places on Asia for its energy exports. That is why the Iran pipeline becomes crucial. That is precisely why Washington wants to stifle the project. The spectre that haunts Washington is the emergence of an Asian energy club involving Russia, Iran, China, and India. The U.S. apprehends that such an Asian grouping — first proposed by Russian President Vladimir Putin in 2003 — will disrupt its strategy of global domination. Through its lukewarm attitude towards the Iran pipeline, the UPA government has tacitly collaborated with the U.S. global strategy.

A Bird In Hand

From The Hindu:

That is to say, the hard reality is that there is no TAP on the anvil in the near future as an alternative to the Iran pipeline project. Our Petroleum Ministry must ponder, “what next.”

Does Manmohan Singh wear spectacles or blinkers?

#$%!@*

Where does the US get off acting like the school bully? From The Hindu:

ON THE proposed Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline, the United States has dropped all pretence at nicety. American Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, during his visit to India, bluntly warned New Delhi to shelve plans to participate in the project. Mr. Bodman was direct and up front about his "concerns." His remarks can't really be termed diplomatic or nuanced; he appeared to be reading the riot act to India.

First, in an interview to Dow Jones in New Delhi, Mr. Bodman said: "During my trip I have made it clear at the highest levels of the Indian Government that the United States opposes the development of the Iranian pipeline to India." "We believe that Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons, and anything that will support that endeavour is something that we oppose," he added.

As Amit Baruah puts it:

There is no "either or" situation here. Any Government that allows itself to be pushed around by the U.S. on ties with Iran will find itself being asked to fall in line time and again on issue after issue.

If there were some high principle involved in America's oppostion to the pipeline, it would still be acceptable. But there isn't. The reason cited, which is the danger of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons through the revenues of the pipeline is just a pretext. A far more important reason is the lobbying organization which claims to speak for the American Jews, as is argued here.

So why is the Indian government toeing the line of an American lobby on Iran? The US - on the directions of AIPAC - will most likely not stop short of attacking another oil-rich country. Unfortunately no one seems to be bothered, including India.

Coercion

We learn that India's vote against Iran was coerced. We also learn through the same US official, that we will continue to be coerced:

As a "first step" towards tightening the screws on Iran, India should withdraw from the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline project, the former U.S. official argued. "This would send a strong message to Iran, while not hurting India's economic interests" because the pipeline was unlikely to be economically viable, he claimed. "I am not sure what kind of investor would put up money for a pipeline running from Iran through Pakistan. What happens if there is an incident in Kashmir?"

Walking away from the IPI pipeline project, said Mr. Rademaker, would, therefore, be "a low cost way of India demonstrating its commitment to non-proliferation."

He clarified that the U.S. did not consider the Iran pipeline to be a "litmus test" for India. But scrapping the project "would be a smart thing for India to do." India, he stressed, "needs to stop thinking of itself as a Third World country... and start aligning itself with the First World countries."

Galling, especially from the current US administration. So it is refreshing when someone lays it out like it is:

"One state, the United States, has overstepped its national borders and is imposing its legal system on other states," Mr. Putin said. "This is very dangerous. Nobody feels secure anymore because nobody feels protected by international law. This policy fuels the arms race... encourages countries to acquire weapons of mass destruction.

"They keep teaching Russia democracy, but don't want to learn it themselves. Why do they resort to bombings and shellings all the time? Could it be because of a lack of political culture, respect for democracy and law?"

Correction: US Ambassador to India says Rademaker is not an US official, and that his remarks were not accurately reported by The Hindu. As to the first point, he is not an outsider. He's been associated with government in some form or other since 1987, and most importantly he was the Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation till sometime last year and should have intimate knowledge of the Iran vote affair. As the second point, The Hindu says:

The Hindu would like to clarify that Mr. Rademaker spoke before an audience of approximately 20 people and that its Associate Editor, Siddharth Varadarajan, was present and took detailed notes of his remarks, and that the quotes attributed to Mr. Rademaker are wholly accurate.

I'll go with The Hindu.

Are They Mad?

From MSNBC/Newsweek (via Atrios):

At least one former White House official contends that some Bush advisers secretly want an excuse to attack Iran. "They intend to be as provocative as possible and make the Iranians do something [America] would be forced to retaliate for," [he says].

How can they even think of doing such a thing after basically destroying another country? How could it happen in a country that is a vibrant democracy with a free press, 24 hour TV, ubiquitous radio, a big military-industrial complex, legalised lobbying (by, for instance, the Israel lobby), an oil industry hungry for foreign oil, and free markets?

I just can't figure it out.

Iran

Military means not a solution to Iran crisis, says Pranab Mukherjee. About time - one was beginning to wonder if the backbone had atrophied due to disuse. Now to repeat it frequently and not only in Iran. Not that it will change the minds of Bush and his crazy vice-president.