What's new

Hassan Rouhani to visit Baku

Iran won't be less reliable than Russia, sometimes you don't have many options, for example Iran is importing natural gas from Turkmenistan, they have shown to be anything but reliable but currently there are no other options for Iran; Iran can't afford to construct a whole delivery system and it is cheaper for Iran to stick with Turkmenistan gas (under current circumstances).

In order to understand how difficult and costly it is to build a natural gas delivery system read this article: How Does the Natural Gas Delivery System Work? - Natural Gas

What system are you talking about? The technology I'm talking about is no new system (as in yesterday's) All the modern refineries are using new technologies, at least majority of Iran's customers (India, China, Japan, Korea to name a few) which again are the MAIN importers of Iranian oil have the technology since 1982 and 1989 in India, Eastern European countries also have the technology however they're not an issue as they're not major importers. As a matter of fact the only country that faced problem was Sri Lanka which replaced Iran's oil with Iraq's oil to remedy the problem.

And yes the cost will be minimum. Certainly a lot less "minimum" ;) than U.S. penalties, however even the countries that use older technologies (similar to that of Abadan's refinery) won't need to reconfigure their refineries as the Iraq's heavy crude could easily replace Iran's, however no country is willing to put aside diversification of its energy supplies and for a lesser cost at that to increase its dependencies on other countries.

As for your questions, if you read my post carefully as well as read the IMF report that I posted earlier should be sufficient to answer them.
We need to focus on the main point in the discussion.
Anyway, you have said sth like Iran cannot afford to build pipeline to NE to replace Turkmen gas, which it is wrong and even the construction of it is started 1-2 years ago. But, let's ignore non-important points.
Iran is obviously unreliable, and much much more unreliable than Russia. instead of getting emotional just note that 1)Iran has a crazy regime 2)Iran is a fully sanctioned country 3)Iran relations with EU have been cut throughly multiple times in the past 3-4 decades 4)Iran, can accidentally, climbs of other countries embassies in Tehran. 5)Iran has very very bad relations with its neighbors, and neighbors can cut the line whenever they want. 6)Iran-Turkey pipeline, which is the only gas export pipeline of Iran, is already bombed multiple times by PJAK, and PKK. 7)US would not be happy with it and would screw any possible attempts in this regard, and Iran has absolutely no power to not let US to do so. this is how oil is already sanctioned. 8)....
I can write more than 10 other reasons that why Iran is much much more unreliable than Russia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Qatar, KSA, Iraq, Egypt, and Algeria to supply EU gas.
 
We need to focus on the main point in the discussion.
Anyway, you have said sth like Iran cannot afford to build pipeline to NE to replace Turkmen gas, which it is wrong and even the construction of it is started 1-2 years ago. But, let's ignore non-important points.
Iran is obviously unreliable, and much much more unreliable than Russia. instead of getting emotional just note that 1)Iran has a crazy regime 2)Iran is a fully sanctioned country 3)Iran relations with EU have been cut throughly multiple times in the past 3-4 decades 4)Iran, can accidentally, climbs of other countries embassies in Tehran. 5)Iran has very very bad relations with its neighbors, and neighbors can cut the line whenever they want. 6)Iran-Turkey pipeline, which is the only gas export pipeline of Iran, is already bombed multiple times by PJAK, and PKK. 7)US would not be happy with it and would screw any possible attempts in this regard, and Iran has absolutely no power to not let US to do so. this is how oil is already sanctioned. 8)....
I can write more than 10 other reasons that why Iran is much much more unreliable than Russia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Qatar, KSA, Iraq, Egypt, and Algeria to supply EU gas.

What was emotional about his post? I read all Sam's posts in the thread and didnt see anything which you refer to as "emotional".
If anything, all I see from you is repeating the word "mullah, mullah, mullah, mullah" in every context. Like a parrot on steroids.
 
What is the issue in Caspian sea ? aren't borders are defined ? then why everyone keep claiming each other's stuff ?
 
What is the issue in Caspian sea ? aren't borders are defined ? then why everyone keep claiming each other's stuff ?

It is defined beetween Azerbaijan and Russia & Kazakhstan, but not between Azerbaijan and Iran & Turkmenistan. Iran claims that each state should get 20%, which in fact do not match the shoreline of respective countries. Azerbaijan's territory extents all the way south into Astara on Caspian coast, so that's where the borderline should run from, a straight line into Turkmenistan's southernmost point on Caspian Sea (on the other hand, Iran does not accept that straight line).

(a little mistake, corrected right information)
 
Last edited:
It is defined beetween Azerbaijan and Russia & Kazakhstan, but not between Azerbaijan and Iran & Turkmenistan. Azerbaijan insists on the old Soviet line, while Iran claims that each state should get 20%, which in fact do not match the shoreline of respective countries. Azerbaijan's territory extents all the way south into Astara on Caspian coast, so that's where the borderline should run from, a straight line into Turkmenistan's southernmost point on Caspian Sea (on the other hand, Iran does not accept that straight line).

Because Iran's proposal is the fairest one. Iran and USSR had agreed to share Caspian resources and shipment rights equally in 2 different agreemnts of 1921 and 1940. Suddenly, in 1991, 3 new countries are born and each if them claiming their own share, while Iran officially was in agreement with USSR. So taking the 20% share is the best proposal and Iran has already compromised enough in the Caspian sea. That's why I told before that Iran won't agree with those borders unless something extraordinary happens.
 
USSR is no more, hence presently there cannot be an agreement between Iran and a non-existent entity, and those three countries are real countries recognized by the rest of the world and Iran itself. Of course Iran cannot claim what is beyond their coastline, that does not fit any logic.
 
Last edited:
Because Iran's proposal is the fairest one. Iran and USSR had agreed to share Caspian resources and shipment rights equally in 2 different agreemnts of 1921 and 1940. Suddenly, in 1991, 3 new countries are born and each if them claiming their own share, while Iran officially was in agreement with USSR. So taking the 20% share is the best proposal and Iran has already compromised enough in the Caspian sea. That's why I told before that Iran won't agree with those borders unless something extraordinary happens.
Iran should have not have even agreed with 20%.
 
Last edited:
Because Iran's proposal is the fairest one. Iran and USSR had agreed to share Caspian resources and shipment rights equally in 2 different agreemnts of 1921 and 1940. Suddenly, in 1991, 3 new countries are born and each if them claiming their own share, while Iran officially was in agreement with USSR. So taking the 20% share is the best proposal and Iran has already compromised enough in the Caspian sea. That's why I told before that Iran won't agree with those borders unless something extraordinary happens.
What you're saying makes no sense. Maritime boundaries are clearly defined under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Nobody cares what Iran and USSR agreed on, because USSR is no longer in existence and even back then the USSR was routinely doing whatever it wanted on Iran's supposed half anyway. You're claiming that Iran's proposal is fair when Iran's proposal has no bearing on anything. The reality of the situation is that maritime boundaries and zones have been clearly defined and all countries in the area get what's coming to them based on their shorelines, end of story.

Maritime_zones_Australia.gif


Iran should have not have even agreed with 20%.
Whether we agree or not matters little. Maritime zones are already defined and you can't pick and choose instances where you want to abide by them and when you want to throw them aside. Wasting time and disputing something that's already been decided is idiotic.
 
What you're saying makes no sense. Maritime boundaries are clearly defined under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

You are wrong in this friend.

For example Turkey doesn't acknowledge this convention.
 
You are wrong in this friend.

For example Turkey doesn't acknowledge this convention.
Why? Island disputes with Greece or something?

Doesn't mean Turkey is on the right here. Most countries go by the above criteria.
 
Why? Island disputes with Greece or something?

Doesn't mean Turkey is on the right here. Most countries go by the above criteria.

We are not part of the convention and do not acknowledge it. Same thing can apply to Azerbaijan too.
 
Back
Top Bottom