Indian Navy Chief over Gwadar

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Chinese do not have a blue water navy and so positioning anything would not be feasible in either projecting military might or presence!

 

[SABRE]

3 things come to mind when talking about Gwadar...

1. Chabahar will compete as an equal to Gwadar. Which one becomes more successful is a matter of debate and geopolitics. I have read arguments and articles supporting each over the other.

But one thing will be certain, the full aim of Gwadar would not be realized, because Chabahar, whether it will be as successful or not, will certainly take away a MAJOR chunk of Gwadar's business.

2. I have said earlier , stop day dreaming that the Chinese Navy will station at Gwadar. Gwadar is of economic significance primarily and of military significance secondarily.

3. With India's access to Chabahar, Pakistan cannot, even if wants to restrict or choke off oil supplies in Hormuz. There are just TOO many vested interests there.
And on this, the way IN is being funded for expansion, its quite phenomenal, then you see, PN, its a stark contrast. There is simply no way for PN to effectively cut off any supplies in Hormuz against India.

What Gwadar actually does in military sense, is make it much harder for IN to blockade Pakistan's sea routes like in 71. BUT, you also have to consider, the IN will be FAR bigger and FAR more technologically advanced than in 71. So you cannot anticipate one way or another. Who knows, whether IN might have the assets to block both.

1st; You do realize that the shortest rout available to the Central Asians is Gwadar , than Karachi & than from Iranian ports in the Arabian sea (right now Bandar Abbass). The only problem is Pakistan's geographic dis-contiguity with Central Asian Republics (CARs). However, the CARs, especially the Uzbekistan, are suspicious towards Iran & its theological approaches. Some times they openly say they would not depend on Iran in terms of trade.

2ndly the Arabian & western states are reluctant to port in Iran - of course they too do not want to be dependent on Iran. Plus, the US wont allow its friends to port there.

3rd; Gwadar is not just about trade. It provides PN with strategic depth away from India. Any IN military ventures at Gwadar will end up chocking Indian oil supply &, trade & investment in ME (especially UAE & Qatar ... & we all know India has invested a lot there). So even if you try to open the blockade by military means it would harms India in both long run & short run. & Since Iran, ME & western oil trade will also be hindered the West would certainly want India to pull back.

In addition IN must know its the Pakistani waters they have to cross or fight in. If anything, no matter if IN bring Aircraft Carriers, it would venturing in harsh waters infested with submarines.

4th; Iran will never allow India to port it self militarily on its ports, especially since they have started to view India as Pro-American state (after all India voted against Iran in the IAEA). Plus they want to improve relations with Pakistan. & not to forget no state allows its land, air & sea to be used by other state to attack the 3rd state - it wouldn't want to loose its relations & turn the 3rd country into its enemy, especially when it is bordering it.


Lastly & hope you don't mind me saying that. India should curb its paranoia & stop living in fair. Not everything is designed to be anti-India, its just designed to be at full advantage of Pakistan unhindered. Gwadar carries deterrent value not aggressive.

 

[Proud to be Pakistani]

1st; You do realize that the shortest rout available to the Central Asians is Gwadar , than Karachi & than from Iranian ports in the Arabian sea (right now Bandar Abbass). The only problem is Pakistan's geographic dis-contiguity with Central Asian Republics (CARs). However, the CARs, especially the Uzbekistan, are suspicious towards Iran & its theological approaches. Some times they openly say they would not depend on Iran in terms of trade.

2ndly the Arabian & western states are reluctant to port in Iran - of course they too do not want to be dependent on Iran. Plus, the US wont allow its friends to port there.

3rd; Gwadar is not just about trade. It provides PN with strategic depth away from India. Any IN military ventures at Gwadar will end up chocking Indian oil supply &, trade & investment in ME (especially UAE & Qatar ... & we all know India has invested a lot there). So even if you try to open the blockade by military means it would harms India in both long run & short run. & Since Iran, ME & western oil trade will also be hindered the West would certainly want India to pull back.

In addition PN must know its the Pakistani waters they have to cross or fight in. If anything, no matter if IN bring Aircraft Carriers, it would venturing in harsh waters infested with submarines.

4th; Iran will never allow India to port it self militarily on its ports, especially since they have started to view India as Pro-American state (after all India voted against Iran in the IAEA). Plus they want to improve relations with Pakistan. & not to forget no state allows its land, air & sea to be used by other state to attack the 3rd state - it wouldn't want to loose its relations & turn the 3rd country into its enemy, especially when it is bordering it.


Lastly & hope you don't mind me saying that. India should curb its paranoia & stop living in fair. Not everything is designed to be anti-India, its just designed to be at full advantage of Pakistan unhindered. Gwadar carries deterrent value not aggressive.

Very very well said..

Pakistan could be crucial to China's bid for regional influence. Transporting oil is currently a long, expensive, and dangerous process for Beijing, traversing some of the most pirated seas in the world. For that reason, China is rapidly diversifying its sources, cutting billion-dollar deals from Sudan to Iran and scoping out alternative transport routes through Burma (Myanmar), Thailand, and Bangladesh.

Pakistan is likely to be among the most important routes.

Sitting at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, the Gwadar Port, which becomes fully operational next year, will provide an overland energy corridor connecting the Middle East to Xinjiang, China's future energy base. That will cut transport by nearly 12,000 miles, reducing a month off the journey time and 25% off the fees. Gwadar could also be part of China's push to protect its growing energy system with a robust Navy.

For Pakistan, Gwadar is a chance to refashion itself a global energy player: a dream in the making for several decades. The potential is rich, given its prize location near the Gulf, at the feet of the energy rich Central Asian states and in the shadow of South and Southeast Asia, which is a third of the world's population and where energy demands are expected to soar.

The opening of Gwadar is indicative of how China's largesse in Pakistan is coming into open competition with the US – and how that could change the region's political landscape.

 

[Contrarian]

1st; You do realize that the shortest rout available to the Central Asians is Gwadar , than Karachi & than from Iranian ports in the Arabian sea (right now Bandar Abbass). The only problem is Pakistan's geographic dis-contiguity with Central Asian Republics (CARs). However, the CARs, especially the Uzbekistan, are suspicious towards Iran & its theological approaches. Some times they openly say they would not depend on Iran in terms of trade.

2ndly the Arabian & western states are reluctant to port in Iran - of course they too do not want to be dependent on Iran. Plus, the US wont allow its friends to port there.

If you want, i will post articles that say that Chabahar(not Bandar Abbas) will be more successful than Gwadar and put their reasons across. There are many factors here.

Again, read my previous post, the end result is, that whether it turns out to be more successful than Gwadar or not, it will ceratinly glean away a major chunk of business that would otherwise have gone to Gwadar.

3rd; Gwadar is not just about trade. It provides PN with strategic depth away from India. Any IN military ventures at Gwadar will end up chocking Indian oil supply &, trade & investment in ME (especially UAE & Qatar ... & we all know India has invested a lot there). So even if you try to open the blockade by military means it would harms India in both long run & short run. & Since Iran, ME & western oil trade will also be hindered the West would certainly want India to pull back.

Im sorry how wold that happen? How would any IN military venture at Gwadar choke Indian oil supply? Would PN start blockading the Hormuz? Im sorry mate, but PN does not have any kind of capability when compared with IN. And when the IN would be at gwadar, would the PN be off at Hormuz or defending their own land?

And even if PN decides to block of Hormuz, how would they stop Indian tankers particularly, they cannot decipher b/w Indian or other ports bound ship without boarding them, and they cannot enforce a complete blockage because 1. It doesnt have capabilities remotely close to do that. 2. Every nation of the planet would be screaming foul at Pakistan. Remember Iran Iraq tanker wars.
This point of yours is a non issue.

In addition IN must know its the Pakistani waters they have to cross or fight in. If anything, no matter if IN bring Aircraft Carriers, it would venturing in harsh waters infested with submarines.

There is a reason why Carriers have a battle group with them. Its not as if they start going to places alone in a hurry. And please donot forget India has subs as well that would be operating in that area. Really now, subs are no silver bullets. 5 or 6 subs that Pakistan plans to have are no miracle fleet to defeat the IN.

And secondly, its not necessary to have to cross Pakistani waters, a Carrier always behind the rest of the fleet providing air support, its not at the forefront of the battle.

PN is a non issue right now, its just not upto the grade. IN will be focussed on influencing the land and air battle.

4th; Iran will never allow India to port it self militarily on its ports, especially since they have started to view India as Pro-American state (after all India voted against Iran in the IAEA).

As did Russia and i think also China. Does it mean that they are also being viewed as Pro American. Stop giving your views as facts.

Plus they want to improve relations with Pakistan. & not to forget no state allows its land, air & sea to be used by other state to attack the 3rd state - it wouldn't want to loose its relations & turn the 3rd country into its enemy, especially when it is bordering it.

Sure, but IN doesnt need to berth at Chabahar during a conflict. Its got the necessary range for this area. What matters is that there are ships in that area ALREADY when the conflict starts, that is the value of Chabahar. There is a reason, India is financing Chabahar.

Lastly & hope you don't mind me saying that. India should curb its paranoia & stop living in fair. Not everything is designed to be anti-India, its just designed to be at full advantage of Pakistan unhindered. Gwadar carries deterrent value not aggressive.

You build a fort, i try and find a new way to destroy it!

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

1st; You do realize that the shortest rout available to the Central Asians is Gwadar , than Karachi & than from Iranian ports in the Arabian sea (right now Bandar Abbass). The only problem is Pakistan's geographic dis-contiguity with Central Asian Republics (CARs). However, the CARs, especially the Uzbekistan, are suspicious towards Iran & its theological approaches. Some times they openly say they would not depend on Iran in terms of trade.

Shortest does not mean the most economical.

Plying transport or rail that is dependent on diesel is very expensive in high altitude since the fuel efficiency dips. That is not so, in shipping. The bookkeeping will only give the results.

It is true that the Sunni Shia divide does impact. However, economic realities in today's world where the population is not totally illiterate also matters. None like to live in deprivation!

2ndly the Arabian & western states are reluctant to port in Iran - of course they too do not want to be dependent on Iran. Plus, the US wont allow its friends to port there.

Valid.

However, the Iran govt has brought in a chink wherein they are dealing in Euros and that warms the European heart.

3rd; Gwadar is not just about trade. It provides PN with strategic depth away from India. Any IN military ventures at Gwadar will end up chocking Indian oil supply &, trade & investment in ME (especially UAE & Qatar ... & we all know India has invested a lot there). So even if you try to open the blockade by military means it would harms India in both long run & short run. & Since Iran, ME & western oil trade will also be hindered the West would certainly want India to pull back.

Not quite.

The combat ratios are adequate in this regard.

Further, the US will allow no blockade, since it will hurt her interests and India is veering towards the US! Catch US selling short her bulwark against Communist China!

In addition IN must know its the Pakistani waters they have to cross or fight in. If anything, no matter if IN bring Aircraft Carriers, it would venturing in harsh waters infested with submarines.

Is that real?

Are you a naval person?

what is infested with submarines?

4th; Iran will never allow India to port it self militarily on its ports, especially since they have started to view India as Pro-American state (after all India voted against Iran in the IAEA). Plus they want to improve relations with Pakistan. & not to forget no state allows its land, air & sea to be used by other state to attack the 3rd state - it wouldn't want to loose its relations & turn the 3rd country into its enemy, especially when it is bordering it.

What makes you feel that India is against Iran. Don't look at issues superficially. I will not elaborate.

When as a Shia nation been chummy with a Sunni nation, more so, when Iran is being blamed for events in Swat check the threads!

Lastly & hope you don't mind me saying that. India should curb its paranoia & stop living in fair. Not everything is designed to be anti-India, its just designed to be at full advantage of Pakistan unhindered. Gwadar carries deterrent value not aggressive.

India has no paranoia.

She is aware of its onions.

May Gwadar flourish!

 

[Cheetah786]

How do you know it was US pressure?

Iam sure you are not a 2 year old don't ask childish questions.

 

[Cheetah786]

The strategic scene is not as simple as it appears. The Times of India report of February 19, 2002, indicated that leasing of Jacobabad (Sind) and Pasni (Baluchistan) to the US for the operations in Afghanistan has not been appreciated by China nor the allowing of the U.S. to establish listening posts in Pakistan's Northern Areas, which border Xinjiang and Tibet. China while undertaking financial and technical assistance for the project, has asked for "sovereign guarantees" to use the Port facilities to which Pakistan agreed. This has, in turn, not been appreciated by the U.S.

See this is called nothing more then propaganda.

India's involvement with Israel And USA will not hurt India Iran relation ship at all.but Pakistan's involvement with USA will hurt Pakistan china relation ship.

 

[Bushroda]

Iam sure you are not a 2 year old don't ask childish questions.

So instead of replying with subtle euphemism why don't you give a straight forward answer to a simple question & prove that atleast you arn't a 2 year old.

I repeat the question 'Why do you think that India backed out of IPI due to US pressure?'

 

[Spring Onion]

So instead of replying with subtle euphemism why don't you give a straight forward answer to a simple question & prove that atleast you arn't a 2 year old.

I repeat the question 'Why do you think that India backed out of IPI due to US pressure?'

here is an old article from 2005 you can imagine the ammount of pressure on India
----------
CENTRAL ASIA - CAUCASUS ANALYST Wednesday / November 16, 2005
DOES THE IRAN-PAKISTAN-INDIA PIPELINE HAVE A FUTURE?


The Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline has been called the ‘peace pipeline’ and ‘mother of all confidence-building Measures’ between India and Pakistan. All three countries stand to benefit from this pipeline. Iran would be able to sell its gas, Pakistan, apart for getting energy supply for its domestic consumption, could also project itself at the cross-roads of trade between Central and South Asia, and India would get much-needed energy to achieve its desired growth rate. However, recent developments in the region, the nuclear cooperation deal between India and the U.S., and the Washington’s strong opposition to the pipeline indicate the project may have a gloomy future.

BACKGROUND: The IPI pipeline would run about 1,115 km (690 miles) in Iran, 705 km (440 miles) in Pakistan and 850 km (530 miles) in India, and total investment is estimated at $4 billion and may take 4 to 5 years to complete. Australia’s BHP, the National Iranian Gas Company, Petronas and Total have expressed interest in building the pipeline. The Indian government recently decided it would seek cabinet approval for joining the project once the three countries decide on the project framework by late 2005. However, much needs to be done and decided. The three countries have yet to decide whether to firm up separate consortiums for the 2,670-km (1660 miles) pipeline in their respective territories or a joint consortium. A number of sources have pointed out that New Delhi’s may prefer to be a gas buyer without sharing any responsibility of the project execution. Islamabad has agreed to allow Tehran to keep the proprietorship of the project excluding the terra firma in Pakistani territory.
Addressing a press conference after the recently held meeting of the Joint Working Group (JWG) in Islamabad, Indian petroleum secretary Sushil C. Tripathy said the Tripartite Framework Agreement would be finalized by December. The pre-feasibility study of the project will also be completed by December. Both sides also decided to seek third party certification of Iran's gas reserves before moving ahead on the IPI pipeline.

However, the project is facing strong American opposition. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told Indian NDTV: "Our views concerning Iran are very well known by this time, and we have communicated to the Indian government our concerns about gas pipeline cooperation between Iran and India." The U.S. has also made it clear to the leadership of India and Pakistan that the proposed project will result in U.S. sanctions under the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA). In the beginning, both countries declared their resolve to go ahead with the project. “This is between us, India is not a client state”, remarked the Indian premier.

New Delhi of late seems to have accommodated American pressures. A change in the Indian stance regarding the IPI pipeline has been visible lately. During his visit to United States, Manmohan Singh made several statements to illustrate this fact. "Only preliminary discussions have taken place (on the pipeline). We are terribly short of energy supply and we desperately need new sources of energy. That’s why we have agreed to explore the possibility of the pipeline with Pakistan," he told The Washington Post, adding “I am realistic enough to realize that there are many risks considering all the uncertainties of the situation in Iran. I don't know if any international consortium of bankers would underwrite this. But we are in a spate of preliminary negotiations." Indian Petroleum Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar said the project was "fraught with terrible risks" and that financing would be extremely difficult.

This is not surprising. For the first time in its history, India has become a strategic partner with the U.S., something clearly indicated by the nuclear deal between the two countries, which trashes existing nuclear non-proliferation laws. According to news reports, U.S. State Department officials said that U.S. nuclear cooperation with India was part of its efforts to stop the construction of the proposed pipeline.

During his trip to Islamabad, World Bank Head Paul Wolfowitz told the Pakistani leadership that the bank would not allow any international financial institution to finance the project. According to a news report, the U.S. is considering a proposal to help Pakistan meet its energy needs as part of its efforts to wean India and Pakistan away from building a pipeline for bringing gas from Iran.


Indian journalists have pointed out that Manmohan Singh is incorrect when saying that only preliminary talks have taken place. As Indian reports point out, remarkable progress has been made in the last six months. Seven meetings between India and Pakistan and India and Iran have taken place on the pipeline. These exchanges have generated a lot of clarity and optimism on the project.

IMPLICATIONS: Manmohan Singh’s recent trip to the United States and India’s emerging grand vision spells a number of implications not only for the IPI pipeline but also for the region, the peace process and India. India will find it very intricate to choose a path between following the United States or joining the IPI gas pipeline project to meet its growing energy needs. Moreover, Indian hard talk on the pipeline could be aimed at drawing more benefits out of the deal from the other pipeline partners. New Delhi has already asked Tehran to sell its gas at the domestic rate, something Tehran is unlikely to accept. During the recently held Indo-Iranian Special Joint Working Group meeting in Delhi, Iranian officials suspected that New Delhi is yielding to US pressure. New Delhi also declined an Iranian proposal for signing an MoU setting out a timeframe for implementation saying that Indian security concerns have to be met first.

Apart from the fact that the IPI pipeline makes greater economic sense with the attendant political and security significance, it is immensely significant for the on-going peace process between India and Pakistan. A number of observers of India-Pakistan conflict have termed this project as the mother of all confidence building measures between India and Pakistan and named it the peace pipeline. This pipeline will tie both countries to a common cause. When operational, both sides would have a stake in the stability, peace and security of the other country.


U.S. interests regionally as well as globally dictate that there should be peace in this region, therefore its opposition to the project is unwise in terms of its interests in South Asia, given the pipeline's potential dividends for promoting regional peace, security and economic development. If New Delhi withdraws, the cost of gas to Islamabad might be uneconomical as it will lose $600 million annually in transit fees from India alone. American strategic thinkers view India as an ally in its attempts to counter China as well as Iran, and thereby ensuring its global energy supremacy – and an India-Iran deal would run counter to this broader logic. By signing a civilian nuclear pact with India that gives it access to more advanced nuclear fuels, the U.S. seems to have achieved this objective – at least on this theatre.

CONCLUSIONS: The prospects for the IP pipeline are complex and unpredictable. India needs news sources of energy to achieve significant growth rates. Pakistan wants to project itself as a crossroads for trade between Central Asia and the Subcontinent, apart from getting gas for its domestic use. Iran needs to sell gas. But the ground realities are not favorable or supportive. American pressure on India and Pakistan has the potential to derail the pipeline peace process between the two or at least result in a stalemate. Pakistan, being a recipient of large sums of U.S. aid, could also be susceptible to consider the risks involved in pursuing a pipeline project against Washington’s wishes. Therefore instead of pressing the issue, Pakistan needs to look for other options as well. What is the future of the IPI pipeline then? Perhaps the most likely outcome is that all sides will keep talking without doing anything on the ground.










CENTRAL ASIA - CAUCASUS ANALYST

 

[MOSABJA]

IF INDIA REALLY IS TOO EASY WITH GWADAR THEN WHY THE INDIAN NAVY CHIEF IS GETTING UPSET

1) the truth is that what ever be the capability it is NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE for them to come to gwadar which is quite far from them and beat PN which is not sleeping.Remember YUGOSLAV all the NATO was searching for YUGOSLAV Mini Sub (one like Cosmos) and they could nt even detect that.REMEMBER that even US and NATO are afraid that a country like IRAN can choke HORMUZ.

If Iran can deter US and NATO with CHOKING which is far less power ful then them then why cant PN deter INDIA by choking oil supplies.Deep down in heart INDIANS are really troubled.It means that Pak would have tit for tat in wake of PAkistan rivers choked.So there would be a strategic balance and no country would CHOKE the other .SO PAK MOTTO IS PEACE THROUGH POWER.

2) secondly there is no possibility of IRAN giving its base to IN to attack GWADAR.Iran is not too good .BE REALISTIC.

3) Chinese are taking interests because they would not only be given a SAFER(would not pass through TAIWAN,JAPAN,US) but SHORTER(though industries are in main land but a highway or rail track from xinkiang would do the job)which they are already building.

4) As far as the IRANS bandar abbas is concerned it can replace GWADAR VIZ aVIS CENT ASIA .BUT NO WAY IT CAN REPLACE HWADAR VIZ a VIS CHINA.

5)As far as Taliban are concerned it is true that right now no SUPER POWER would back Pakistan actively if it plays a TALIBAN TRUMP CARD but mind you that at the time of SOVIETS PAK WAS NOT A NUK POWER so it needed back of US.
But if it plays TALIBAN TRUMP CARD right now to protect Balochistan and kick BLA then US cant attack Pak cuz its NUK POWER plus few ANZAS,ARMOURED PIERCING BULLETS,IEDs,ANTI TANK GUIDED MISSILES would BOOK NATO.

6) as far as UIGHURS issue is concerned I am considering a scenario in which Pak uses a TALIBAN trump card and reestablish its relations with TALIBAN then Pak can PERSUADE them to stop meddling in CHINA.Dont forget CHINA ENJOYS LOTS OF GOOD WILL AMONG THE TALIBAN.
*In korean hostage crisis matter was solved when CHINA intervened.
*ABDULLAH MEHSUD the militant commander who kidnapped Chinese was FORCED TO STEP DOWN AS COMMANDER THE NEXT DAY HE DID IT.Cuz Talliban didnt like him damaging CHINA.
*Abdullah Mehsud too before blowing himself up swore upon God that HE DIDNT KILL CHINESE ENGINEERS.
*Chinese Engineers are given protection by tribes and Taliban in KOHAT and in GOMAL ZAM DAM.

I would like to have INDIANS to have peace with pkistan dont build Dams on pak rivers .We can co operate extensively.INDIA needs energy Pak can give that through cent asia,Iran.SO INDIANS DOT BE WITH PAKISTAN .HAVE PEACE PROSPERAND LIVE HAPPILY
LONG LIVE SINOPAKFRIENDSHIP

 

[Spring Onion]

Bravo SABRE you deserve sweets on my part will add to your rep when log in from home

 

[SABRE]

I am in a bit of a hurry so in this post I have actually made mistakes of putting different answers to different quotes in couple of places. Please for give me but you'll get the idea - hopefully.

If you want, i will post articles that say that Chabahar(not Bandar Abbas) will be more successful than Gwadar and put their reasons across. There are many factors here.

Written by whom? Indians? If Indians than of course it would be a bias.

Plus I have everything at disposal myself even the articles you might have read. Thats one advantage of being the student of prominent strategists & also yourself heading that way. (I like this emoticon, just wanted to use it )


The simple reason why Gwadar has advantage in the region:

1. Major powers, especially the western states, are not willing to port there.

2. When you enter the Arabian sea th nearest points are Gwadar & Karachi for docking. [The distance between Dubai & Gwadar is also very short (mere few hours by sea ... 1:20mins by air)].

3. Provides shortest (& economical) rout to Central Asian trade ... this is specially important for their oil trade. ---- As I said the Central Asians, especially Uzbekistan do not view Iran's influence very kindly. & their own analysis suggests that they should take Pakistani rout.

Again, read my previous post, the end result is, that whether it turns out to be more successful than Gwadar or not, it will ceratinly glean away a major chunk of business that would otherwise have gone to Gwadar.

Again the question ... who is docking there? From the major regional states its India only. The Americans, several Europeans & Middle Easterns don't get along with the Iranians. Plus as I said when you enter the Arabian sea the nearest points are Karachi & Gwadar. Would you like to sail into the enclosed straight of Harmoz or open sea? --- one reason why Qatar & Oman are considering oil & Gas pipe-line to Pakistan & not Iran.

Im sorry how wold that happen? How would any IN military venture at Gwadar choke Indian oil supply? Would PN start blockading the Hormuz? Im sorry mate, but PN does not have any kind of capability when compared with IN. And when the IN would be at gwadar, would the PN be off at Hormuz or defending their own land?

Reality is ambiguous & oblivious to you isn't it? In 2001 when Pakistan & Indian armies were eye-to-eye at borders what happened? The economy went down & the major economic loss was on Indian side as Americans & Europeans started to leave. Think if two Navies take to Arbian sea capable of launching nuclear strike. This time it wont just be India & Pakistan, it would involve Middle East, Iran, India & Pakistan. Now if India carries out strikes in Arabian Sea think of the International Trade & India's own investment in the UAE & Qatar. Trade from there would stop, oil wont reach India & Indian goods wont reach these areas. India crossing into Pakistani waters would also be lowering the Nuclear Thrashold, next thing you know the Americans & Europeans are leaving in fear that nuclear war can take place. India has much too lose than Pakistan.

Now in 2ns Scenario think if/when Central Asia oil & gas starts flowing from Gwadar. This is the oil the Americans, Europeans, Africans, Asians & Australians badly want. If this oil trade is hindered in Arabian Sea, think of the pressure of these states on India to move itself away from the port.

And even if PN decides to block of Hormuz, how would they stop Indian tankers particularly, they cannot decipher b/w Indian or other ports bound ship without boarding them, and they cannot enforce a complete blockage because 1. It doesnt have capabilities remotely close to do that. 2. Every nation of the planet would be screaming foul at Pakistan. Remember Iran Iraq tanker wars.
This point of yours is a non issue.

As I said not everything is designed to be anti-Indian but at full advantage of Pakistan. Why would Pakistan block Indian Trade out of the blue when we can take advantage of it. It would better if we get India itself to port at Gwadar than sail in to the narrow Hormuz.


As for capability, you must not undermine the submarines as well as PN. After all, with all those expensive Naval Ships & gadgets India could not stop Pakistani ships from taking out Somnat port in 1965 & in 1971 got the taste of Daphne Class Submarine when it sunk INS Kukri. The surface ships may not have stealth advantage of subs but they are equally lethal.


I hate General Zia UlHaq, I always have. But I do applaud him for his strategy during Indian military exercise "Operation Brass Tacks." Indians brought in large number of forces with live ammunitions at Pakistani & Chinese borders. Pakistan was busy handling Soviet intervention in Afghanistan. When Zia learned that Indian exercise seems less an exercise & more a deployment he just simply deployed artilleries & where? On the Sindh & Punjab border & not jsut the Indo-Pak border. What happened? Indians got confused, started to protest & next thing you know India pulling back & signing an agreement that from now on exercises would take place over 50Kms away from border with lesser live ammunitions, inform each other prior to exercise & invite external observers.

So you see all you need is a good strategy not technology. You can debate all you want but IN knows what lurks in the Arabian Sea.

& the int. community will scream foul on Pakistan if Pakistan blocks the routs. Pakistan wont. As I said it holds deterrent value not aggression. The idea is just signal to India that this could be done & the Indians know about it. Thats why there is so much fuss. IN actions would bring foul screams on India not Pakistan.

There is a reason why Carriers have a battle group with them. Its not as if they start going to places alone in a hurry. And please donot forget India has subs as well that would be operating in that area. Really now, subs are no silver bullets. 5 or 6 subs that Pakistan plans to have are no miracle fleet to defeat the IN.

Yes the ACs travel with a party but that doesn't mean its out of the threat of the subs. Just sinking an AC would undermine the entire party fleet with it. As for the Indian subs they wont know where the PN has laid the anti-sub mines while PN would of course know abt it.

PN is a non issue right now, its just not upto the grade. IN will be focussed on influencing the land and air battle.

You are again undermining the PN. Think in future. 4 Agosta-70s, 3 Agosta-90Bs & 3 U-214. 6 of them capable of launching nuclear cruise missiles. Too high deterrent value, India would think more than 10 times before going in.

As did Russia and i think also China. Does it mean that they are also being viewed as Pro American. Stop giving your views as facts.

China obstained & I don't think Russia voted against them. Instead offered them enriched fissile material.

Sure, but IN doesnt need to berth at Chabahar during a conflict. Its got the necessary range for this area. What matters is that there are ships in that area ALREADY when the conflict starts, that is the value of Chabahar. There is a reason, India is financing Chabahar.

India is wasting money not investing it. As the Iranians think tanks themselves believe that its better to take advantage of Gwadar. Remeber the IPI, they also prefer Pakistan to take it down into the Arabian Sea. The West wont take Iranian trade, especially oil & gas, from the Iranian ports. But think if this oil is flowing from Pakistan?

You build a fort, i try and find a new way to destroy it!

Thats a wrong strategy. Play more Chess. I say you build a fort, we capture it.

------------------

Let me tell you something & many of your Indian strategists also believe in this. India wants to go global but only thing keeps dragging it back at regional level & that is Pakistan. Every Indian comes up & goes coercive 'we would do this & that.' Why not say be friends? This Bharat Karnad mentality has to go. I have been around the master minds of Pakistan's defence & foreign policy & not a single time they speak of war with India - including nuclear war. In fact they are not anti-Indians at all, & have rather very professional approach than emotional.

I am just guessing here but your age might be in either teens or you might just have started your 20s. If you are a student of Social Sciences learn to be professional than emotional.

India has much to gain from Gwadar than considering it a threat. If they keep on considering it as a threat than they would of course have coercive posture against it which would than in fact turn it into a threat - especially when Chinese PLAAN ships start to escort their trade ships from South China sea to Chittagong (Bangladesh) & than to Gwadar just in fear that India might do something. As a result the back & forth PLAAN movement from South China Sea to Chittagong & than to Gwadar will hinder the Indian trade in East Asia & virtually block the Indian Ocean. In such a blockade would IN be capable of taking three fronts (China, Bangladesh & Pakistan)? I do not think so.


----------------------------

 

[Bushroda]

here is an old article from 2005 you can imagine the ammount of pressure on India
----------
CENTRAL ASIA - CAUCASUS ANALYST Wednesday / November 16, 2005
DOES THE IRAN-PAKISTAN-INDIA PIPELINE HAVE A FUTURE?

Thats pure Pakistani perspective devoid of any business sense. The author expects India to pour billions of dollars in a dark hole for some confidence building measures that don't last more than the rain drop bubbles.

Did he even consider for one moment what would happen to the contract if Iran happens to come under the US blade? Who in his right mind would invest under these circumstances? Next given the stress between US & Iran since 2004 which Insurance company would dare provide Insurance cover to the project?

Next the author believes that remarkable progress can be made in just 6-7 meetings when more than $50 billion of Indian money is involved. 6/7 meetings isn't even enough time for the negotiation for gas price forget about covering other aspects of the business like providing security cover etc.

Also, for India another factor is that the pipeline would go through the insurgency affected Baluchistan province where insurgents keep blowing up gas pipeline every second day. Who would've ensured the safety of the pipeline in that province? Who would've covered the loss if the supply gets affected? Already Western oil & Gas companies have started wrapping up their operations in Baluchistan & moving to Africa what guarantee does it hold that the pipeline wouldn't be affected.

There is huge money involved from the Indian side & there is no way that government would've put such huge amount of money simply so that Pakistan can have some confidence in India.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

See this is called nothing more then propaganda.

India's involvement with Israel And USA will not hurt India Iran relation ship at all.but Pakistan's involvement with USA will hurt Pakistan china relation ship.

Times of India is like Pakistan's Daily Times. Not very pro govt to say the least.

Therefore, it must be their propaganda at best!

Of course, there is no US presence in Pakistan and they are not having bases in Pakistan and you would be right.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Gwadar port, given the current situation, is only suitable for China and not the CARs since Afghanistan is in no position to allow transit and the present govt is not very amenable towards Pakistan.

Conversely, Iran has not fomented any Shia upsurge in Afghanistan and hence the relationship of the govts are not volatile, though the US influence cannot be ruled out.

In the event, there is a necessity for Afghanistan to boost its economy by allowing transit facilities to CAR from the Arabian Sea and the US permits the same, Afghanistan has to look to Iran since the situation in areas bordering Pakistan is a 'no go' because of the turmoil, while that towards Iran is relatively calm.

Unless, the Pashtuns are controlled, calmed and made peaceable, the importance of Gwadar over Chabahar is certainly diminished in so far as being a trading hub and an opening to the sea for landlocked countries.

Chabahar is strategically more important since it located right at the mouth of the Straits of Hormuz and thus can control shipping in the event there is a naval strength worthy of note, be it of any country.

In so far as gas being projected to Pakistan over Iran by Qatar and Oman, one does not carry coals to Newcastle. The Oil Minister Bijan Namdar Zanganeh said here Saturday that Iran holds 27.5 trillion cubic meters of proven natural gas reserves. (Oil Minister: Iran owns 27.5 trillion cm of proven gas reserves).

When India and Pakistan were in an eyeball armed "peace", nothing substantial occurred that made foreign capital leave India.

The issue is not a nuclear war, but a naval blockade as in 1971.

If there is a nuclear war, then who will be left to worry?

Why should India hinder oil supply to other nations? In a scenario of the unlikely fresh Indo Pak conflict, it will be to hinder Pakistan and not the world. In fact, hindering the world of its oil will be totally irrational.

As far as naval warfare is concerned all facets be in air, sea or undersea is taken care of by the flotilla sailing. If they don't cater for the same, then there would be something drastically wrong. One does not expose capital ships for target practice. At least, that is not the teaching in the Indian Navy.

As far as Operation Brasstack or Operation Parakrama is concerned, it was not due to Pakistan that they were scaled down. So, giving Zia credit is misplaced.

It would be interesting if you could post some of the commentaries of the Iranian think tanks who feel Gwadar is a better spin off for Iran to its own ports.

No one is stating in India that one has to go to war. It is indeed wonderful to know that you move around with Pakistani strategist. That way, it will be most beneficial to know their views if you post them. Actually, those who deal with wars or have been in actual wars, are the real ones who hate it with all their heart since they have experienced the death and destruction that is so glorified by those who sit back and clap!

Though I have not understood as to how India benefits from Gwadar. The day China has a Blue water Navy capability, she will not sit back in their ports and allow their boats to rust their serviceable life!