Abu Musa residents: Iran trying to harass us from our homes

[Arabian Legend]

How bout standing up for themselves plus elections and as far as doing for the world is concerned has more respect in the world including Arab countries then any Israeli Puppet in Arab lands hows is that for starter.

is that how you describe a lack of diplomacy

 

[Bratva]

The question I want answered is this: why do pakistanis always, and I mean always, slave themselves to the Middle Eastern nation they work at but never to a secular Western nation? If they're living in Iran, they become mullah lovers. If they're living in a GCC country, they start spewing out their garbage. But if they're living in the West, this never happens!


Is it because of the type of people that choose to go and work in the ME nations are different or is it because of how we Middle Easterners are? We don't really have a concept of multiculturalism so anybody that comes to our land is forced to be like us and think like us.

We have two pakistanis who have every problem imaginable in their own nation but are fighting the Iran/arab war for spare change. This is pathetic. Go and fix your own nation and maybe you wouldn't have to fight our war for spare change.

coming this from a person who is living in western country, the same western countries your leaders bash so fervently. This phatetic crap shows you have no logical arguments to debate with and you are just bad mouthing every other person who is debating respectfully. It's a Pakistani forum hosting Iraninan section so every other nationality has equal rights to debate about Iran. Don't ever forget that Hospitality of Pakistanis. This is not some Irani Forum where you can spew this crap and get away with it. Know your limits, and be aware of that you are guest here don't become the owner of house. If you have problems with discussing than stop posting here.


The question is instead changing our perceptions that why Iranians after signing a MoU with sharjah still took over the whole island? and if some one ask them than they start accusing other persof having slave mentality?

 

[Abii]

coming this from a person who is living in western country, the same western countries your leaders bash so fervently. This phatetic crap shows you have no logical arguments to debate with and you are just bad mouthing every other person who is debating respectfully. It's a Pakistani forum hosting Iraninan section so every other nationality has equal rights to debate about Iran. Don't ever forget that Hospitality of Pakistanis. This is not some Irani Forum where you can spew this crap and get away with it. Know your limits, and be aware of that you are guest here don't become the owner of house. If you have problems with discussing than stop posting here.

as I said, fix your nation and you wouldn't have to act as a merc for spare change.

and what is exactly being discussed here? You post a Press TV like news piece to start a troll war and then you demand people to respect you. What's worth respecting here? Your pathetic mercenary attitude that has no place in a conflict between Iranians and arabs or your pathetic sorry excuse of a thread that has less substance than a 2 dollar *****?

Oh and talk about knowing your place!! Oh the irony! lmao
you're fighting a war that isn't yours to begin with and you tell me to know my place.

 

[Bratva]

as I said, fix your nation and you wouldn't have to act as a merc for spare change.

and what is exactly being discussed here? You post a Press TV like news piece to start a troll war and then you demand people to respect you. What's worth respecting here? Your pathetic mercenary attitude that has no place in a conflict between Iranians and arabs or your pathetic sorry excuse of a thread that has less substance than a 2 dollar *****?

Oh and talk about knowing your place!! Oh the irony! lmao
you're fighting a war that isn't yours to begin with and you tell me to know my place.

You got bitten by some mad DOG bro? coz you totally gone mad. It happens when you live in western country and especially next to America, you become master of spewing crap and not answering the question you are asked. Superiority complex in full swing.

Than why dont you end this useless and crap of yours by just posting some logical stuff that shows Iran didn't occupied the Island and it was given to you by Sharjah?

and talking about fighting a war that isn't yours. A country whose army fighting rebels inside syria and he is giving lectures to other. I just love iranians lousy crap when they ran out of logics, they forget their own reality and start throwing stones at other houses.

 

[raptor22]

Than why dont you end this useless and crap of yours by just posting some logical stuff that shows Iran didn't occupied the Island and it was given to you by Sharjah?

You mean you & your fellows are logical ? so here you are :


History of abu musa and the tunbs

The British Government's announcement in January 1968 of its decision of terminating Pax-Britannica in the Persian Gulf caused a sense of urgency for closer cooperation among regional states. Settlement of territorial and boundary differences thus, became a necessity, especially in the offshore areas where exploitation of new oilfields was expanding rapidly.

Iran had in 1965 negotiated with Britain for delimitation of maritime areas, which established the median line of the sea as a principle upon which the continental shelf between Iran and her Arab neighbours was to be divided. It was on the basis of this principle that the subsequent maritime delimitation agreements were achieved. In anticipation of existence of oil structures across maritime boundaries, Iran decided to enforce a provision in her continental shelf agreements with the states on the opposite side preventing inappropriate exploitation of such structures. According to this provision, which appears in all continental shelf boundary agreements, if a petroleum structure extends across the boundary and could be exploited from the other side, there should be no sub-surface well completion within 125 metres of the boundary without the mutual agreement of the two parties. The area of drilling prohibition is 500 metres with Saudi Arabia.

Ignoring United Arab Emirates' internal boundaries, the eight states littoral to the Persian Gulf need, at least, sixteen continental shelf boundaries among them. Of these only seven have been negotiated of which four are related to Iran. Two of the most complicated border issues settled in this period were those of late 1968 between Iran and Saudi Arabia and the 1971 settlement between Iran and Sharjah on Abu Musa Island. These were followed by a number of other settlements such as: continental-shelf boundary division of 1970 between Iran and Qatar; 1972 between Iran and Bahrain; 1975 between Iran and Oman and the river and inland boundary settlement between Iran and Iraq in that same year. Maritime boundaries between Iran and Kuwait, at the head of the Persian Gulf, was covered by a draft agreement between the two sides which came about in 1962, but it is not in force because of Iraq's continued territorial disputes with Iran and Kuwait. In all, maritime boundaries in two areas of the Persian Gulf have not been settled. These are the north-west areas between Iran, Kuwait, and Iraq and the area between Iran and UAE because of uncertainties concerning the two Tunbs and Abu Musa islands.

The issue of the two Tunbs and Abu Musa islands: In late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries the British occupied a number of Iranian islands in the Persian Gulf, either directly or through assumed sovereignty for the so-called Trucial Emirates. These included Tunbs and Abu Musa as well as Qeshm, Hengam and Sirri islands. A War Office map, presented by the British Minister in Tehran to the Shah in 1888 confirmed all these islands, as Iranian owned. Iran's case was further strengthened with the publication in 1892 of Lord Curzon's Persia and the Persian Question in which the map also showed the islands as Iranian territory.

British fear of a Russian encroachment in the Persian Gulf intensified at the turn of the twentieth century. In 1902 a secret meeting at the British Foreign Office decided that the strategic islands at or near the Strait of Hormuz should be occupied. This decision was communicated to British political administrators in India and the Persian Gulf in a memorandum dated July 14th 1902. A year later the government of India sanctioned occupation of the islands of Tunb and Abu Musa in the name of the Sheikh of Sharjah. Iran was on the brink of civil war and the authority of the central government was at its weakest. It took the Iranians about one year to realise what had happened. During his tour of southern ports and islands in April 1904, Director of Iranian Customs found out that the Iranian flag was replaced in Tunb and Abu Musa by the flag of the Sheikh of Sharjah. He lowered that flag and ordered the Iranian flag to be re-hoisted. He also commissioned two armed guards at Abu Musa. The Iranian flag was lowered again and the two sides decided to maintain status quo pending further negotiations.

Meanwhile, Iran continued struggles for the recovery of its islands as Iranian customs office wrote to the government in July 1927, demanding action against illegal trade by establishing observation posts on the three islands. A small fleet of Iranian navy was sent to recover Abu Musa and the two Tunbs and to put an end to the problem there.

The Anglo-Iranian Negociations of 1928:

When Iran prepared in 1928 to take her territorial dispute with Britain to the League of Nations, the British agreed to negotiate the status of the Tunbs, Abu Musa and Sirri islands. These negotiations began in January 1929 and continued until mid-spring 1929 without much progress. Baldwin's Conservative government was replaced in May that year by a Labour government, and Arthur Henderson replaced Chamberlain as Foreign Secretary. Henderson showed a more protective line towards Britain's colonial role in the Persian Gulf and brought Clive's negotiations with the Iranians on the issue of the Tunbs and Abu Musa to an abrupt end. This led the Iranians to try to recover the island in the 1930s through a series of actions.

Sheikh of Ras al-kheimah returns the Tunb Island: In 1934 Governor of Bandar Abbas and other Iranian officials visited Greater Tunb. This visit was the result of a secret Iranian arrangement with the Sheikh of Ras al-Kheimah according to which the Sheikh lowered his flag in Greater Tunb and the Iranian flag was hoisted instead.

Earlier, an Iranian warship in Tunb's territorial waters seized a Trucial Coast dhow. These activities attracted the attention of the British who vigorously protested against what was going on in that island. The Iranian government was also orally informed that the British Government would as a last resort protect the interests of the Trucial Sheikhs by force. They intervened at the end of this episode and reversed that development. Further Developments:

When, at the end at the end of 1948, the Iranians expressed a wish to place administrative offices on Tunb and Abu Musa, the British ignored it. In 1949 there were rumours, first that Iran was preparing to refer the case to the United Nations, later that they intended to occupy the islands by force. The Iranian government subsequently received a note from the British Embassy in Tehran reminding them of -clear attitude - of the British Government in that respect. The Iranians in return erected a Flagstaff on Lesser Tunb in August that year, which the Royal Navy promptly removed.

Iran's protests and actions for the recovery of these islands continued until the British began withdrawing from the region. The issue however, was settled through negotiations that lasted throughout the year 1971 between Iran and Britain the latter acting on behalf of its protectorate emirates. This was the outcome of about 68 years of Iranian protests and demands for the return of the islands. Unlike claims by some sources, this was not an occupation but a negotiated settlement. Otherwise the British at least should have issued a statement of protest against the signing of the MoU between Iran and their protectorate Emirate of Sharjah concerning status of Abu Musa island and against Iran's seizure of the two Tunbs.

Renewal of Claims on the islands:

Iranian authorities were reported in April 1992 to have prevented a group of non-nationals from Sharjah from entering Abu Musa. The High Council of the UAE met on May 12th to discuss the issue and agreed that commitments of each member states before 1971 were to be treated as commitments of the Union as a whole.

Again reports on 24 August indicated that Iranian authorities refused entry to Abu Musa of one hundred people of different nationalities. Iranian sources made it clear ctivities were seen in the Arab part of Abu Musa involving a number of armed individuals from other countries, including Western states. The UAE, on the other hand, without officially denying

these serious charges of breach of the 1971 MoU, accused Iran of preventing UAE nationals from entering Abu Musa demanding visas from them. Tension began to ease towards the end of 1992, but in late December, the closing statement of the 13th summit of the Arabic countries' Co-operation Council of the Persian Gulf, announced in Abu Dhabi, called on Iran to terminate "occupation" of the Tunb islands.

Some of the UAE Arguments: The following two are the main points argued by the United Arab Emirates and Iran's response to them:



1-Priority in occupation:

The first is the argument of "priority in occupation". This claim is vague and ignores the following facts:

A- Whereas the emirates appeared on the political map of the region only in 19th century, Iran was an ancient nation and was the only government in the vicinity of these islands at the time. All historical documents verify that

all islands of northern half of the Persian Gulf have always belonged to Iran.

B- Ras al-Khaimeh did not exist at the turn of 20th century, and Sharjah was not, at the time, an emirate of territorial dimension to be able to claim offshore territories. The Sheikh was a tribal chief under British protection, whose authority was to the tribal people without territorial definition. One should not ignore the fact that British pretext for taking control in the Persian Gulf was to suppress the activities of the same tribes, then referred to by them as "pirates" of no political entity, let alone territorial dimension.

C- In the nineteenth century, Iran had lease arrangements with Oman, according to which Fath Ali Shah in 1811 and Naser ad-Din Shah in 1856 granted the Sultan lease title to Bandar Abbas, Minab and southern Persian Gulf coastal areas from east to west as far as Bahrain. If all these areas belonged to Iran, the islands of Abu Musa and the two Tunbs situated in its geographical centre could not have been "unoccupied".

D- Iran's sovereignty and ownership of these islands, as well as all other offshore and inland areas of the country, were traditionally established without the display of flags of identity. Marking occupation or ownership of territory by hoisting flags was a new concept introduced to the region by European powers.

E- Nevertheless, in 1887 Iran hoisted flags in Sirri and Abu Musa to mark her ownership of these islands after dismissing the Qasemi deputy governors of Bandar Lengeh.

F- Geographical documents from Arab & Islamic historians of the post-Islamic era confirm that all islands of the Persian Gulf belonged to Iran.

G- Prime Minister Haji Mirza Aqasi's 1840s proclamation of Iran's ownership of all islands in the Persian Gulf was not challenged by any government then or at any time thereafter.

H- An official British document verifies that after the establishment of one branch of the Qasemi family at Lengeh,

the family occupied the Iranian islands, probably in the "confused period subsequent to the death of Nadir Shah". This story is an admission that Tunbs, Abu Musa and Sirri islands belonged to Iran and were illegally occupied at a time when Iran in practice was leaderless.


I- More than 25 official or semi-official British maps of 18th and 19th centuries discovered by this author confirm Iran's ownership of these islands.


J- Sir E. Beckett, legal expert of British Government at the Foreign Office (who later served as a judge at the International Court of Justice) ruled in 1932 that the Iranians possessed sovereignty over Tamb and Abu Musa in 1887-88.

 

[Abii]

You got bitten by some mad DOG bro? coz you totally gone mad. It happens when you live in western country and especially next to America, you become master of spewing crap and not answering the question you are asked. Superiority complex in full swing.

Than why dont you end this useless and crap of yours by just posting some logical stuff that shows Iran didn't occupied the Island and it was given to you by Sharjah?

and talking about fighting a war that isn't yours. A country whose army fighting rebels inside syria and he is giving lectures to other. I just love iranians lousy crap when they ran out of logics, they forget their own reality and start throwing stones at other houses.

oh my god
the door handle on my toilet has more logic than you

The islands were part of Iran since 3000 years ago. The british invaded the islands and took them over in the early 20th century. They later gave admin rights to Shrjah and in the 70`s the British themselves gave the islands back.

It wasn't even theirs to give to anybody but what matters is that the thieves themselves gave it back. UAE isn't even part of this whole calculation. It's like I take over your house and give it to some bum on the side of the street. A few years after you come and kick the bum out the door. But instead of going his way, the bum starts screaming and crying to the whole neighborhood that you have taken his house, the house that was yours for all eternity!!!!!

Stop trolling pakistani. No amount of spare change is worth losing your honour and dignity.

 

[somebozo]

How bout standing up for themselves plus elections and as far as doing for the world is concerned has more respect in the world including Arab countries then any Israeli Puppet in Arab lands hows is that for starter.

You mean IRGC electing people they want infront of their gun barrels?

Abu Musa is and will remain part of Iran but only if Iran was ruled by sane minded rulers. The resident of Abu Musa are not in mood to welcome some insane bulldogs like IRGC.

 

[raptor22]

You mean IRGC electing people they want infront of their gun barrels?

Abu Musa is and will remain part of Iran but only if Iran was ruled by sane minded rulers. The resident of Abu Musa are not in mood to welcome some insane bulldogs like IRGC.

watch your language .. this kind of language indicates your social and cultural background . who the hell you are that let yourself speak instead of residents of abu mosa ? are you Iranian or Emirati to talk on behalf of them ?