• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Egypt end gas deal with Israel.

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
Mubarak's fall, a product of the Arab Spring, has finally come home to roost for Israel.
As one the reasons for Mubarak's removal was selling Egyptian natural gas at well below market prices to Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/egypt-cancels-natural-gas-deal-with-israel-1.425883

As today's Egyptian cancellation of gas deal struck between Mubarak and Israel is a final end for what was basic reality for nearly a year. Because Egyptian militants had already blown up the pipeline 14 times, meaning Israel got no below market price gas anyway.

Of course Israel is already crying fowl, and citing violations of the Oslo accords, but then again Egypt also has Israel dead to rights in its own violations of the Oslo accords. And as Egypt approaches its final transformation to full civilian rule, I very much doubt the Egyptian military will go to bat for Israel.

Posted as more of a news item than comments on the future. But its hard to say Israel is better off than it was a year ago.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Egypt is stating that it does not have to honor existing contracts.

And where does LL get this knowledge that the contracts had anything to do with the fall of the Egyptian government? It has been over a year, narry a peep from him about the contract being an incentive for overthrow.

So if Egypt is demonstrating that previous contracts are worthless and can be changed anytime, how can anyone expect Israel to accept any contract with the Arabs. Eygpt has shown again that committments are worthless. How soon Jordan and Lebanon follow suit? At least Syria makes no pretense and same with Hamas in Gaza. They do not want peace with Israel under fair terms.
 

the DRIZZLE

Platinum Member
Sep 6, 2007
2,956
1
81
Mubarak's fall, a product of the Arab Spring, has finally come home to roost for Israel.
As one the reasons for Mubarak's removal was selling Egyptian natural gas at well below market prices to Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/egypt-cancels-natural-gas-deal-with-israel-1.425883

As today's Egyptian cancellation of gas deal struck between Mubarak and Israel is a final end for what was basic reality for nearly a year. Because Egyptian militants had already blown up the pipeline 14 times, meaning Israel got no below market price gas anyway.

Of course Israel is already crying fowl, and citing violations of the Oslo accords, but then again Egypt also has Israel dead to rights in its own violations of the Oslo accords. And as Egypt approaches its final transformation to full civilian rule, I very much doubt the Egyptian military will go to bat for Israel.

Posted as more of a news item than comments on the future. But its hard to say Israel is better off than it was a year ago.
The term "below market prices" is misleading. There is a global market for natural gas but transportation costs are very high so pricing is determined on a netback from other customers. For example, Egypt could compress the gas into LNG and sell it to Europe if they wanted to spend $1bn to build a liquefaction and export terminal. If you spread this cost over the production it comes to $1-$2/mmbtu. Shipping adds other $.50-1/mmbtu. Once you subtract these costs off the $9/mmbtu delivered price in Europe you get a number that's not all that different from the $4 Israel is paying now especially when you consider that most analysts expect world LNG prices to plummet once the US starts exporting LNG.

But this is all beside the point. As a developing nation telling the world you won't honor you contracts is the best way to discourage investment in your country. Israel has it's own gas fields and is expected to become a gas exported in the future so this is at worst a 3 year problem for Israel.
 
Last edited:

gevorg

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2004
5,075
1
0
Sources close to EMG said in response, "Egypt does not understand what it is doing. This move will bring back the country - politically and economically – by 30 years. This is a breach of the peace agreement with Israel."
:D
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
No one in the world understand why current Israeli leadership is not complying with their part of the Oslo accords they signed, as they keep settling on disputed territory Israel can't ever own, but I don't think anyone in the world will distrust Egypt for refusing to sell its natural gas to Israel.

Just call it an embargo, Israel is first to claim its right to embargo all its neighbors, but when Israel gets embargoed they go wah wah wah. As Israel is a far larger serial violator of the Oslo accords and human rights than Egypt. Especially when the gas deal that netted the Egyptian people nothing was only signed in 2005 by a very corrupt Mubarak dictatorship that benefited only Mubarak and his cronies. And any US aid to Egypt never went to the Egyptian people, and instead only went to Mubarak and his cronies.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,408
2
81
What are you talking about can't ever own? US owns native American land. Italians and french own German land. and on and on and on.

Never say never and never say ever.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
What are you talking about can't ever own? US owns native American land. Italians and french own German land. and on and on and on.

Never say never and never say ever.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As Zebo ignores the fact that there is a dividing line in world history, before the formation of the UN, land by conquest was legitimate, after the formation of the UN, land by conquest is a illegitimate concept.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,632
3,125
126
As Zebo ignores the fact that there is a dividing line in world history, before the formation of the UN, land by conquest was legitimate, after the formation of the UN, land by conquest is a illegitimate concept.
who made up that rule??
Who in there right mind is going to enforce the rule?
It has always been the spoils go to the victor.....
What are you and others smoking who honestly believe there is such a rule....
Un who?? The Un is a bigger joke than the so called international court..lol
 

bononos

Diamond Member
Aug 21, 2011
3,722
68
91
who made up that rule??
Who in there right mind is going to enforce the rule?
It has always been the spoils go to the victor.....
What are you and others smoking who honestly believe there is such a rule....
Un who?? The Un is a bigger joke than the so called international court..lol
Its a rule that makes as much sense as some of the inherent natural rights human beings have. It doesn't take an international body like UN to legitimize it.

If you say to the victor goes the spoils still applies then any country can go ahead and conquer new territories as the spoils of war.

The very fact that you have uttered such a thing is very telling that you have no other recourse to explain why or what Israel is doing beyond the 1967 borders.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,088
494
126
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As Zebo ignores the fact that there is a dividing line in world history, before the formation of the UN, land by conquest was legitimate, after the formation of the UN, land by conquest is a illegitimate concept.
Uh huh, and who enforces this new concept?
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As Zebo ignores the fact that there is a dividing line in world history, before the formation of the UN, land by conquest was legitimate, after the formation of the UN, land by conquest is a illegitimate concept.
Land by conquest is not legitimate if you are a little guy.

For the big guys they are not called on when they break the rules.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
No one in the world understand why current Israeli leadership is not complying with their part of the Oslo accords they signed, as they keep settling on disputed territory Israel can't ever own, but I don't think anyone in the world will distrust Egypt for refusing to sell its natural gas to Israel.

Just call it an embargo, Israel is first to claim its right to embargo all its neighbors, but when Israel gets embargoed they go wah wah wah. As Israel is a far larger serial violator of the Oslo accords and human rights than Egypt. Especially when the gas deal that netted the Egyptian people nothing was only signed in 2005 by a very corrupt Mubarak dictatorship that benefited only Mubarak and his cronies. And any US aid to Egypt never went to the Egyptian people, and instead only went to Mubarak and his cronies.
The Palestinians do not honor the Oslo accords.
Yet you feel Israel should.

Egypt is showing that they will not honor contracts - that is different than an embargo.

You are just trying to twist the issue to cover up that Egypt has failed.
You also have not shown where the gas contract had anything to do with the Arab Spring.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
If egypt doesn't want to sell something to someone else, so what? I don't see any problem with them not selling, I'm sure plenty of others will.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
If egypt doesn't want to sell something to someone else, so what? I don't see any problem with them not selling, I'm sure plenty of others will.
IF they choose to make the decision to not sell that is fine.

However, they already have a contract to sell; that is different.

LL seems to think that contracts can be voided anytime if it is against Israel.
But contracts from Israel that benefit others; Israel is obligated to honor.

Hypocrit
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
15,434
2,986
126
IF they choose to make the decision to not sell that is fine.

However, they already have a contract to sell; that is different.

LL seems to think that contracts can be voided anytime if it is against Israel.
But contracts from Israel that benefit others; Israel is obligated to honor.

Hypocrit

That doesn't make LL a hypocrit (sic) since he isn't the one who signed any contracts.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Those are contracts / agreements made by a previous 'regime'.
Yet if the US chose to not sell agreed upon grain shipments to Egypt made by the Bush administration- all hell would be raised.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
That doesn't make LL a hypocrit (sic) since he isn't the one who signed any contracts.
Pay attention;

It is OK by LL for a contract that benefits Israel to be canceled.
Yet a contract that benefits some other group from Israel is not OK for adjustment/cancellation.

To my that is being hypocritical
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,977
4,979
126
IF they choose to make the decision to not sell that is fine.

However, they already have a contract to sell; that is different.

LL seems to think that contracts can be voided anytime if it is against Israel.
But contracts from Israel that benefit others; Israel is obligated to honor.

Hypocrit
Israel can sue them in international court. They'd have to recognize the authority of one first :)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY