INDIA APPEASES LEFT AND MUSLIMS WITH TEHRAN VISIT,

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 NEW DELHI 000786

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

UNVIE FOR AMBASSADOR SCHULTE
DEPT OF ENERGY FOR A/S KAREN HARBERT, TOM CUTLER, MOLLY
WILLIAMSON
STATE EEB FOR DAS PAUL SIMONS, STEVE GALLOGLY, JAMES EIGHMIE
STATE SCA FOR PDAS STEVE MANN

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/15/2017
TAGS: PREL PGOV EPET PARM KNNP IR PK IN
SUBJECT: INDIA APPEASES LEFT AND MUSLIMS WITH TEHRAN VISIT,
BUT TIES DEVOID OF CONTENT SAYS TOP JOURNALIST

REF: NEW DELHI 00663

NEW DELHI 00000786 001.2 OF 003


Classified By: PolCouns Ted Osius for Reasons 1.4 (B,D)


1. (C) SUMMARY: "Times of India" diplomatic correspondent
Indrani Bagchi, who accompanied Foreign Minister Mukherjee on
his visit to Tehran February 6-7, told Deputy PolCouns that
the visit had been an exercise by the government of India
(GOI) to garner headlines that would please the Indian Muslim
vote bloc and the Left. She said the Liquefied Natural Gas
(LNG) deal would not happen, the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI)
pipeline was going nowhere and that Indo-Iranian cooperation
on the port at Chabahar was "dead in the water." Mukherjee's
visit had been "all about headlines and political comfort,"
according to Bagchi, who advised that, while it is good for
the Indians and Iranians to talk, the U.S. need not worry too
much about the rhetoric in the Indo-Iranian relationship.
END SUMMARY.

Pleasing the Muslim Voters and the Left
--------------


2. (C) Indrani Bagchi, "Times of India" diplomatic
correspondent, told Deputy PolCouns February 14 that Foreign
Minister Mukherjee's visit February 6-7 to Tehran had been
primarily for the sake of pleasing the Muslim vote bloc and
the Indian Left. (Note: In official statements, the MEA
maintained the visit was part of the regular process of
high-level exchanges between the two countries. End note.)
Bagchi, who accompanied Mukherjee on the visit, asserted that
the GOI's goal was to appease opposition forces in the face
of upcoming elections in Uttar Pradesh province, which has a
large Muslim minority population that acts as a swing
constituency. The visit was "a cynical exercise on the part
of the Indian government" to garner headlines at home and
keep the Muslim voters (both Shia and Sunni) happy.

IPI and LNG Deals Dead
--------------


3. (C) On the IPI pipeline, Bagchi opined that it would
never come to fruition. "The deal has been on the table
since 1995, it is still where it was in 1998 when I began
reporting on it, and in 2015, it will still be in the same
place," Bagchi emphasized. "While it is good for India and
Iran to talk," she added, "it is impossible to sell the idea
of India paying Pakistan's army $100 million per annum to
protect the pipeline." The LNG deal "is dead," she said,
noting that the best technology for such a project would come
from Japan and the U.S., but neither country is willing to

NEW DELHI 00000786 002.2 OF 003


provide it given the current political climate. "There is no
way Iran has the technology to get the gas into a pipeline,"
Bagchi argued. Iranians were the world's worst negotiators
and deal-makers anyway, she added, indicating that the U.S.
should not be concerned about either the IPI pipeline or the
LNG deal. "The U.S. should low-ball it," asserted Bagchi,
underlining that Mukherjee's visit and the proposed projects
were "all about headlines and political comfort." Deputy
PolCouns recited our many concerns about Iran.

Mukherjee's Message - Flexibility, Restraint, Transparency
--------------


4. (C) Mukherjee's message to the Iranians had been to be
flexible, exercise restraint, take the views of the
international community into account, and to "be more
convincing" concerning its willingness to negotiate, Bagchi
outlined. Regarding Mukherjee's statement that the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) should play a
central role, Bagchi suggested that India was being typically
Brahmanical in "reading the fine print to the Iranians" by
helping them to see that, if they engage in dialogue, open
their facilities, and cease the reprocessing of spent fuel,
the IAEA would then verify that Iran had ceased uranium
enrichment, thereby eventually freeing Iran of UNSCR 1737
sanctions. At that point, the IAEA would, in fact, be taking
the central role, explained Bagchi. India was trying to help
Iran see the way out, but the Iranians "are not linear in
their thinking," bemoaned Bagchi, adding, "they think in
circles." Asked if India could play an intermediary role
with Iran, Bagchi replied, "No, they can not play the role of
intermediary."

Chabahar Port Cooperation "Dead in the Water"
--------------


5. (C) Indo-Iranian cooperation on development of the
Iranian port complex of Chabahar, an entry to Afghanistan in
lieu of transit across Pakistan, was "dead in the water,"
according to Bagchi. "Iran denied India equipment or
personnel" for the development of the port, said Bagchi,
claiming that the Iranians had told the Indians that they had
to provide their own supplies and manpower if they wanted to
use the port, which they then tie up in red tape.

Mottaki Keeps His Distance
--------------


6. (C) Bagchi noted with interest that Iranian Foreign
Minister Mottaki had declined to invite the visiting Indian

NEW DELHI 00000786 003.2 OF 003


foreign minister to lunch. She theorized that this was in
retaliation for Mukherjee having failed to invite Mottaki for
a meal when he visited New Delhi in November 2006. "It is
possibly the most important barometer for the decline of the
relationship," Bagchi emphasized, suggesting that Mukherjee
had not wanted to appear too close to the Iranians when
Mottaki was in town. This protocollary snub, she added,
stood in contrast to the warmth of the Iranian relation with
Mukherjee's predecessor, Natwar Singh.

Comment: You've Lost That Loving Feeling
--------------


7. (C) Certainly Bagchi does not speak for the GOI, but her
refreshing candidness and privileged access reveal the
changes taking place in the Indo-Iran relationship. Bagchi's
comments echo the "what has Iran done for India lately?"
sentiment Emboffs have heard from other civilian experts
recently. Certainly the GOI would never admit to the charge
Bagchi makes that the trip was to cover domestic election
concerns, nor that bilateral relations are as empty as Bagchi
suggests, but Post notes that both official feedback (reftel)
and press accounts downplay any forward progress between
India and Iran. The trip appears to have produced little of
substance. India has significant potential energy interests
in Iran to be sure, and has a degree of influence with
Tehran, but Bagchi's insider report suggests the platitudes
of a friendly joint statement may be hiding problems in this
regional relationship. End comment.
MULFORD