USA State Department must learn the difference between the word ‘BANDAR’ and...

USA State Department must learn the difference between the word ‘BANDAR’ and ‘BANDAR GHURKI ‘


USA State Department must learn the difference between the word ‘BANDAR’ and ‘BANDAR GHURKI ‘

The US State Department Principal Deputy Spokesperson, Vedant Patel said at the press briefing that “US sanctions on Iran remain in place and we will continue to enforce them.” Then he even went on to threaten India by adding “Any entity, anyone considering business deals with Iran, they need to be aware of the potential risk they are opening themselves up to, potential risk of sanctions.”

The United States warned that “anyone” considering business deals with Tehran needs to be aware of the “potential risk of sanctions.”

Well Patel Bhai , we Indians are not averse to risk taking . We did so even way back in 1971 when we had practically nothing to defend ourselves against to your nuclear armed naval flottila led by USS Enterprise . Next were your sanctions able to achieve much after we carried out our second nuclear test ?

Coming to the present, how effective are your sanctions against Russia and China ? And next you want to make India angry by using the ‘ Sanction ‘ word . What will happen if BRUCS decides to place sanctions over USA ?… for thought .

Patel ji ask your department people to look up the HINDI to ENGLISH dictionary and know the difference between BANDER that is a port and BANDAR GHURKI which monkeys use to cowdown their opponents. So please do not try your tricks with India.

In fact the above veiled threat from the US of “potential risk of sanctions” came a day after India inked a 10-year agreement for running the Chabahar Port in Iran. The External Affairs Minister Shri S Jaishankar emphasised that the project will benefit the entire region andasked people not take a “narrow view” of it.

He also pointed out that the US itself had appreciated the larger relevance of Chabahar in the past. The EAM was speaking at an interaction after the launch of the Bangla edition of his book ‘Why Bharat Matters’ in Kolkata on Wednesday.

On being asked about the US’ remarks, Mr Jaishankar said, “I did see some of the remarks which were made, but I think it’s a question of communicating, convincing and getting people to understand, that this is actually for everyone’s benefit. I don’t think people should take a narrow view of it.”

The Long-Term Bilateral Contract on Chabahar Port Operation was signed between Indian Ports Global Limited (IPGL) of India and the Port & Maritime Organisation (PMO) of Iran on Monday, enabling the operation of Shahid-Behesti port in the Chabahar Port Development Project for a period of 10 years.

Mr Jaishankar further said that India had a long association with the project, but was not able to sign a long-term pact, which was important. He added that New Delhi was able to sort out the issues and sign the long-term agreement, which will benefit the entire region.

“We have had a long association with the Chabahar Port, but we could never sign a long-term agreement. The reason was…there were various problems on the Iranian end…the joint-venture partner changes, the condition changed,” the Foreign Minister said.

He added, “Finally, we were able to sort this out and we were able to get the long-term agreement done. The long-term agreement is necessary, because without it you cannot really improve the port operation. And the port operation we believe, will benefit the entire region.”

The Chabahar Port is an India-Iran flagship project that serves as an important transit port for trade with Afghanistan and Central Asian countries, which are landlocked countries. India has been a key player in the development and operation of Chabahar Port.

The Indian government has invested in the port’s infrastructure and has been involved in upgrading its facilities to make it a viable transit route for Indian goods bound for Afghanistan and Central Asia.

So no one should even think in theirdreams that any BandarGhurki will work against India . Now we are in a position to give it back Tit for Tat .