India-Iran, Qatar SeaPipeline Not Possible without Pakistan's Approval

[NaMaloom]

Our Pakistani friends were jumping for joy after hearing that India cannot lay a pipeline without the permission of Pakistan!

Now as per Article 58 they can do squat to prevent India from doing so! The bubble has burst, and how!!

its better not to have any knowledge rather to have 'incomplete knowledge'

NOW READ THESE ARTICLES & CLAUSES SLOWLY ..........


The above quoted clause (1) of article 58 which debates about the 'FREEDOM' of 'all states' (coastal & Land lock) in EEZ in relation to navigation, overflight & of laying of submarine cables & pipelines is actually subjecting these freedom under Article 87 of PART VII of the same United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
relevant clause are stated under



Again the clause (1) sub clause (c) of Article 87 is referring to the Part of VI (which deals with the 'subjective freedom' of state or states for laying Submarine cables or pipelines on the continental shelf); in order for State or States to exercise the given 'subjective freedom' by UN under the convention to lay the undersea pipeline the following clause 79 of Part VI is applicable, which is stated below



The clause 3 of article 79 of the UN convention on the law of sea has explicitly mention that consent of coastal state is necessary for delineation of such pipeline projects; while the clause clause 4 has clarified that no given freedom to States (other then COASTAL STATE) under this clause affect the right of coastal state over its jurisdiction in EEZ.

Now back to Article 58 clause 3 (mention as under) clearly instructs STATES to respect & to comply with the LAWS & REGULATIONS of COASTAL STATE in EEZ



Now after quoting these number of clauses which have made it clear that India can't even 'initiate' the pipeline project in Pakistani EEZ all its own without the consent (read 'approval') of Pakistan; I want to ask you that how did you reach to conclusion that India have all the right to lay down an undersea pipeline in 'Pakistan's EEZ' but Pakistan have no right under the the international law even in Pakistan's EEZ & why you ignored the following wordings of Article 58 clause 1 (posted by you in your post)


either you are just another Indian troll or you just copy & pasted the (incomplete) clause from some Indian forum without even understanding the matter.

@OrionHunter Looks like you been smoking some heavy stuff. Read @HRK 's post and wake up.

 

[graphican]

Sometimes i think even India asks God, God why u gave Pakistan the best and left behind what was useless, i.e, india.

Isi leay tau india is always drooling over pakistan.
There can be a pakistan without India, but there cant be an India without Pakistan.

If you want to destroy yourself, follow the path of arrogance as every inch of it goes to destruction. If you want to thank God, thank being Pakistani and just follow the the path of thanks and every inch of it leads to reward. Don't bring comparisons into the equation.

 

[Shamain]

Our Pakistani friends were jumping for joy after hearing that India cannot lay a pipeline without the permission of Pakistan!

Now as per Article 58 they can do squat to prevent India from doing so! The bubble has burst, and how!!

Itna shock laga hai kay maansik santolan hil gaya hai, above written text ka matlab samajh nahi araha.
They are saying the line was supposed to pass thru area which has now becme our continental shelf, so now go build pipeline beyond that limit.

If you want to destroy yourself, follow the path of arrogance as every inch of it goes to destruction. If you want to thank God, thank being Pakistani and just follow the the path of thanks and every inch of it leads to reward. Don't bring comparisons into the equation.

Aww no trust me i am not arrogant, what i wrote had a genuine reason behind that.

Its pakistans geo strategic location advantage and resources rich status which india lacks. Nd how i have always seen india drooling over pakistan for that yet pretending that oh we dont need her, we are too good ourselves etc etc.

No arrogancee hereeeeeeeeee.

 

[farhan_9909]

bichaare ghareeb indians.

saari umar hum inki maarte rahengay,Wallah inki kismat kharab kia barbaad thi jo inki muqaddar main hum inkay parosi leeekay tay

 

[Shamain]

bichaare ghareeb indians.

saari umar hum inki maarte rahengay,Wallah inki kismat kharab kia barbaad thi jo inki muqaddar main hum inkay parosi leeekay tay

Yea india kay apnay aisay kaam hain that none her neighbour wants her.

 

[farhan_9909]

Yea india kay apnay aisay kaam hain that none her neighbour wants her.

yes,perhaps we are cursed for our ancestors sins for having a country like india in our neighborhood

 

[Shamain]

yes,perhaps we are cursed for our ancestors sins for having a country like india in our neighborhood

India has 7 neighbours, itnay ziada ancestors 7 countries kay saray kay saray tau gunah nahi karain gay.
sab hee tung hain uss say

hence, proved india is an azmaish.
Q.E.D

 

[Echo_419]

Now read this,,,,,,,,,,,,,, slowly.

Article58

Rights and duties of other States in the exclusive economic zone​

1. In the exclusive economic zone, all States, whether coastal or land-locked, enjoy, subject to the relevant provisions of this Convention, the freedoms referred to in article 87 of navigation and overflight and of the laying of submarine cables and pipelines, and other internationally lawful uses of the sea related to these freedoms, such as those associated with the operation of ships, aircraft and submarine cables and pipelines, and compatible with the other provisions of this Convention.

PREAMBLE TO THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA

Pakistan can do squat to prevent this pipeline. Your territorial water ends at 12NM. You cannot prevent India or anyone else from laying down a pipeline even 13NM outside your coastline.

Lol damm you bubble buster

 

[Abhitej]

People are discussing an irrelevant issue here. India will never take risk of building pipeline anywhere. India is already buying large number of LNG carriers to transport gas. No need for pipeline to any country. Transport gas by ships. This way we are not tied to any country & can buy gas from any country that gives cheap rates.

Larsen & Toubro signs LNG shipbuilding pact with Hyundai Heavy Industries

Mumbai: Engineering and shipping major Larsen & Toubro (L&T) has signed a crucial technology transfer agreement with South Korea’s Hyundai Heavy Industries to build liquefied natural gas (LNG) carriers at its shipyard at Kattupalli, near Chennai.

The agreement was signed with the intention of bagging at least three carriers from the revised nine-ship tender that public sector gas importer GAIL India Ltd is expected to float in the next few weeks. GAIL had issued a INR423.7bn ($6.62bn) tender to charter nine LNG carriers in August last year, which was scrapped in February this year due to poor response.

“We have signed a memorandum of understanding with Hyundai, the world’s largest shipyard, for know-how to manufacture LNG carriers for the GAIL tender,” said M V Kotwal, whole-time director and president (heavy engineering).

“This will help bringing into India the complex technology involved, and help us to gain more orders from India and abroad, since India’s imports of LNG are set to double over the next five years.”

The L&T-Hyundai Heavy agreement comes against the backdrop of a similar pact that was signed last month between state-run Cochin Shipyard and another Korean giant, Samsung Heavy Industries. Samsung had been one of the four Korean yards that qualified for GAIL’s tender requirements, the others being Hyundai Heavy Industries , Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering and STX Offshore & Shipbuilding.

 

[Echo_419]

Sure then go ahead and lay that pipeline without Pakistan's approval.

Lets see what happens then.

And why would Pakistan allow the terrorist state of india any such pipeline in its EEZ?

Kya karloge agar pipeline bechaa bhi dii toh

Looks like India has another pipeline to forget about.

Don't know about that but you sure didn't read the previous comments

 

[Shamain]

Kya karloge agar pipeline bechaa bhi dii toh

Agar bata diya tau sirf batanay pay bhi uno kay paas ja kay roo gay,pakistan nay yeh keh diya uwaaainnnn uwaaaiiiiinnnn

 

[45'22']

People are discussing an irrelevant issue here. India will never take risk of building pipeline anywhere. India is already buying large number of LNG carriers to transport gas. No need for pipeline to any country. Transport gas by ships. This way we are not tied to any country & can buy gas from any country that gives cheap rates.

Larsen & Toubro signs LNG shipbuilding pact with Hyundai Heavy Industries

Mumbai: Engineering and shipping major Larsen & Toubro (L&T) has signed a crucial technology transfer agreement with South Korea’s Hyundai Heavy Industries to build liquefied natural gas (LNG) carriers at its shipyard at Kattupalli, near Chennai.

The agreement was signed with the intention of bagging at least three carriers from the revised nine-ship tender that public sector gas importer GAIL India Ltd is expected to float in the next few weeks. GAIL had issued a INR423.7bn ($6.62bn) tender to charter nine LNG carriers in August last year, which was scrapped in February this year due to poor response.

“We have signed a memorandum of understanding with Hyundai, the world’s largest shipyard, for know-how to manufacture LNG carriers for the GAIL tender,” said M V Kotwal, whole-time director and president (heavy engineering).

“This will help bringing into India the complex technology involved, and help us to gain more orders from India and abroad, since India’s imports of LNG are set to double over the next five years.”

The L&T-Hyundai Heavy agreement comes against the backdrop of a similar pact that was signed last month between state-run Cochin Shipyard and another Korean giant, Samsung Heavy Industries. Samsung had been one of the four Korean yards that qualified for GAIL’s tender requirements, the others being Hyundai Heavy Industries , Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering and STX Offshore & Shipbuilding.

I don't think that would be economically feasible.....
importing tons of fuel daily via ships
We need pipelines

 

[45'22']

its better not to have any knowledge rather to have 'incomplete knowledge'

NOW READ THESE ARTICLES & CLAUSES SLOWLY ..........


The above quoted clause (1) of article 58 which debates about the 'FREEDOM' of 'all states' (coastal & Land lock) in EEZ in relation to navigation, overflight & of laying of submarine cables & pipelines is actually subjecting these freedom under Article 87 of PART VII of the same United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
relevant clause are stated under



Again the clause (1) sub clause (c) of Article 87 is referring to the Part VI of the convention (which deals with the 'subjective freedom' of state or states for laying Submarine cables or pipelines on the continental shelf); in order for State or States to exercise the given 'subjective freedom' by UN under the convention to lay the undersea pipeline the following clause 79 of Part VI is applicable, which is stated below



The clause 3 of article 79 of the UN convention on the law of sea has explicitly mention that consent of coastal state is necessary for delineation of such pipeline projects; while the clause clause 4 has clarified that no given freedom to States (other then COASTAL STATE) under this clause affect the right of coastal state over its jurisdiction in EEZ.

Now back to Article 58 clause 3 (mention as under) clearly instructs STATES to respect & to comply with the LAWS & REGULATIONS of COASTAL STATE in EEZ



Now after quoting these number of clauses which have made it clear that India can't even 'initiate' the pipeline project in Pakistani EEZ all its own without the consent (read 'approval') of Pakistan; I want to ask you that how did you reach to conclusion that India have all the right to lay down an undersea pipeline in 'Pakistan's EEZ' but Pakistan have no right under the the international law even in Pakistan's EEZ & why you ignored the following wordings of Article 58 clause 1 (posted by you in your post)


either you are just another Indian troll or you just copy & pasted the (incomplete) clause from some Indian forum without even understanding the matter.

Instead of going rounds ,I will directly quote the article 79 which states the laws for pipelines in a continental sea bed..

Article79

Submarine cables and pipelines on the continental shelf

1. All States are entitled to lay submarine cables and pipelines on the continental shelf, in accordance with the provisions of this article.

2. Subject to its right to take reasonable measures for the exploration of the continental shelf, the exploitation of its natural resources and the prevention, reduction and control of pollution from pipelines, the coastal State may not impede the laying or maintenance of such cables or pipelines.

3. The delineation of the course for the laying of such pipelines on the continental shelf is subject to the consent of the coastal State.

4. Nothing in this Part affects the right of the coastal State to establish conditions for cables or pipelines entering its territory or territorial sea, or its jurisdiction over cables and pipelines constructed or used in connection with the exploration of its continental shelf or exploitation of its resources or the operations of artificial islands, installations and structures under its jurisdiction.

5. When laying submarine cables or pipelines, States shall have due regard to cables or pipelines already in position. In particular, possibilities of repairing existing cables or pipelines shall not be prejudiced.


You only mentioned clause 3 and selectively ignored 1 and 3
Clause 1 clearly states we can create pipeline
Clause 2 states that the coastal state can't impede(meaning to stop) the construction or maintenance of any pipeline

Now coming to clause 3....it says that the delineation of the course is subject to the concern of the coastal state....what delineation means is drawing a precise boundary.....and what clause 3 indicates is .....the path/route shall be decided by the coastal state......

And if we go by the freedom of seas clause in part VII or by the article 58,then it clearly indicates that we have the right to make a pipeline there....

Read the clauses again and quote me back if you find any wrong in my post...

 

[coffee_cup]

Instead of going rounds ,I will directly quote the article 79 which states the laws for pipelines in a continental sea bed..

Article79

Submarine cables and pipelines on the continental shelf

1. All States are entitled to lay submarine cables and pipelines on the continental shelf, in accordance with the provisions of this article.

2. Subject to its right to take reasonable measures for the exploration of the continental shelf, the exploitation of its natural resources and the prevention, reduction and control of pollution from pipelines, the coastal State may not impede the laying or maintenance of such cables or pipelines.

3. The delineation of the course for the laying of such pipelines on the continental shelf is subject to the consent of the coastal State.

4. Nothing in this Part affects the right of the coastal State to establish conditions for cables or pipelines entering its territory or territorial sea, or its jurisdiction over cables and pipelines constructed or used in connection with the exploration of its continental shelf or exploitation of its resources or the operations of artificial islands, installations and structures under its jurisdiction.

5. When laying submarine cables or pipelines, States shall have due regard to cables or pipelines already in position. In particular, possibilities of repairing existing cables or pipelines shall not be prejudiced.


You only mentioned clause 3 and selectively ignored 1 and 3
Clause 1 clearly states we can create pipeline
Clause 2 states that the coastal state can't impede(meaning to stop) the construction or maintenance of any pipeline

Now coming to clause 3....it says that the delineation of the course is subject to the concern of the coastal state....what delineation means is drawing a precise boundary.....and what clause 3 indicates is .....the path/route shall be decided by the coastal state......

And if we go by the freedom of seas clause in part VII or by the article 58,then it clearly indicates that we have the right to make a pipeline there....

Read the clauses again and quote me back if you find any wrong in my post...

All theorey man, all theorey.

Fact ot the matter is that these two articles are more than enough for Pakistan to show the middle finger to the hostile terrorist neighbor, who is hell bound to destroy us:

3. The delineation of the course for the laying of such pipelines on the continental shelf is subject to the consent of the coastal State.

4. Nothing in this Part affects the right of the coastal State to establish conditions for cables or pipelines entering its territory or territorial sea, or its jurisdiction over cables and pipelines constructed or used in connection with the exploration of its continental shelf or exploitation of its resources or the operations of artificial islands, installations and structures under its jurisdiction.

 

[45'22']

All theorey man, all theorey.

Fact ot the matter is that these two articles are more than enough for Pakistan to show the middle finger to the hostile terrorist neighbor, who is hell bound to destroy us:

3. The delineation of the course for the laying of such pipelines on the continental shelf is subject to the consent of the coastal State.

4. Nothing in this Part affects the right of the coastal State to establish conditions for cables or pipelines entering its territory or territorial sea, or its jurisdiction over cables and pipelines constructed or used in connection with the exploration of its continental shelf or exploitation of its resources or the operations of artificial islands, installations and structures under its jurisdiction.

What theory???

You missing the point man......India can create the pipeline......it's up to Pakistan to decide the route in its extended EEZ.....

I am just waiting for @HRK 's reply for he has read the clauses and knows what I am talking about...