Skip to main content
6 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 28, 2019 at 18:09 comment added Brythan @Benjamin I didn't really get into it in this answer, but I find it unlikely that any of this will prevent a war with Iran. If anything, it makes Iran more desperate and likely to go to war more openly. The comparisons shouldn't be to war with Iran but to other methods of securing the oil flow. Reconditioning TAP is cheaper than a new pipeline or building a canal.
Jul 28, 2019 at 18:01 comment added SurpriseDog The article says that it would cost $100-300 million to recondition the Trans-Arabian Pipeline. That seems a far cheaper and easier option than a war.
Jul 27, 2019 at 20:47 history edited chirlu CC BY-SA 4.0
Spelling fix
Jul 26, 2019 at 10:06 comment added Peter Taylor Surely the pipeline is only a complete solution if the destination of the oil is the Red Sea? If the destination is anywhere in Asia then the ships would have a longer route. And other Gulf countries might prefer to be dependent on Oman than Saudi Arabia, which has far greater pretensions to regional dominance.
Jul 25, 2019 at 20:44 comment added Wis according to this map from the BBC showing the route of the seized UK tanker the location where they seized it is technically in Oman's Coastal waters. however, the route that can be opened with a 225 meter long and wide canal is entirely in Oman's territorial waters which are mostly internal waters, it's a more far and much smaller area that can be much easier to defend from mining and attacks. as for the issue with the entire gulf, it's why I asked the 2nd question, ships can stick to Arabian coastal waters, it only adds 300km of distance from the Strait to Kuwait.
Jul 25, 2019 at 18:07 history answered Brythan CC BY-SA 4.0