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

[Green Angel]

 

[ares]

Have you ever read Indian maritime zones act of 1976, one that it had submitted to UN in compliance with deposit obligation pursuant to UNCLOS? Almost all the states in their legislation has kept a room for maneuvering. UNCLOS states that all states shall have the right to fly and navigate in coastal state's EEZ but India laws provide that government mayl designate areas in the EEZ where the entry and passage of foreign ships will be regulated by the establishment of fairways sealanes, traffic separation scheme.The designated area in EZZ may have provisions pertaining customs and other fiscal matters.

This one is important, section 7.

Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (2) and subject to any measures that may be necessary for protecting the interests of India, the Central Government may not impede the laying or maintenance of submarine cables or pipelines on the continental shelf by foreign States. Provided that the consent of the Central Government shall be necessary for the delineation of the course for the laying of such cables or pipelines.

http://www.un.org/depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/IND_1976_Act.pdf

Question, if in some manner, morally justified or unjustified, a pipeline which is to be laid by a third state in Indian waters impinges the national interest of India - will the government of India give its consent? No consent means no project until UN or some legal body quashes Indian concerns. Indian government can levy some sort of charges if it deems fit.


In short it's all about diplomatic relations.

Pakistan legislation on its waters is almost same, btw.

You are quoting Indian maritime act, which has been ratified by UN, does Pakistan have similar act, which was ratified by UN. If No then the international law applies ..even now dozens under sea cable are crossing Pakistani EEZ and into India..mostly communication purposes.

You still don't get the term Exclusive economic zone. Pakistan has economic rights hence Pakistan can claim royalties for the passage of pipeline through their zone.


They know the truth bro as their media is reporting it. Its what you call being butt hurt and this is what they call Decidophobia in more specific terms.

No that is not what it EEZ means, Pakistani EEZ means, Pakistan has exclusive rights to natural resources found in the region.

 

[coffee_cup]

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...

And I say, just go ahead and prove us wrong. Try to build that "pipeline" without Pakistan's approval.

Unless that happens, I'll stick to my point, India CAN NOT build that pipeline in Pakistan's EEZ as long as Pakistan does not approve it. And Pakistan will definitely not approve it as long as india does not stop the cross-border terrorism in Pakistan.

 

[Providence]

India ain't building sh!t without pak approval ...

 

[graphican]

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!!

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!!

I am not international law expert but apparently, India cannot unless it gets permission from Pakistan and you know the answer without asking

HKR has given a good detailed reply on that. Read his Post. # 46 India-Iran, Qatar SeaPipeline Not Possible without Pakistan's Approval | Page 4

 

[45'22']

And I say, just go ahead and prove us wrong. Try to build that "pipeline" without Pakistan's approval.

Unless that happens, I'll stick to my point, India CAN NOT build that pipeline in Pakistan's EEZ as long as Pakistan does not approve it. And Pakistan will definitely not approve it as long as india does not stop the cross-border terrorism in Pakistan.

I gave you all the clauses.....
You can agree or disagree.....that is up to you
good day

I am not international law expert but apparently, India cannot unless it gets permission from Pakistan and you know the answer without asking

HKR has given a good detailed reply on that. Read his Post. # 46 India-Iran, Qatar SeaPipeline Not Possible without Pakistan's Approval | Page 4

He is wrong....
he didn't mention the first 2 clauses and gave a separate meaning to the 3rd clause

 

[graphican]

I gave you all the clauses.....
You can agree or disagree.....that is up to you
good day


He is wrong....
he didn't mention the first 2 clauses and gave a separate meaning to the 3rd clause

Even in the source article, original design is trying to bypass Pakistani waters. If India could've built it in Pakistani waters, they would've planned the same before. Besides the source article is saying India cannot (CAN NOT) build this pipeline without Pakitan's approval and here Indians are going bananas stating otherwise.

 

[Emmie]

You are quoting Indian maritime act, which has been ratified by UN, does Pakistan have similar act, which was ratified by UN. If No then the international law applies ..even now dozens under sea cable are crossing Pakistani EEZ and into India..mostly communication purposes.



No that is not what it EEZ means, Pakistani EEZ means, Pakistan has exclusive rights to natural resources found in the region.

Article 6 - Pakistan territorial waters and maritime zones act of 1976.


Subject to any measures that may be necessary for protecting the interests of Pakistan, and without prejudice to the provisions of subsection (2), the Federal Government may not impede the laying or maintenance of submarine cables or pipelines on the sea-bed of the Continental Shelf by foreign States

Provided that the consent of the Federal Government shall be necessary for the delineation of the course for the laying of such cables or pipelines.

http://www.un.org/depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/PAK_1976_Act.pdf

Told you Pakistan had a similar legislation.

 

[45'22']

Even in the source article, original design is trying to bypass Pakistani waters. If India could've built it in Pakistani waters, they would've planned the same before. Besides the source article is saying India cannot (CAN NOT) build this pipeline without Pakitan's approval and here Indians are going bananas stating otherwise.

It would have been a better idea to skip Pakistan EEZ had it happened.....
But it doesn't mean that we can't create a pipeline......the articles of all the 3 parts (EEZ,High Seas and Continental Shelf) clearly indicates that a coastal state can't stop the construction or maintenance of a pipeline

 

[Echo_419]

India ain't building sh!t without pak approval ...

Agreed we are very scared of Marshall Pakistanis

 

[Emmie]

It would have been a better idea to skip Pakistan EEZ had it happened.....
But it doesn't mean that we can't create a pipeline......the articles of all the 3 parts (EEZ,High Seas and Continental Shelf) clearly indicates that a coastal state can't stop the construction or maintenance of a pipeline

In high seas absolutely nobody can stop but in EZZs sate has to obtain coastal state's consent.

 

[graphican]

It would have been a better idea to skip Pakistan EEZ had it happened.....
But it doesn't mean that we can't create a pipeline......the articles of all the 3 parts (EEZ,High Seas and Continental Shelf) clearly indicates that a coastal state can't stop the construction or maintenance of a pipeline

What is your basis of this assumption as neither the blue-print nor the UN declaration is stating what you are assuming.

In anther thread, I was telling few Indian members that the coin of time has flipped and now India is dependent on its economic growth on Pakistan. Here is what makes me think that.

• For gas pipeline from Iran, India needs Pakistan
• For marine pipeline from Oman, India needs Pakistan
• For the transportation of goods to central Asia, India needs Pakistan
• To make uses of economic corridor with China, India needs Pakistan

and surprisingly, Pakistan doesn't need India for energy requirements or for trade routes. Now it is in the best interest of India to improve its ties with Pakistan or alternatively, undergo a war and own its land forcefully. In case India chooses not to do any of these, it will be over-run by China and its economic growth. Out of all three options, I see India undergoing a war with Pakistan because Pakistan wouldn't let it get trade, land and sea routes unless Kashmir is resolved which I don't' see happening on the table.

 

[45'22']

In high seas absolutely nobody can stop but in EZZs sate has to obtain coastal state's consent.

Coastal state will give the route or path.....it can't approve or disapprove the construction

I have posted the entire article above.....read the first 2 clauses of continental shelf

What is your basis of this assumption as neither the blue-print nor the UN declaration is stating what you are assuming.

In anther thread, I was telling few Indian members that the coin of time has flipped and now India is dependent on its economic growth on Pakistan. Here is what makes me think that.

• For gas pipeline from Iran, India needs Pakistan
• For marine pipeline from Oman, India needs Pakistan
• For the transportation of goods to central Asia, India needs Pakistan
• To make uses of economic corridor with China, India needs Pakistan

and surprisingly, Pakistan doesn't need India for energy requirements or for trade routes. Now it is in the best interest of India to improve its ties with Pakistan or alternatively, undergo a war and own its land forcefully. In case India chooses not to do any of these, it will be over-run by China and its economic growth. Out of all three options, I see India undergoing a war with Pakistan because Pakistan wouldn't let it get trade, land and sea routes unless Kashmir is resolved which I don't' see happening on the table.

My assumption is based on the articles of the UN......

Read the 3 articles(58,79 and 87) you will get what I am trying to say
Here is the link

UNCLOS - Table of Contents

What is your basis of this assumption as neither the blue-print nor the UN declaration is stating what you are assuming.

In anther thread, I was telling few Indian members that the coin of time has flipped and now India is dependent on its economic growth on Pakistan. Here is what makes me think that.

• For gas pipeline from Iran, India needs Pakistan
• For marine pipeline from Oman, India needs Pakistan
• For the transportation of goods to central Asia, India needs Pakistan
• To make uses of economic corridor with China, India needs Pakistan

and surprisingly, Pakistan doesn't need India for energy requirements or for trade routes. Now it is in the best interest of India to improve its ties with Pakistan or alternatively, undergo a war and own its land forcefully. In case India chooses not to do any of these, it will be over-run by China and its economic growth. Out of all three options, I see India undergoing a war with Pakistan because Pakistan wouldn't let it get trade, land and sea routes unless Kashmir is resolved which I don't' see happening on the table.

Having said that.....I still advocate for good relations.....I will choose TAPI and IPI over this..

@graphican India won't start a war for this.....There are 2 reasons.....

1-A war will not be good for economy.....So starting a war because we aren't. Getting oil doesn't makes sense besides we will still be getting oil like we are doing now via ships which is less economical

2-the clauses say that we can create a pipeline so the first point will not even come to picture

 

[coffee_cup]

Coastal state will give the route or path.....it can't approve or disapprove the construction

I have posted the entire article above.....read the first 2 clauses of continental shelf


My assumption is based on the articles of the UN......

Read the 3 articles(58,79 and 87) you will get what I am trying to say
Here is the link

UNCLOS - Table of Contents


Having said that.....I still advocate for good relations.....I will choose TAPI and IPI over this..

@graphican India won't start a war for this.....There are 2 reasons.....

1-A war will not be good for economy.....So starting a war because we aren't. Getting oil doesn't makes sense besides we will still be getting oil like we are doing now via ships which is less economical

2-the clauses say that we can create a pipeline so the first point will not even come to picture

Dude, you can discuss it to death in online forums, but if the things could be built based opon these online discussion, india would already have built a manned colony on Pluto as well.

Lets be realistic here, india has three choices:

1) Obtain Pakistan's approval for this gas pipeline (which she ain't gonna get unsless she stops the cross-border terrorism in Pakistan)

2) Build the pipeline few kilometers away from Pakistan's EEZ, sparing few billion dollar extra should not be that big a problem for economic Supapowa india, right?

3) Say goodbye to this pipeline and import the gas via ships/tankers ,

 

[graphican]

Coastal state will give the route or path.....it can't approve or disapprove the construction

I have posted the entire article above.....read the first 2 clauses of continental shelf


My assumption is based on the articles of the UN......

Read the 3 articles(58,79 and 87) you will get what I am trying to say
Here is the link

UNCLOS - Table of Contents

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

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.

We can define a curve for the cable and it is our due right according to legislation. We can prevent India from laying this cable in any area we choose and it can be the outer most mile of our owned territory which will render the pipeline in-feasible. So you need us and cannot escape our consent.