Iran: Arrangement with Egypt will Allow Warships Through Suez

Pundit Press ^ | 2/17/11 | Aurelius

[rightistight]

Yesterday, news broke that Iran would be trying to send two warships through the Suez Canal, both marking their increased ability to move with the fall of the Mubarak presidency and in order to show Israel just how close their navy can get. Early reports today stated that Egypt would not let the ships past and, therefore, the movement was canceled.

Now new reports from Iran's Press TV state that not only will Iran still be trying to send their warships through the Suez Canal, but that they are working with "Egyptian officials" to make it happen.

Talking about the official, the article stated:

"He said that the Iranian officials were in contact with officials in Cairo to secure the Iranian vessels' passage, adding that Egyptian authorities believed there was nothing wrong with the passage."

Israel has called the movements an "act of provocation," stating that the exercise is well off course of where Iran's warships usually go and that the ships' destination is off the coast of their nation.

[AU72]

Well Obama has deepsixed another ally.

[Robe]

I believe that Egypt is bound by international treaties and law to allow all shipping of any country pass through the canal

[ZX12R]

We should sink those ships as soon as they leave dock, and nuke all their military installations, as a warning to the rest of the raghead countries.

[Robe]

Ah found it .....(MARITIME LAW......

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982)

Suez canal

In terms of commercial navigation and traffic density the Suez Canal is the most important canal in the world.

Regulations for the Suez Canal were established in 1888 by the Convention of Constantinople. This was the first treaty in the history of international maritime law to grant free passage within a canal. Article 1 prohibits interference with vessels in the canal and so guarantees free passage in peacetime and war. Article 2 prohibits obstruction and interference with the security of the canal and its branches.

[americanophile]

Considering we have an entire fleet based a little more than 150 miles off Iran’s coast, in Bahrain, we’re not in much of a position to freak about a couple of lousy warships passing through the Suez.

[Cheburashka]

If anyone wants to read the Constantinople Convention, here it is.

Constantinople Convention of the Suez Canal

Note carefully Article I.

[flaglady47]

Considering we have an entire fleet based a little more than 150 miles off Iran’s coast, in Bahrain, we’re not in much of a position to freak about a couple of lousy warships passing through the Suez.

Yeah, but Israel has a right to freak out, and Israel is one of our vital interests in the MidEast. It is also another example of the bully Iran pushing the western world around. I am part of that western world, I can’t stand the leadership of Iran, and therefore threats against us our of concern to me. This is a threat against our interests. Let the two warships through and then make sure they never make the round trip back home. Sink them, surreptitiously or otherewise.

[RainMan]

Sure, they can pass thru the canal ... and as soon as they enter the territorial waters of Israel without permission, Israel can turn them into fishing reefs.

[americanophile]

It’s fine for Israel to be concerned. As for us, I think we keep a close eye on them, provide them with an ‘escort’ while they’re in the region, and see what we can learn about their activities. They’re not going to challenge the U.S. Navy and they’re not going to start shelling the Israeli coast, so a sovereign warship traveling in peacetime through international waters, or through the territorial waters of an allied nation with permission, is simply not that big of a deal.

[newzjunkey]

The Suez canal is in Egypt therefore it's only Egypt who should have a say whether Iran will send two "warships" though the canal.

This isn't "rocket surgery." If Israel turn this into another USS Liberty incident--an unprovoked attack by Israel on a U.S. navy ship in int'l waters--they can get stuffed and suffer whatever consequences come their way.

[Mashood]

No Low T problems here.

[americanophile]

This treaty is valid so long as the Egyptian military junta wants it to be. It’s silly to read it as binding ‘law.’

[tanknetter]

Sure, they can pass thru the canal ... and as soon as they enter the territorial waters of Israel without permission, Israel can turn them into fishing reefs.

And even if they don't enter Israeli territorial waters, the Israeli Navy can make life very, very unpleasant for them.

At the very least I'd expect to see many pictures of the Iranian ships as seen through the attack periscopes of Israel's Dolphin-class subs hit the net pretty quickly.

The Iranians are pretty stupid to be doing this. All it'll do is show the rest of the world (and their own population - which WILL be able to access the pics) how weak they are.

[ClearCase_guy]

What happens if the Iranians scuttle their own ship inside the canal? They can blame an Israeli submarine. Then, you have an international act of war by the Jews, and a vital international seaway encumbered to all, at least for a time. Big international outrage at Israel's "unprovoked attack".

I think the payoff for Iran might be enough to warrant scuttling a ship.

[tanknetter]

What happens if the Iranians scuttle their own ship inside the canal? They can blame an Israeli submarine. Then, you have an international act of war by the Jews, and a vital international seaway encumbered to all, at least for a time. Big international outrage at Israel's "unprovoked attack".

IIRC that's what the North Koreans tried to claim when their mini-sub sunk that South Korean corvette - the ROK did it to themselves to provoke an international incident.

Problem is that any sort of forensic investigation WILL demonstrate clearly not only how the ship was sunk (torpedo hit vs. some other method) but also likely WHO did it (ability to trace explosives back to their source).

There's also the fact that the Israelis would have to be nucking futs to try that sort of thing, let alone actually think they could get away with it. And no one believes that the Israelis are nucking futs. They have absolutely NO interest in doing something that shuts down the canal.

[soupbone1]

Seems like the next flotilla of peaceniks will have Iranian naval support.

[Cheburashka]

Duh. Any treaty is valid until one side or another denounces it. Then it becomes invalid, because one side won’t honor it.

[americanophile]

Duh yourself. You just reiterated my (largely rhetorical) point.

[GAB-1955]

Let Israel sink them if they must. After all, Israel and Iran are in a state of war.