Should Europe and/or Israel seize the Suez?

[Trotz]

An Islamic Republic in Egypt could shut down the Suez (OPEC be damned or not) and oil prices around the world, even in Canada with the Albertan oil sands, would skyrocket out of control.

Domestically, we would have to deal with strengthening Albertan seperatists who would complain about most of the income from their oil boom benefiting the east.
Internationally, NATO would have to deal with a modernizing Russia benefiting from an oil boom and Islamic Republics in the Middle East forming in Egypt, Saudi Arabia; et al.


The United States' petro dollar would increase, sounds good in theory but in reality it means those treasury bills are worth more in real debt and the US's current military cutbacks (including the cancelled F-35) would be expanded to include other projects.

Non-oil producing countries, even China, would have their economies slow down as a result of an increase in oil prices.

It seems that the U.S., Israel or Europe would be forced to seize the Suez or see a change in the current world order.

 

[gopher]

why would anyone risk making more enemies by closing the canal?

 

[Trotz]

why would anyone risk making more enemies by closing the canal?

No rational person would close the canal but:

explain that to Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who could be Egypt's new Mullah in a couple of days, weeks; et al.

 

[gopher]

As usual, there is much Islamophobic paranoia on this forum as he represents only a small minority movement in Egypt.

 

[Trotz]

As usual, there is much Islamophobic paranoia on this forum as he represents only a small minority movement in Egypt.

Just like the Mullah in Iran was a nobody during the Shah's reign in otherwise secular Iran...

 

[petros]

Egyptian Govt doesn't support an Israel / Palestine two state solution. Jordan will see the next uprise. Peace is going to be crammed down the throats of the Mid East leaders who don't support the two state solution.

Pay attention and watch....

 

[gopher]

The Mullah is considered orthodox in Iran and always had a mass following in that Shiia country. Al-Qaradawi is a paradoxical figure in Egypt because he claims to adhere to Sufism rather than Sunnism. I understand he is a member but not leader of the Brotherhood.

 

[Machjo]

An Islamic Republic in Egypt could shut down the Suez (OPEC be damned or not) and oil prices around the world, even in Canada with the Albertan oil sands, would skyrocket out of control.

Domestically, we would have to deal with strengthening Albertan seperatists who would complain about most of the income from their oil boom benefiting the east.
Internationally, NATO would have to deal with a modernizing Russia benefiting from an oil boom and Islamic Republics in the Middle East forming in Egypt, Saudi Arabia; et al.


The United States' petro dollar would increase, sounds good in theory but in reality it means those treasury bills are worth more in real debt and the US's current military cutbacks (including the cancelled F-35) would be expanded to include other projects.

Non-oil producing countries, even China, would have their economies slow down as a result of an increase in oil prices.

It seems that the U.S., Israel or Europe would be forced to seize the Suez or see a change in the current world order.

Absolutely not! The Suez is Egyptian territory. Think of how irritated we get when Americans enter Canadian waters in the high arctic without our permission. Why is it that we expect other countries to respect our sovereignty while we can go on carrying out Kipling's "White Man's Burden"?

 

[Colpy]

Tried that. Brits, France and Israel.

1956.

The Yanks got all upset.

Right now Israel and Egypt are at peace.........seizure of the Canal would be very counter-productive.

If they close it.....all bets are off.

 

[Machjo]

Tried that. Brits, France and Israel.

1956.

The Yanks got all upset.

Right now Israel and Egypt are at peace.........seizure of the Canal would be very counter-productive.

If they close it.....all bets are off.

And what if Canada should decide to close off the North West Passage? Valid reason to invade Canada? What's the difference?

Now of course it would be stupid to close the canal off, but seeing that in principle it is on their soil, it's theirs, just like Panama is free to make the rules for the Panama Canal and Canada for the North West Passage.

 

[damngrumpy]

What right would Israel or Europe have to take someone else's country over in order to
operate the Canal. Besides I don't think they could succeed, well maybe Israel, but if
that were to happen it would plunge the whole Middle East into war.
People are already talking about an Islamic state. The real problem for this region is the
discipline of religion is about to be thrown out the window in the Middle East, what many
don't understand is this is youth motivated and they are planning to throw all these old
traditions out the window, this is a generational change here. It is a rejection of old
conservative values in favour of some serious freedom and that ultimately leads to a period
of chaos in the short run.
The Saudis, Iranians and others should be looking over their shoulder as the rumblings of
the future are about to consume them. Age demographic, employment, religious tribalism,
and customs are about to confront them all. This is very serious and I don't think the Islamic
question will be the number one issue here, liberal reform does not lend itself to accepting
the Taliban or Islamic fundamentalism.

 

[Colpy]

And what if Canada should decide to close off the North West Passage? Valid reason to invade Canada? What's the difference?

Now of course it would be stupid to close the canal off, but seeing that in principle it is on their soil, it's theirs, just like Panama is free to make the rules for the Panama Canal and Canada for the North West Passage.

Nations do not act on principle, they act on their own self interest.

Egypt's Suez Canal Authority (SCA) reported that in 2003 17,224 ships passed through the canal. The canal averages about 8% of the world shipping traffic.
Pretty important............

Go ahead....close the Panama Canal.....see what happens.

You do understand that Panama was created by Teddy Roosevelt, because he wanted a Canal, right?

The NW Passage is unimportant.........although we couldn't close it if we tried. We don't have the naval presence, and the USA considers it international waters.

 

[MHz]

Why not just wait till a winner has been declared and let them have control of the daily running of the canal rather than put it in the hands of the ones who fully backed the person who just lost popularity with the people. Even the VP is not much better as he has a history of assisting the CIA in running the black prisons in Egypt. The US and Israel are too into covert operations to be given free reign over a bottle neck.

The US will 'stay out of it' the same way they are staying 'out of Lebanese politics'. Invoke any changes we don't approve of and there will be consequences, the visible ones will be financial punishments.

 

[Bar Sinister]

I wouldn't worry too much about oil traffic. Some tankers do use the canal, but the largest tankers go by way of the Cape of Good Hope as they won't fit through the canal. Also, from what I have been able to determine on the news even if the government of Egypt fell, the Egyptian army would make sure the canal stays open. The biggest loss of revenue in this matter is going to be tourist dollars as tourists stay away from Egypt during a time of year most favourable to visiting the country.

 

[earth_as_one]

My understanding is that the Muslim Brotherhood was just as surprised by this uprising as the Egyptian government. Sure they joined the revolt after the fact, but they make up only a small minority of the protesters. This revolt is not led by religious authorities, unlike the Iranian revolt which toppled the Shah. The real force behind this revolt are young Egyptians. They are the majority and until now, had no voice.

While the revolt has resulted in the shutdown of the internet and disrupted the telephone system, only businesses in the main cities are closed. Most business outside of the main cities continue to operate normally including the Suez canal. Good luck getting spare parts and service...

Over the weekend, the Egyptian military secured the canal and only a general strike by canal workers could shut it down. While that's possible, its unlikely. The protesters would more likely try to disrupt state controlled media transmissions, the Egyptian stock exchange and banks.

 

[gopher]

'' Some tankers do use the canal, but the largest tankers go by way of the Cape of Good Hope as they won't fit through the canal.''

Good point.

 

[Colpy]

'' Some tankers do use the canal, but the largest tankers go by way of the Cape of Good Hope as they won't fit through the canal.''

Good point.

According to BBC this morning, a little more than 5% of the world's oil goes through the canal.

Not as much as I would have thought.

And they can sail around the Cape.

Not THAT big a deal......we want to be friends with any new Egyptian regime.

My understanding is that the Muslim Brotherhood was just as surprised by this uprising as the Egyptian government. Sure they joined the revolt after the fact, but they make up only a small minority of the protesters. This revolt is not led by religious authorities, unlike the Iranian revolt which toppled the Shah. The real force behind this revolt are young Egyptians. They are the majority and until now, had no voice.

While the revolt has resulted in the shutdown of the internet and disrupted the telephone system, only businesses in the main cities are closed. Most business outside of the main cities continue to operate normally including the Suez canal. Good luck getting spare parts and service...

Over the weekend, the Egyptian military secured the canal and only a general strike by canal workers could shut it down. While that's possible, its unlikely. The protesters would more likely try to disrupt state controlled media transmissions, the Egyptian stock exchange and banks.

A democracy is very much preferable to Mubarak.

Mubarak is very much perferable to the Muslim Brotherhood.

War with Israel would be inevitable if the Brotherhood gets any toehold on power in Egypt.

So far, so good.....but revolutions have a way of eating their offspring......and going bad.

 

[earth_as_one]

A democracy is very much preferable to Mubarak.

Mubarak is very much perferable to the Muslim Brotherhood.

War with Israel would be inevitable if the Brotherhood gets any toehold on power in Egypt.

So far, so good.....but revolutions have a way of eating their offspring......and going bad.

Colpy (paraphrased):
Yes I believe in democracy as long as people who think like me and vote the right way are the only ones who can vote.

In case you didn't know, that's how democracy worked under Mubarak. Except when you control the outcome of an election, its no longer a democracy. That's what's known as a sham democracy.

...Over the weekend, the Egyptian military secured the canal and only a general strike by canal workers could shut it down. While that's possible, its unlikely. The protesters would more likely try to disrupt state controlled media transmissions, the Egyptian stock exchange and banks.

Egyptian protesters call for general strike
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2011/01/31/egypt-protest.html

Ok maybe the canal could be shut down by a general strike. But I suspect the Egyptian military would operate the canal. But they can't run banks, the stock exchange, shopping centers...

A general strike is the logical next step, but I don't the canal will close for very long if canal workers went on strike.

 

[JLM]

An Islamic Republic in Egypt could shut down the Suez (OPEC be damned or not) and oil prices around the world, even in Canada with the Albertan oil sands, would skyrocket out of control.

Domestically, we would have to deal with strengthening Albertan seperatists who would complain about most of the income from their oil boom benefiting the east.
Internationally, NATO would have to deal with a modernizing Russia benefiting from an oil boom and Islamic Republics in the Middle East forming in Egypt, Saudi Arabia; et al.


The United States' petro dollar would increase, sounds good in theory but in reality it means those treasury bills are worth more in real debt and the US's current military cutbacks (including the cancelled F-35) would be expanded to include other projects.

Non-oil producing countries, even China, would have their economies slow down as a result of an increase in oil prices.

It seems that the U.S., Israel or Europe would be forced to seize the Suez or see a change in the current world order.

Looks like the "Chicken Little" attitude is alive and well. Of course if we don't have enough problems, it makes sense to "borrow" some.

 

[earth_as_one]

Israel, that shining beacon of freedom and democracy in the middle east is urging all nations to support dictator Mubarak:

Israel seeks support for Mubarak: report
(AFP) – 4 hours ago
JERUSALEM — Israel has told its diplomats in the United States, Europe and elsewhere to encourage their host nations to support the regime of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, daily Haaretz reported Monday.


The newspaper said Israel's foreign ministry told its diplomats to stress that it is in "the interest of the West" and of "the entire Middle East to maintain the stability of the regime in Egypt."


"We must therefore curb public criticism against President Hosni Mubarak," the message sent at the end of last week said, according to Haaretz.

AFP: Israel seeks support for Mubarak: report


As Israeli leaders well know, Mubarak isn't exactly a "forgive and forget" kind of guy. If he stays in power, he would order his security apparatus to hunt down, arrest, torture and execute protesters.

There is no going back. The protesters know their lives are at stake and that they have to topple Mubarak or face the consequences for failing, which in many cases would be worse than death.