Indian engagement with any nations need not be seen as a consequence of or as a response to its relationship with any other nation. Isn't this the basic premise of non-alignment?
Iran is not some 'aire-gair' arbitrary state, it is a major 'civilisational nation' in the world with a prominent place in the human history. Its interaction with Greek and Indian history is significant. The impact Iranian culture has had on Indian langauges, arts and architecture are considerable.
By deepening the ties and elevating the charachter of relationship we need to strive to insulate it from counter-productive intelli-games and geo-political games of many evil minded players; and capitalise it for development and flowering of arts and sciences.
India surely has the latent and presumptive power to straighten out those dirty harries and assert its non-alignment.
RE:assetive non-alignment
by on Apr 29, 2008 01:16 AM Permalink
Vikas...can you point even a single terrorist attack by a shiite militants on innocent people?
RE:assetive non-alignment
by Loan Shark on Apr 29, 2008 01:44 AM Permalink
unfortunately suicide bombers die before one could confirm whether he is a shia or a sunni
how does one tell by looking at a muslim, if he is shia or sunni?
RE:assetive non-alignment
by Ramesh Nittoor on Apr 28, 2008 05:46 PM Permalink
The relationship between two nations is more on the basis of the role of the office and not merely the personality of the incumbent or even the ideology of the dispensation in power. This long term substratum in the relationship should never be given up for the sake of short term exigencies.
Iran has made horrible mistakes, it has also been subjected to horrible treatment. India can be and shall be a mitigating factor and never an aggravting influence as long as it abides by its well developed principle of non-alignment.
RE:assetive non-alignment
by Mahesh Jagga on Apr 28, 2008 06:11 PM Permalink
It was the basic guiding principle of JLN that friendships should be based on ideology and character. And look where we landed up. A defunct NAM and untrusting rest of the world.
Friendships are based on nation's interests - strategic and long term. If being a friend with Iran helps us in long term - its okay - else NAM may go take a hike.
By persuing outdated stratagrams like NAM we will be left with friends like Iran, Cuba, Venezuela and may be Chad.
RE:assetive non-alignment
by Ramesh Nittoor on Apr 28, 2008 06:21 PM Permalink
Your confusion about non-alignment is amazing. Non-alignment is India's internal policy while NAM was a set of third world nations seeking to get past the machinations of the cold war rivalries. It is as if cold cream and ice-cream are similar things!
RE:assetive non-alignment
by Mahesh Jagga on Apr 28, 2008 06:29 PM Permalink
NAM was our declared (from the roof tops - I would say) foreign policy and not an internal policy.
Basic issue here is "what guides the nation's foreign policy?" Some foggy relationship going back to pre civilization days or current geo political situation.
Friends and enemies are not permanent but nation's interests are.
RE:assetive non-alignment
by Muhammed Rashid on Apr 28, 2008 07:00 PM Permalink
Why both of you are fighting? Nehru did a lot of mistakes and lots of good things. He went to UN when Pakistan attacked India in 1948. His 5 year plans atleast showed path to India'a early development. Friendship with Iran will help India in its quest for Petrol and gas
RE:assetive non-alignment
by Ramesh Nittoor on Apr 29, 2008 04:53 AM Permalink
India can and shall moderate the geo-political tensions and reduce the risks of war. Saving innocent lives and according development a priority is reason enough to talk. India surely does not want Iran or Pakistan to be at war with anybody.
Non-alignment policy will insure conformance to international law and define the paramaters of international condict equitibly.
