Military Review

Bypassing the Bosphorus

255
Bypassing the Bosphorus



The project, interested in Stalin and Brezhnev, will be implemented

In Iran, preparations are continuing for the construction of the Caspian-Persian Gulf shipping channel. The project is, as in the past, of strategic importance for our country. But the West, together with Turkey, directly or indirectly prevented the creation of this artery. By the way, the United States included it in anti-Iran sanctions.

Since the 1890-s, our relations with Iran were largely determined by the project of the Caspian-Persian Gulf shipping channel. Developed by Russian engineers in 1889 – 1892, it provided the shortest exit for Russia to the Indian Ocean basin, the Turkish Bosporus and Dardanelles turned out to be unnecessary for this purpose.

The project was promoted by the collective refusal of England, France, Austria-Hungary and Germany to support the Russian 1878 proposals of the year regarding the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles about the control of St. Petersburg over these straits and the deployment of its military bases along their coast.

The fact is that over half of Russia's foreign trade was carried out in this way. And it was precisely through him that the interventionists, supported by Turkey, repeatedly penetrated into the Black Sea and, accordingly, to the shores of the empire.

But preserving Russia's dependence on this route has been and remains one of the strategic tasks of the West in this region. For good reason in 1997, US anti-Iran sanctions were extended to the project of the Caspian-Persian Gulf channel. More precisely, companies and countries that assisted Tehran in the implementation of this plan were subjected to financial and other economic penalties. And although the US sanctions policy on Iran is being revised, it is not yet clear whether the bans on participation in this project will be lifted.

The joint Russian-Iranian commission for the construction of the canal, established at the end of the 19th century, began work in 1904. But the parties could not agree on the status of the project and the artery itself. Petersburg insisted on the principle of extraterritoriality, by analogy with the Suez and Panama Canals, which belonged to Great Britain and the United States at that time. The status of a condominium proposed by Tehran (a parity joint management) did not suit Petersburg, since there was no certainty about the clearly pro-Russian orientation of Iran. And the extraterritoriality allowed to ensure the military-political security of the route.

In 1908, negotiations were suspended, helped by growing pressure on Tehran from Istanbul and London on the status of the new channel and the timing of its construction.

The First World War, of course, did not allow the Russian-Iranian negotiations on the project to be resumed, and the subsequent normalization of Turkey’s relations with Soviet Russia reduced its relevance. As is known, the RSFSR and the USSR rendered military-technical and economic assistance to Turkey during its confrontation with the Entente and Greece (1919 – 1923). In return, Ankara in September 1924 ensured that the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles would never be used to the detriment of the interests of the USSR.

With the death of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in November 1938, anti-Soviet, more precisely, Pan-Turkist political trends in Ankara sharply increased. The best proof of this is her participation in the Fuel plan, a project of joint aggression with Britain and France against the USSR, scheduled for mid-March 1940. The plan included, in particular, the passage of British and French warships to the Black Sea.

But since the end of 30, Soviet-Iranian relations began to deteriorate, which was caused by the active influence of England, Germany and Turkey on Tehran’s foreign policy. There they were just preparing to terminate the Soviet-Iranian Treaty of 1921 of the Year “On Friendship and the Border”, according to which (article 6) the USSR, in the event of a threat to its security, had the right to bring its troops into the country.

Tehran-43. Unknown plot

From mid-April, 1941 Turkey under various pretexts made it difficult for the passage through the straits of Soviet ships with military and other cargoes for Yugoslavia, which was subjected to fascist aggression. The pro-Nazi policy of Turkey during the Great Patriotic War (at least up to 1944, inclusive) is also known. All these factors prompted the USSR to return to the idea of ​​the channel Caspian-Persian Gulf. The project was finalized by the fall of 1942 — after the joint entry of Soviet and British troops into Iran in August-September 1941 and the anti-fascist forces led by Shahinshakh Mohammed Reza-Pahlavi came to power in Tehran.

The alarming events on the Soviet-German front, the threat of a Turkish attack on the USSR and the approach of German-Italian troops to the Suez Canal in 1942 could not but contribute to the intensification of work on the creation of the Caspian-Persian Gulf channel. Both sides described the project as mutually beneficial and therefore promising. The question was raised at the talks of I.V. Stalin with M.R. Pahlavi, held on 30 on November 1943-th in Tehran.

The sharp deterioration of Soviet-Turkish relations in 1945 – 1953, on the one hand, contributed to the reanimation of the Caspian-Persian Gulf project. But on the other hand, the attempts of the USSR in the same period to “join” Iranian Azerbaijan to the Azerbaijan SSR led to the strengthening of influence on Tehran of Washington and London. Because the project was forgotten for many years. Moreover, in the spring of 1953, the Soviet Union headed for normalizing relations with Turkey, as it were, as opposed to difficult relations with Iran.

Soil preparation

Since the second half of 50's, the Iranian leadership has decided to restore the policy of what is called parity cooperation with the West and the USSR. In June-July 1956, an official visit of a government delegation led by Shahinshah to the USSR took place, unprecedented for history bilateral relations. A number of economic agreements were signed, which, however, did not concern the channel. However, at the talks, during one of the meetings of the then USSR Pres. Council N.A. Bulganin and Shahinshakh noted (according to the protocol record) that the parties attach great importance to studying the project of constructing the Caspian-Persian Gulf shipping channel. But this plot was not included in the final communique. Most likely at the initiative of the Iranian delegation, so as not to annoy the Americans, who dissuaded Tehran from the project.

Nevertheless, in 1962, a Soviet-Iranian commission was set up to work on the issue, the then head of the USSR Supreme Soviet, L.I. Brezhnev during his visit to Tehran in November 1963. It was then that the parties created a legal framework for the project, signing the agreement "On the joint use of water resources of the border rivers" and "On the development of transit of Iranian goods through the USSR, the Soviet - through the territory of Iran."

And in June, 1965, when the visit of Shahinshakh to the USSR, which was just as large as in 1956, took place, the parties agreed to speed up the reanimation of the project, but again without a corresponding mention in the final communiqué. A preliminary version of the channel was considered during the visit of the Soviet Prime Minister A.N. Kosygin to Tehran at the beginning of April 1968. The project was mainly approved by both parties. But by tradition, without mentioning it in the communique ...

In the same years, American-Iranian summits became more frequent, during which the United States directly or indirectly declared that the project did not correspond to the long-term interests of the United States and its NATO allies. This position was supported by Saudi Arabia. And in Iraq, on the contrary, they supported the project (providing the shortest route between this country and the USSR), which contributed to the normalization of relations between Baghdad and Moscow, which culminated in 1974 – 1975 in the bilateral treaty “On Friendship and Good Neighborhood”.

It is noteworthy that since the fall of 1975, plans for overthrowing the Shah regime and provoking the Iranian-Soviet and Iranian-Iraqi confrontations began to be developed in the United States. True, Washington observed the “etiquette” in the channel question: the American position on this project was also not included in the bilateral final communiqué ...

In Tehran, they did not dare to completely ignore the position of the United States. After all, up to 70 percent of the annual export volume of Iranian oil went overseas, and the share of the United States in foreign investment in Iran exceeded 40 percent. In addition, supplies from the United States at least by 60 percent covered the needs of the Iranian armed forces for weapons and ammunition. But in general, the share of NATO countries in providing the Iranian army reached 85 percent.

At the same time, Turkey from the second half of 60 began to periodically reduce the tariffs for the transit of Soviet foreign trade cargoes through the Bosporus and Dardanelles. This factor was important for the USSR, because, first, already in 60 at least 50 percent of the annual volume of exported Soviet oil was transported along this route. And secondly, the implementation of the project of the channel required colossal financial and technical resources, the allocation of which became problematic for the USSR for many internal and external economic reasons.

All this contributed to the fact that both sides did not even let down the strategic project, but chose not to accelerate its implementation. During the negotiations of Shakhinshakh in Moscow in October of 1972 and A.N. Kosygin in Tehran in March of the 1973 side again outside the communique recorded the channel’s mutual benefit, recommending that a number of technical parameters be clarified. However, the legal and technological base for future construction was still expanded: during these visits, in addition to the 1963 agreements mentioned, the Economic and Scientific-Technical Cooperation Program for 15 years and the memorandum On Mutual Encouragement of Capital Investments were signed.

In total, 60 – 70-ies in Iran with the help of the USSR built over 60 industrial, energy and transport facilities, including the Isfahan Metallurgical Combine, one of the largest in the region and adjacent to the Azerbaijan SSR, almost 500-kilometer-wide Trans-Iranian gas pipeline.

Washington, London and Ankara insisted that the main export stream of Iranian blue fuel be pumped through Turkey, but Moscow and Tehran in 1972 – 1973 agreed on the transit of Iranian gas to European countries during 20 years through the USSR. These deliveries were supposed to begin with 1976, but the deterioration of the domestic political situation and subsequent well-known events in Iran led to a “conservation” of the project.

In short, the Caspian-Persian Gulf trunk line, extremely advantageous to the USSR and Iran, ran into ever-increasing opposition from the United States and NATO. Although, judging by the mentioned agreements and tendencies in bilateral relations, legal, economic and technological ground was gradually being prepared.
Time to build

Today, the project in the list of priorities for Tehran and in contrast to the Shah period in the country does not at all conceal the parameters of the channel, or negotiations with other countries on its construction. According to Iranian experts and the media, the channel Caspian-Persian Gulf directly brings to the Indian Ocean not only Russia, but also most of the other ex-USSR countries, as well as Europe. For potential users, this path is more than twice as short as the traditional water route through Turkey. Therefore, not only Iranian, but also foreign specialists are involved in the finalization of the project. Channel commissioning is planned for 2020-x.

Similar assessments are expressed by the Russian expert community. In short, the Caspian-Persian Gulf shipping channel, which runs entirely through Iranian territory, is capable of providing the shortest possible access to the Indian Ocean basin from the North Atlantic, Baltic, Black Sea-Azov, Danube and Volga-Caspian basins. This route is necessary for the country not only as a transport corridor, but also to provide desalinated water to the central drylands. True, all this, though promising, but still only a prospect.

Back in 1996 – 1997, the leadership of the Iranian Ministry of Roads and Transport, sending delegations to Russia, reported a desire to attract its investments or technologies to build a trans-Iranian waterway. Our party, in principle, endorsed these proposals, speaking in favor of their comprehensive study, especially in the field of ecology, in view of the uniqueness of the Caspian's biological environment. At the same time, an agreement was reached on Iranian experts studying the Russian experience in hydraulic engineering. Iranian delegations sent by Tehran began to regularly visit the White Sea-Baltic, Volga-Baltic, Volga-Don canals. In 1998, a joint expert group was established to study the trans-Iranian water project, and the following year the government of the Islamic Republic officially approved the revised feasibility study.

The total length of the shipping route will be about 700 kilometers, including along the fairways of rivers of north-western (Caspian) and south-western Iran, including the international Shatt al-Arab, bordering Iraq, of the order of 450 kilometers. The required investment for the construction of the entire artery was estimated by the Iranian side in 2012 – 2013 years at least 10 billion, including the connecting trans-Iranian section (north-west - south-west) - in 5,5 – 6 billion dollars. Full payback of the project will come, according to local estimates, in the fifth year from the date of commissioning. According to the same calculations, the channel will provide Russia and Iran with transit revenues - 1,2 – 1,4 and 1,4 – 1,7, respectively, a billion dollars, starting from the third or fourth year of operation.

During the meetings at the beginning of 2000-s of the Russian-Iranian Commission on Trade and Scientific and Technical Cooperation, representatives of Tehran offered our country a number of options to pay for its technological assistance for the construction of the channel, as well as the construction of cargo (river-sea) and auxiliary vessels in the Russian Federation sought after by the waterway.

The recent publication of an expert group in Dagestan Pravda (Makhachkala) is noteworthy in this regard: “... The presence of shipbuilding factories in the republic is a strong argument in favor of creating a large industrial ship manufacturing cluster in Dagestan, including for the trans-Iranian route” . But the project of formation of such a cluster based on the Makhachkala shipyard-shipyard remained on paper. According to the chief engineer of this company, Mikhail Halimbekov, the drawings, technologies, calculations for the construction of modern high-tech production were prepared by a well-known shipbuilding company in Germany, but this did not move as far as it went.

It was also noted that in the opinion of “many scientists, including Dr. Sc., Professor Shikhsaid Abdullayev, based on the cooperation of republican industrial enterprises, it is realistic to organize a competitive production of river-sea vessels. Moreover, the use of the developments of the well-known Russian designer Hamid Khalidov for the creation of ships of mixed navigation of the new generation - "trimarans" - just meets the requirements and conditions of transit cargo transportation through such channels as the trans-Iranian. " Moreover, the world has seen an increase in demand for such vessels.

It is reasonable to assume that modern geopolitical factors, including the serious aggravation of relations with Russia provoked by Turkey, contribute to a more thorough study of the options for our assistance in creating such an important waterway.
Author:
Originator:
http://cont.ws/post/193159?_utl_t=tw
255 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The black
    The black 5 February 2016 12: 14
    75
    A really ambitious project. If it is implemented, it will be extremely beneficial for the Russian Federation.
    1. Pravdarm
      Pravdarm 5 February 2016 12: 23
      30
      It would be great! That would be our trump card!
      1. sever.56
        sever.56 5 February 2016 12: 27
        45
        The nightmare of the State Department and Turkey ... !!! wassat
        1. cniza
          cniza 5 February 2016 12: 48
          22
          Quote: sever.56
          The nightmare of the State Department and Turkey ... !!! wassat


          It would be a very strong move, the project is more than a hundred years old, it is time to implement it - so many jobs and new business.
          1. BecmepH
            BecmepH 5 February 2016 13: 20
            -41 qualifying.
            so many jobs and new business.
            How many "businessmen" will profit again ... The cosmodrome (strategic facility) was plundered, and here is some kind of channel ...
            1. Furious bambr
              Furious bambr 5 February 2016 14: 14
              +9
              One hell steal everywhere. And the spaceport was almost completed. It is extremely beneficial for the country, so it is necessary. The question is different: Tan and associates. And some country will surely wail about a political conspiracy against it
              1. BARKHAN
                BARKHAN 5 February 2016 19: 08
                23
                Quote: Furious Bambr
                One hell steal everywhere

                The problem is not that they steal, but that they do not sit for it.
            2. spiriolla-45
              spiriolla-45 8 February 2016 10: 01
              +4
              It is possible, following the example of the Belomor Channel, only this time to drive all liberal evil to construction. At least some positive trace from this scum would have remained in history.
          2. Ezhaak
            Ezhaak 5 February 2016 13: 39
            -12 qualifying.
            Quote: cniza
            It would be a very strong move, the project is more than a hundred years old

            Only now the mountain ranges seem to have decided not to take into account. And then I recall the floodlights with river turning. And the death of the Aral Sea to those floodlights is an example and a consequence.
            1. Igor V
              Igor V 5 February 2016 14: 02
              13
              The first stage of the turning of the northern rivers - the Irtysh - Karaganda canal was completed. Will you find at least one person in Karaganda who would be against it? And what has the Aral to do with it? "Where is the estate, and where is the water."
              1. VP
                VP 8 February 2016 11: 04
                +2
                In vain it is so disdainful - "green" really will go to the foam, these guys will go to such grants that wow, they will get rich.
            2. Weyland
              Weyland 6 February 2016 00: 09
              +4
              Quote: Hedgehog
              Only now the mountain ranges seem to have decided not to take into account.

              You have 18 minuses and 7 pluses (one of them is mine hi ) Conclusion: 72% did not hear about the existence of the Elburs Range laughing fool . EMNIP, the height of Demavend is almost 6 km?
              1. Baikonur
                Baikonur 6 February 2016 01: 35
                0
                I also did not understand how the turn of the rivers and the Aral are connected!
                А
                Conclusion: 72% did not hear about the existence of the Elburs Range. EMNIP, the height of Demavend is almost 6 km?
                This is what?
              2. Yuyuka
                Yuyuka 6 February 2016 11: 51
                0
                You have 18 minuses and 7 pluses (one of them is my hi). Conclusion: 72% did not even hear about the existence of the Elburs laughing fool ridge. EMNIP, the height of Demavend is almost 6 km?

                here I am about the same thing - I wrote about the subway to Syria, I set the cons! and what makes my project smarter? belay it’s easier to dig a hole through the mountains! But seriously, then the talents of couches are immeasurable - they do not calculate far either enomically or politically! Economically, it’s cheaper now for Kosygin to provoke Turkey and make a second bosphorus with a couple of volleys! hi
                1. saigon
                  saigon 7 February 2016 08: 49
                  +3
                  Yeah, and drive on a new strait in chemical protection. Prospect shine, just swing
                  1. Yuyuka
                    Yuyuka 7 February 2016 11: 30
                    +4
                    Yeah, and drive on a new strait in chemical protection. Prospect shine, just swing

                    nobody canceled a joke of humor repeat I just added a number of crazy ideas - I want very much glory winked
                    1. bannik
                      bannik 8 February 2016 01: 06
                      +3
                      Oh oh oh! What kind of fools lived in the century before last and last - they believed that such a channel could be built with their capabilities. And we, so smart, know for sure that with our capabilities it is impossible to build such a channel! The cons "impossibilities" are mine.
              3. user
                user 6 February 2016 12: 06
                +2
                “I don’t believe in the implementation of such a project,” Chingiz Ismayilov, head of the Caspian Research and Information Center, Doctor of Geography, told reporters.


                Well, here's the pros and cons, whose move?
            3. The comment was deleted.
            4. The comment was deleted.
            5. Alex_T
              Alex_T 7 February 2016 09: 55
              +4
              Incidentally, the remark about the mountains is very reasonable. Why are you cons? Look at the physical map of the area, there are solid hills and mountains.
            6. NordUral
              NordUral 7 February 2016 20: 00
              +2
              They were embarrassed, although Stalin's projects were never distinguished by projection. I searched, I found here a map with heights relative to sea level. It’s a pity that I didn’t find it on the rivers; maybe, given the rivers, everything is real. And so there are big questions.
          3. NIKNN
            NIKNN 5 February 2016 22: 55
            +2
            Quote: cniza
            Quote: sever.56
            The nightmare of the State Department and Turkey ... !!! wassat


            It would be a very strong move, the project is more than a hundred years old, it is time to implement it - so many jobs and new business.


            China is definitely connected ... smile
          4. viktor561
            viktor561 7 February 2016 20: 33
            +2
            Yes, the United States will not allow it - like the Nicaraguan Canal to die out - although China wanted to build!
            1. NordUral
              NordUral 8 February 2016 00: 06
              +1
              Everything bad ends in the end.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. REDBLUE
          REDBLUE 5 February 2016 13: 05
          +5
          Everything is written beautifully. When will it be implemented? When to take shovels? Moreover, in Russia we have so many zones and guys suffer from idleness. And here they will serve
          1. Alexey Lesogor
            Alexey Lesogor 6 February 2016 00: 07
            +4
            Why take shovels. Hire specialists to dig up seas and ditches from a neighboring country. They overcame them, we have access to the Indian Ocean. wink
        4. cap
          cap 5 February 2016 14: 07
          +3
          Quote: sever.56
          The nightmare of the State Department and Turkey ... !!! wassat


          It turns out where the dog is buried!
          Thanks I'll know.
      2. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 5 February 2016 12: 29
        16
        Quote: Pravdarm
        It would be great! That would be our trump card!

        the range of "calibers" with MRK will increase significantly.
        1. Bayonet
          Bayonet 5 February 2016 19: 39
          -3
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          the range of "calibers" with MRK will increase significantly.

          While it is dug up, the "calibers" will be the day before yesterday! smile hi
          1. bannik
            bannik 8 February 2016 02: 14
            -1
            Digging a channel in a year or two is an objective reality!
      3. Reserve officer
        Reserve officer 5 February 2016 12: 30
        20
        An extremely important channel. But you need to be aware that the main work here is not earthwork, but political. Provide construction despite the pressure and cries of the "pack of partners".
        1. padded jacket
          padded jacket 5 February 2016 12: 39
          +4
          The channel will be extremely useful both to us and to all the Caspian countries as well as China, India and other Asian states, as well as strengthen our already "close" cooperation with Iran.
          Velayati: Russia and Iran initialed contracts worth about $ 40 billion
          The contracts relate to the construction of the second and third phases of a nuclear reactor in Bushehr, as well as the development of the railway network, said Advisor to the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ali Akbar Velayati.
          http://ria.ru/world/20160204/1369642683.html
          1. Inok10
            Inok10 5 February 2016 13: 27
            +6
            Quote: quilted jacket
            The channel will be extremely useful both to us and to all the Caspian countries as well as China, India and other Asian states, as well as strengthen our already "close" cooperation with Iran.

            ... in general, the essence is ... laughing
        2. Nyrobsky
          Nyrobsky 5 February 2016 15: 24
          +1
          Quote: Reserve officer
          An extremely important channel. But you need to be aware that the main work here is not earthwork, but political. Provide construction despite the pressure and cries of the "pack of partners".

          The correct idea, but I would add it by the fact that the feasibility of the project and its economic benefits will directly depend on Russian-Iranian relations. If they (relations) in 10-15 years will resemble the current Russian-Turkish, then again there will be a threat to the free movement of Russian ships through a section of the channel under the control of Iran, as well as in the Turkish Bosphorus. Mattresses will definitely try to drive a wedge - where without them?
          Here it is necessary to draw up an agreement on the operation of the channel in such a way that no one would have thought about the possibility of using it as a lever of pressure.
      4. Seal
        Seal 5 February 2016 13: 41
        12
        What is the trump card? This channel will deprive us of the mass of trump cards needed for a conversation with the Caspian states.
        Now we hold all the Caspian countries for one place by the fact that they have the only access to the World Ocean through our inland waterways (Volga, Volgo-don, Don). And in case of breaking a channel through Iran, all of them (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan) will depend on Iran, and not on us.
        It would be better for us to dig our channel of the Caspian-Azov Sea through the Kuma-Mana depression.
        1. Black Colonel
          Black Colonel 5 February 2016 14: 24
          +6
          "... through the kuma-manic depression."
          Yeah. The land there has been bought by our oligarchs for about 10 years for nothing. And again, through this channel (the Caspian-Azov Sea) access to Europe through the Turkish Bosphorus and Dardanelles.
          1. Seal
            Seal 5 February 2016 17: 08
            +5
            Before the Olympics, we have passed laws that allow us to practically free of charge seize the land necessary for state needs. And they will order - so the oligarchs themselves will dig at their sites.
            Yes, and in fact there has long been a half-channel. In the form of a reclamation channel.
            In the meantime, digging - in Turkey, the President will change 10 times already. It’s not a century that we and Turkey have been at enmity with.
            In any case, we will work for ourselves in the Azov-Caspian Canal, and in the case of the Persian-Caspian Canal, we will work for someone else’s uncle.
            Moreover, they correctly say that from the Indian Ocean to the Caspian Sea will get any unnecessary living creatures, which in figs will devour the remnants of the Caspian sturgeon to us.
        2. Yuyuka
          Yuyuka 5 February 2016 14: 30
          +4
          It would be better for us to dig our channel of the Caspian-Azov Sea through the Kuma-Mana depression.

          as well as the subway to the coast of Syria wassat
        3. Nyrobsky
          Nyrobsky 5 February 2016 15: 32
          +3
          Quote: Seal
          It would be better for us to dig our channel of the Caspian-Azov Sea through the Kuma-Mana depression.

          And again run into the Bosphorus?
          The idea is not bad for the future - but it is for domestic consumption.
          And here, as it were, the main motive is the desire of Russia not to depend on one sea route through the Bosphorus.
          1. Seal
            Seal 5 February 2016 17: 49
            0
            And again run into the Bosphorus?

            Do not want to go through the Bosphorus - it sends its goods by sea from the ports of the Baltic, Murmansk, Arkhangelsk, the Far East. Glory to Zeus, Neptune did not offend our country by the seas.
            And, actually, what do you dislike about the Bosphorus? What do you think Turkey is going to violate the Montreux Convention? Yes, she did not violate her even during the Second World War. You have not forgotten how (in what way) you got in 1941-1942. Italian torpedo boats and German submarines in the Black Sea?
            1. Nyrobsky
              Nyrobsky 5 February 2016 23: 22
              0
              Quote: Seal
              Do not want to go through the Bosphorus - it sends its goods by sea from the ports of the Baltic, Murmansk, Arkhangelsk, the Far East. Glory to Zeus, Neptune did not offend our country with the seas. And, in fact, why do you dislike the Bosphorus?

              Sir, you are not careful))) The question is not whether I like or dislike the Bosphorus personally ...
              The whole topic is that Russia would have a new sea route, alternative to the Bosphorus.
              The comrade offers to close the Caspian Sea to the Sea of ​​Azov ..... and where do you see a new path?
              From Azovsky through Black you can only rest against
              to the Bosphorus!
              Maybe you have a different vision of leaving the Sea of ​​Azov, but as I understand it, this path will be three times longer. Or am I a geography profane ...
        4. Full name
          Full name 5 February 2016 20: 03
          +2
          Totally agree with you. The benefits for Russia from the implementation of this project are questionable, the numerous disadvantages outweigh the advantages. The fact that the Caspian Sea from the inner sea will become a passage yard does not this circumstance make one think about its uselessness for Russia. All the arguments that it will be possible to play it safe with a "correct" agreement on the status of the channel, I consider frivolous. The agreement is just a piece of paper, the agreement can be revised over time, but the physical possibility of access through the channel (for example, a small unmanned submarine) is a reality.
        5. polkovnik manuch
          polkovnik manuch 8 February 2016 09: 35
          +1
          The Manych-Chagrai canal project already exists and the problem is only in the ecological component, design and exploration work was carried out in the early 2000s, and even then, under various pretexts, large businessmen bought up land adjacent to Lake Manych-Gudilo, including for the organization of reserves and reserves, even pushed it all under the auspices of UNESCO. The plans also included the construction of a railway canal on one side of the canal and a highway on the other, the construction of several transshipment ports (at the mouth of the Sredny Yegorlyk river, the Cheprak river near the town of Proletarsk). For two years this topic stopped being buzzed in the press, they said that the sluices would be expensive (about 20 pieces), then they said that a lot of fresh water would be lost aimlessly (the main supplier of which the Don River has been losing its level for many years, water now Even to maintain the irrigation systems for growing rice, the northernmost, in working order, it becomes more and more problematic to receive. The plus is that the Volga-Don Canal can no longer cope with the freight traffic, and minus the environmental consequences of construction have not been studied.
      5. Seal
        Seal 5 February 2016 13: 56
        +4
        That would be our trump card!

        It would be a mediocre loss of our trump cards, so necessary for conversations with Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan.
        1. bannik
          bannik 8 February 2016 02: 33
          +2
          Yeah, but fools rule in Iran! Freebies will be given to these countries! Iran is really profitable with Russia: they are the Caspian - the Persian Gulf for us, we are the Volga-Balt (which, of course, will have to be modernized).
    2. Zoldat_A
      Zoldat_A 5 February 2016 12: 23
      56
      Quote: Black
      Really ambitious project.

      I would do more. By value, this channel would be no less, if not more, than Suez or Panama. Only America clung to Panama - you can't drive away with a stick, with the Suez, the British have stirred up the waters for three oceans. And here, if they invest, they will give it to Iran. And Iran today is one, and tomorrow is different. Who would have thought 40 years ago how politically unprofitable it is to lay a gas pipeline through Ukraine? And what will happen to Iran in 40 years? Where is the guarantee that in 40 years the Donald Cooks will not climb into the Caspian Sea via this channel?

      And so, of course, the plan is good ...
      1. The black
        The black 5 February 2016 12: 27
        +7
        And here, if they invest, they will give Iran. And Iran today is one, and tomorrow another. Who, 40 years ago, could have thought how politically unprofitable it is to lay a gas pipeline through Ukraine?
        I agree. But investing is not necessary. The channel is primarily interested in IRAN !!! This is not only shipping, but also irrigation of vast territories. And for us, in any case, having two exits is in every way better than one ...
        1. pv1005
          pv1005 5 February 2016 12: 34
          11
          [quote = Black] [quote] This is not only shipping, but also irrigation of vast territories. And in any case, having two outputs is better than one ... [/ quote]
          Here about irrigation please in more detail. request From the combination of two water bodies with sea water (the Caspian and the Persian Gulf), fresh water will not be added to the rivers. But it is easy to decrease, since it will be necessary to fill the channel of the channel in places where it will go not along rivers and lakes, therefore, the evaporation area will also increase. In Central Asia, they were already growing, the Aral Sea was over.
          1. The black
            The black 5 February 2016 12: 49
            +1
            Pavel, of course, I am not special. in hydrotenologies, but still I think that they will probably find some solution for desalination. All of Saudi Arabia and the Emirates drink (desalinated) sea water. So, they’ll probably come up with something.
            1. pv1005
              pv1005 5 February 2016 13: 02
              +6
              Quote: Black
              Pavel, of course, I am not special. in hydrotenologies, but still I think that they will probably find some solution for desalination. All of Saudi Arabia and the Emirates drink (desalinated) sea water. So, they’ll probably come up with something.

              And faith does not allow to build desalination plants for irrigation without digging a canal? stop smile
              1. The black
                The black 5 February 2016 13: 12
                +2
                and why "hoses" to pull inland, if the channel will be? wink... here, after all, the project in the complex is interesting .....
              2. Seal
                Seal 5 February 2016 20: 10
                +4
                And faith does not allow to build desalination plants for irrigation without digging a canal?

                Rather than faith, but knowledge of physics. From the desalination plants, distilled water is obtained at the outlet, that is, chemically pure, without any minerals and salts. In order to make it potable, it is still decently modified. And the whole complex makes drinking water extracted from sea water quite expensive. But the Saudis and the Emirates can afford it. They can still.
                But to use this essentially the same drinking water for irrigation - well, it's like making nails out of gold. The cost of water spent on irrigation will be higher than the value of the crop fool
          2. Outsmarted
            Outsmarted 8 February 2016 08: 29
            0
            The project itself is of course delusional. But it is possible to separate the freshwater and the marine basins with locks. So, for example, gateways are arranged in the Panama Canal.
        2. andj61
          andj61 5 February 2016 15: 36
          0
          Quote: Black
          This is not only shipping, but also irrigation of vast territories.

          For irrigation, you need to have water from the rivers, and there it is only in the southern part - Shatt al-Arab. And in the north, near the Caspian Sea, and in the center, will it be possible to take so much water?
        3. Nyrobsky
          Nyrobsky 5 February 2016 15: 38
          +1
          Quote: Black
          I agree. But investing is not necessary. The channel is primarily interested in IRAN !!!

          What is it like? For us, it is no less important.
          And the subsequent profit from the operation of the channel will be distributed among those who invested in its creation, and this is tens of billions in the long run. Otherwise, for the passage of ships, we only have to unfasten our money in their treasury.
        4. polkovnik manuch
          polkovnik manuch 8 February 2016 09: 39
          0
          Ornament with what? Salt sea water, which will also "dilute" the water in the rivers of Iran!
      2. Diana Ilyina
        Diana Ilyina 5 February 2016 12: 31
        +9
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        And so, of course, the plan is good ...


        I agree, Alex! It is not known what will happen in 40 years, but what will happen in 40, here and for 5 years nobody will undertake to predict what will happen! Therefore, the best option would be that which failed in 1878, namely, the establishment of control over the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles! Judging by how Erdogan and Davutoglu behave, a direct Russia-Turkey conflict is not ruled out. Here it would not hurt to raise the issue of the straits, although the mattresses will tear their fifth point on the British flag to prevent this!
        1. Dewa1s
          Dewa1s 5 February 2016 12: 56
          +4
          Establishing control of the Bosphorus and Dardanelles is a military project. And not you, dear Diana, have to sit in the trench for its implementation.
          The Iranian project is more interesting in that it provides an alternative. Expands a chessboard, gives the chance to bargain. IMHO, the project is interesting even if in the end we are
        2. Reserve officer
          Reserve officer 5 February 2016 12: 59
          +5
          Diana, that one option, that the other - the territory is still not ours. And to predict the behavior of governments is fortune-telling on coffee grounds.
          But two options are always better than one. And the question is not only in the channel, as such, but in its status. Co-ownership of the channel with Iran Do you like? This is really a lot of work for our politicians and economists. It's not just stupid to buy American stocks.
          1. Seal
            Seal 5 February 2016 17: 53
            +1
            Canal Ownership with Iran Do you like?

            It will be joint only until a new Khomeini arrives. Maybe he certainly will not come for another 200 years. Maybe ....
      3. Ami du peuple
        Ami du peuple 5 February 2016 12: 40
        +4
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        And so, of course, the plan is good ...

        The idea of ​​the Trans-Iranian Canal, notice, matured at the beginning of the 20th century. That is, technically, he was, even at that time, quite feasible. In general, the Russian Empire was not afraid to implement the most ambitious projects. The same Transsiberian, for example.
        1. Seal
          Seal 5 February 2016 17: 59
          +2
          In general, the Russian Empire was not afraid to implement the most ambitious projects.

          That is precisely what the Russian Empire was not afraid of. Now where do our borders go? Who will we try for?
          It would be better for us to build a high-speed railway from Sakhalin (through a tunnel) to Brest (Belarus) with a gauge of 3,5 meters and switch over 2/3 of container shipping from Japan, Korea and China to Europe.

          Then the Japanese will quickly dig a tunnel under the Laperouse Strait and drag our railway right up to Tokyo, and on the other hand the Europeans will stretch to London.
          1. sa-ag
            sa-ag 5 February 2016 18: 23
            0
            Quote: Seal
            It would be better for us to build a high-speed railway from Sakhalin (through the tunnel) to Brest (Belarus) with a gauge of 3,5 meters

            What kind of track is this?
            1. Bayonet
              Bayonet 5 February 2016 19: 50
              -2
              Quote: sa-ag
              What kind of track is this?

              To New Vasyuki! smile hi
            2. Seal
              Seal 5 February 2016 20: 21
              +2
              What kind of track is this?
              There is a German development, times, sorry, even Hitler. But it was worked out by German engineers to the smallest detail. Up to the detailed development of a new locomotive and carriage. And the routes were planned, and it was calculated how many new tunnels in Europe it would be necessary to break through. The program was closed in January 1945.
              Nothing prevents us from realizing the same thing, but on our territory.
              http://www.popmech.ru/technologies/7403-magistrali-tretego-reykha-proekt-gigants
              kikh-zheleznykh-dorog / # full
              1. akims
                akims 7 February 2016 00: 35
                +1
                Not only counted, but also punched.
            3. Full name
              Full name 5 February 2016 21: 11
              +1
              Ha, and here our thoughts coincide. And I thought that an alternative to the proposed channel could be a wide-leg railway. After all, the channel's carrying capacity will be rather modest (given the relief), which means that only small-tonnage river-sea vessels will be able to navigate it. On the other hand, Russian Railways planned to build the ShZhD to Europe via Ukraine back in 2011. It is clear that that project is not currently being implemented, but it would be logical to move it to the south.
            4. polkovnik manuch
              polkovnik manuch 8 February 2016 09: 49
              +1
              With current technologies, the track is quite real, the railway workers talked about it back in the eighties, the problem is in the existing infrastructure (stations, tunnels, bridges, factories for the creation of new rolling stock, etc.), and the country has no "dough" for this, "West "- Naturally, he won't help us.
          2. Nekarmadlen
            Nekarmadlen 5 February 2016 18: 24
            0
            And who else in the world is still using. d. xnumx meter gauge? ...
            1. Seal
              Seal 5 February 2016 20: 24
              0
              Not. But all the calculations were made. The Germans. As directed, sorry, Hitler.

              http://www.popmech.ru/technologies/7403-magistrali-tretego-reykha-proekt-gigants
              kikh-zheleznykh-dorog /

              Breitspurbahn (German broad-gauge railway) - a project of a railway network with an ultra-wide gauge (3000 mm), prepared on the personal order of Adolf Hitler. It was developed by Deutsche Reichsbahn from May 1942 until the last days of the war in 1945.

              https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breitspurbahn
          3. Bayonet
            Bayonet 5 February 2016 19: 49
            -3
            Quote: Seal
            It would be better for us to build a high-speed railway from Sakhalin (through a tunnel) to Brest (Belarus) with a gauge of 3,5 meters and switch over 2/3 of container shipping from Japan, Korea and China to Europe.
            Then the Japanese will quickly dig a tunnel under the Laperouse Strait and drag our railway right up to Tokyo, and on the other hand the Europeans will stretch to London.

            wink
      4. Tersky
        Tersky 5 February 2016 12: 46
        +8
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        And what will happen to Iran in 40 years? Where is the guarantee that in 40 years the Donald Cooks will not climb into the Caspian Sea via this channel?

        Absolutely true and fair questions, yes ... For - "It was smooth on paper, but they forgot about the ravines" ...
        1. Pravdarm
          Pravdarm 5 February 2016 12: 47
          +6

          Then there is no need to build Power of Siberia, or Nord Streams, etc. What will happen in 40 years?
          Lie on the stove at home and contemplate how packs of jackals will do all this around the house?
          So what?
          1. askort154
            askort154 5 February 2016 13: 37
            +1
            PravdARM ..... (Sorry for the vulgar re-planning!)


            Yes hussars, do not get carried away! On our site there are already three representatives of the fair sex!
            1. Pravdarm
              Pravdarm 5 February 2016 13: 49
              +1
              To blame! Will not happen again!
              I apologize to the ladies! love
              I can’t delete it anymore.
              Consider it in the men's office!
              Ladies, don't eavesdrop! wink
        2. The black
          The black 5 February 2016 13: 16
          +3
          You, of course, are right about something, but only Iran can implement this project without us, without our "wants - they did not want." By the way, there is still Kazakhstan, for which this project can be very beneficial.
      5. The comment was deleted.
      6. aleks 62 next
        aleks 62 next 5 February 2016 13: 29
        +1
        ..... Where is the guarantee that Donald Cooks will not climb into the Caspian Sea through this channel in 40 years? ...

        .... Well, you can regulate the passage through it by a convention such as Montreux (for the military) or limit the military passage only to ships of Iran and Russia .... This will not be a natural channel, but a "private" one .... In general, guarantees that will be in peace and which new countries will appear, while others will not disappear ... But from an economic point of view, and a strategic project is good ... Only its length is embarrassing ..... Already 700 km ... How much time and money will you have to dig. ?????? ... bully
      7. 16112014nk
        16112014nk 5 February 2016 13: 54
        +2
        The channel will be beneficial to Russia only subject to extraterritoriality. If in another way - then no!
      8. Igor V
        Igor V 5 February 2016 14: 23
        +5
        "Who 40 years ago ..."
        I would like to recall that 40 years ago pipes were laid not in Ukraine, but on the territory of the Soviet Union. And the current situation would not have been seen by anyone in a terrible dream at that time.
        1. Zoldat_A
          Zoldat_A 5 February 2016 14: 58
          +1
          Quote: Igor V
          I would like to recall that 40 years ago pipes were laid not in Ukraine, but on the territory of the Soviet Union. And the current situation would not have been seen by anyone in a terrible dream at that time.

          I remember this, only who 40 years ago would have thought that this would not be the territory of the Soviet Union, but Ukraine, and, besides, so mean? We also don’t know what will happen to our territory, with Iran and the canal in 40 years. Of course, I would like to believe in the best ... Well, for example, why not dream up that in 40 years the territory of Iran will be Russia in general? laughing laughing You never know ... About Ukraine today 40 years ago also seemed like a fairy tale ...
          1. Berthan
            Berthan 5 February 2016 15: 58
            +1
            Well, if you start fantasizing: why not assume that technical progress is not forever fixated on smartphones? And air (stratospheric, space) transportation will be equal in profitability to sea transportation. This too - it may happen in a few decades ...
            And what, in this scenario, will be the role of the "controllers" of the straits-canals?
      9. Igor V
        Igor V 5 February 2016 14: 23
        0
        "Who 40 years ago ..."
        I would like to recall that 40 years ago pipes were laid not in Ukraine, but on the territory of the Soviet Union. And the current situation would not have been seen by anyone in a terrible dream at that time.
      10. slavik_gross
        slavik_gross 5 February 2016 14: 42
        0
        Everyone has forgotten about the environment ... Everything needs to be well calculated here so as not to disturb the ecosystem of the Caspian, and this is a good idea.
      11. andj61
        andj61 5 February 2016 15: 33
        +2
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        I would do more. By value, this channel would be no less, if not more, than Suez or Panama.

        And WHAT and WHERE to carry along this channel? It applies exclusively to trade in Russia and the Caspian littoral countries with the Indian Ocean region. For Iran, this is very interesting, but for Russia, insofar as it is.
        And it is unlikely that they will be able to meet the budget of 10 billion. The same amount went to expand the much shorter Suez Canal ...
      12. Seal
        Seal 5 February 2016 17: 51
        +2
        So it is necessary to implement a canal project in Nicaragua. And place our base there. One on both sides of the channel. That would be KOZYR !!
    3. Pirogov
      Pirogov 5 February 2016 12: 27
      +4
      A really ambitious project. If it is implemented, it will be extremely beneficial for the Russian Federation ................................... ......................................
      ................................ A channel called, Sickle on Turkish Eggs,.
    4. lysyj bob
      lysyj bob 5 February 2016 12: 28
      +1
      Quote: Black
      Really ambitious project


      Confrontation is also anticipated to be robust, just look at the neighbors in the Persian Gulf. And the states on the British flag will be torn so that this project does not exist. The case may end with another war, with all the consequences for Iran and Russia.
      But if it burns out, both Russia and Iran will win very much.
    5. Thrall
      Thrall 5 February 2016 12: 28
      31
      The Russian opposition supported the project of the new channel at a rally with the slogans "Digging a hole for Russia is not possible in the homeland!" and demanded to urgently give them shovels from the budget))
      1. nemec55
        nemec55 5 February 2016 12: 43
        +7
        The Russian opposition supported the draft of the new channel and demanded to give them shovels))

        Probably one of these muzzle snouts in the photo soldered you minus laughing (do not agree the bastards on the shovel to them give the digger an excavator)
    6. vlad66
      vlad66 5 February 2016 12: 28
      11
      Quote: Black
      A really ambitious project. If it is implemented, it will be extremely beneficial for the Russian Federation.

      If it is implemented, then Turkey will lose its arrogance and arrogance, and even with mattresses.
    7. Tarpon
      Tarpon 5 February 2016 12: 39
      -1
      Need to implement faster!
    8. The comment was deleted.
    9. Vend
      Vend 5 February 2016 12: 45
      +4
      Quote: Black
      A really ambitious project. If it is implemented, it will be extremely beneficial for the Russian Federation.

      The project has not lost relevance even now. This speaks volumes in his favor. It would be very good if they raised the topic of this project again.
    10. Maxom75
      Maxom75 5 February 2016 13: 00
      +8
      And for Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan. This project is a breakthrough and Iran can make good money on it. The only question is that Russia will be able to supply the Volga channel especially below the Volga Hydroelectric Power Station, which has become very shallow, so last year we had to drive tugboats with echo sounders in front of the bulk carriers in order to clarify the possibility of passage of vessels. The fairway has not been cleaned for 30 years. (((
    11. iouris
      iouris 5 February 2016 13: 21
      +5
      Maybe it’s cheaper to eliminate Turkey as an obstacle?
      1. PSih2097
        PSih2097 5 February 2016 18: 51
        0
        Quote: iouris
        Maybe it’s cheaper to eliminate Turkey as an obstacle?

        all the more so since the Turks themselves got into the worst of it all the time twice in a row and in one day.
    12. Vadim237
      Vadim237 5 February 2016 13: 25
      0
      Of course it is profitable - several hundred units of quarry and construction equipment will be ordered to our machine builders.
    13. Seal
      Seal 5 February 2016 13: 39
      +1
      Well, and how will it be profitable? It will be absolutely disadvantageous for us. Now we hold all the Caspian countries for one place by the fact that they have the only access to the World Ocean through our inland waterways (Volga, Volgo-don, Don). And in the case of breaking a channel through Iran, all of them will depend on Iran, and not on us.
      It would be better for us to dig our channel of the Caspian-Azov Sea through the Kuma-Mana depression.
    14. Geisenberg
      Geisenberg 5 February 2016 13: 51
      0
      Quote: Black
      A really ambitious project. If it is implemented, it will be extremely beneficial for the Russian Federation.


      That is to say the least ...
    15. Seal
      Seal 5 February 2016 13: 54
      +1
      then for the Russian Federation will be extremely beneficial.


      Well, and how will it be profitable? It will be absolutely disadvantageous for us. Now we hold all the Caspian countries for one place by the fact that they have the only access to the World Ocean through our inland waterways (Volga, Volgo-don, Don). And in the case of breaking a channel through Iran, all of them will depend on Iran, and not on us.
      It would be better for us to dig our channel of the Caspian-Azov Sea through the Kuma-Mana depression.
    16. skrabplus.ru
      skrabplus.ru 5 February 2016 14: 50
      +1
      Wait for its implementation, even if tomorrow they start digging, unfortunately, for decades ...
    17. Red_Hamer
      Red_Hamer 5 February 2016 14: 53
      0
      And if you take into account such waterways of Russia as the Volga))
    18. marlin1203
      marlin1203 5 February 2016 15: 09
      +3
      Where is the money, Zin? How much does it cost?
  2. shelva
    shelva 5 February 2016 12: 18
    +3
    This channel would be a good ass in the ass to the Americans from their NATO.
  3. Lt. Air Force stock
    Lt. Air Force stock 5 February 2016 12: 18
    0
    It’s time to dig ... 735 kilometers. Not one decade for sure. In addition, it will not be a narrow Panama Canal, but wide (probably no less than a kilometer wide), which significantly increases both financial and time costs for construction.
    1. The black
      The black 5 February 2016 12: 22
      +6
      It’s time to dig ... 735 kilometers.
      They will invite Ukraine, they will not get used to it ... they are SEA BLACK !!! dug, and then some kind of canal ... laughing
    2. Mikhail Krapivin
      Mikhail Krapivin 5 February 2016 12: 23
      +2
      The Chinese need to be entrusted, they will dig out on a turnkey basis in five years. They will also build high-speed railways throughout Iran.
      1. Seal
        Seal 5 February 2016 20: 30
        0
        The Chinese need to be entrusted, they will dig out in five years, on a turn-key basis.

        But why should the Chinese channel?
        These Chinese just recently, it seems, got involved in the construction of a new "Panama" canal in Nicaragua, and now they are slowing down - there is not enough money. And the Nicaraguan Canal will be 100 times cheaper than the Persian-Caspian Canal and 10 times more strategically profitable.
    3. Tatar 174
      Tatar 174 5 February 2016 12: 26
      +5
      Now, at this level of technological development, this does not take much time if there is a desire. And if China becomes a contractor, they’ll dig it in one fell swoop laughing
      In general, the idea is interesting.
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 5 February 2016 12: 35
        -1
        Quote: Tatar 174
        Now, at this level of technological development, this does not take much time if there is a desire. And if China becomes a contractor, they’ll dig it in one fell swoop
        In general, the idea is interesting.

        Well, actually, yes, if for example you start digging at once from several directions, for example, from the Caspian Sea and the Persian Gulf, + you also start digging from the middle of the way towards the Caspian Sea and the Persian Gulf (in this way 4 groups will dig). You can dig quickly. Now you can’t be mistaken with global positioning systems.
      2. Stirbjorn
        Stirbjorn 5 February 2016 12: 54
        +2
        Quote: Tatar 174
        Now, at this level of technological development, this does not take much time if there is a desire. And if China becomes a contractor, they’ll dig it in one fell swoop
        In general, the idea is interesting.
        And what can they dig all of Nicaraguan? There is a distance of 10 times less than this
        1. Tatar 174
          Tatar 174 5 February 2016 14: 36
          0
          Quote: Stirbjorn
          And what can they dig all of Nicaraguan? There is a distance of 10 times less than this

          I do not know ...
      3. Seal
        Seal 5 February 2016 20: 30
        0
        And if China becomes a contractor, they’ll dig it in one fell swoop


        But why should the Chinese channel?
        These Chinese just recently, it seems, got involved in the construction of a new "Panama" canal in Nicaragua, and now they are slowing down - there is not enough money. And the Nicaraguan Canal will be 100 times cheaper than the Persian-Caspian Canal and 10 times more strategically profitable.
    4. Shark Lover
      Shark Lover 5 February 2016 12: 28
      -3
      Ukrainians will be attracted. They dug up the Black Sea, the specialists must stay, so the question is removed from the agenda.
      1. GRIG
        GRIG 8 February 2016 12: 48
        0
        Quote: Shark Lover
        Ukrainians will be attracted. dug up the black sea, specials should stay

        Will not work. Seafarers have already complained that over the years their skills have been lost, and Putin stole all the documentation, like waving a shovel.
        Have you seen their "grand" canal (moat) along the border? ... Ottozh.
        And they are no longer capable of more. Not those now kakly, not those.
        Yes, and themselves somehow more reliable to dig. Well, dill will also begin to divert small tubules to itself ... we know them as flaky ones.
    5. max702
      max702 5 February 2016 12: 29
      +2
      Write nonsense, with the current level of technology 3-5 years. The only question is financing, the technology is overwhelmed, people too .. The main and main problem is who will steer the channel, and guarantees for interested parties, if they can solve everything and agree, then 3-5 years and the channel will work.
    6. sisa29
      sisa29 5 February 2016 12: 32
      +2
      Kilometer wide ???? What for belay ... Sorry, but you said an obvious nonsense. The canal is 735 kilometers long and 1 km wide. OUR Civilization cannot be built with the current level of technical development!
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 5 February 2016 12: 39
        -4
        Quote: sisa29
        Kilometer wide ???? What for . Sorry, but you said an obvious nonsense. The canal is 735 kilometers long and 1 km wide. OUR Civilization cannot be built with the current level of technical development!

        Why not needed? After all, ships will not wait in line to pass 735 kilometers of the canal one at a time. With a width of 1 km, ships will be able to walk in two directions continuously. There will be a four-lane sea road, you can walk at 20 knots.
        1. Bayonet
          Bayonet 5 February 2016 20: 02
          +1
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          . With a width of 1 km, ships will be able to walk in two directions continuously.

          Will the gateways be the same too? You dear comrade forgot that the water level in the Caspian Sea is not the same as in the Persian Gulf. The water level in the Caspian is subject to fluctuations, according to 2009 data, it was 27,16 m below sea level. hi
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 5 February 2016 13: 31
        0
        Still how to build, we also have excavators with a bucket capacity of 300 tons of soil and the rest. not a small quarry and construction, equipment is available.
    7. Deniska999
      Deniska999 5 February 2016 12: 44
      +4
      Moreover, there the relief is not flat, I would say.
      1. Anatole Klim
        Anatole Klim 5 February 2016 12: 50
        +8
        Quote: Deniska999
        there the relief is not flat

        I also looked at the physical map of Iran, there are mountain ranges and ridges, I can’t even imagine how they will break through this channel, but they write that there is a feasibility study, so they somehow designed it. (Click)
        1. Executer
          Executer 5 February 2016 13: 43
          +4
          And if you look south - there is the Hormuz spill, which is locked at a time! And he is under the constant supervision of the Saudi-Qatari-Americans. So we need a very careful military-political analysis and justification ...
        2. kuz363
          kuz363 5 February 2016 13: 57
          +2
          So I also wanted to say about the mountains. This is a major obstacle. I have not heard that channels were laid through the mountains. Unless a tunnel should be made so that the ship could pass freely. But what size it should be! Or gateways. But then powerful pumping stations are needed to pump water.
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 5 February 2016 16: 59
            -2
            Rocks can be blown up.
          2. sisa29
            sisa29 5 February 2016 19: 08
            0
            Why at the gateway pumping station ???
            1. Seal
              Seal 5 February 2016 20: 33
              +1
              Why at the gateway pumping station ???

              Sorry, but gravity does not flow up. laughing
              Well, perhaps only in fairy tales or REN-TV programs :)))
              1. sisa29
                sisa29 6 February 2016 00: 47
                -2
                I'm sorry! Judging by your comment, you are an absolute dilettante in this matter, and even mocking. Turn on your brains why raise water with pumps in the airlock? I didn’t hear any more stupidity. The principle of operation of sluices is the principle of communicating vessels where water flows through the valves through the vessels A with a higher level into vessel B, the sluice chamber itself, and then into vessel C with the lowest level. So this is the sequence of closing and opening the valves and regulates the level in the airlock. And lo and behold without pumps

                , fairy tales and REN TV, the vessel can rise to the level of chamber A or descend to the level of chamber C.
                1. kuz363
                  kuz363 7 February 2016 20: 26
                  +1
                  You know very little hydraulics. If the locks are placed in accordance with the relief from an elevation of -28 m (the Caspian Sea) to the level of 0 m (the Persian Gulf), and taking into account the mountainous relief, then they will be located in the form of steps that will descend from the highest point of the mountainous relief in both sides to the bay and the sea. Yes, water will flow into the lower locks from the upper locks by gravity. And where will the water come from in the upper locks without pumping stations? Perhaps we can say that it is necessary to collect water there from the mountain rivers that are higher than the locks. But how suitable is this method for different seasons of the year, melting of snow and glaciers, is the volume of water inflow sufficient ...
          3. Hey
            Hey 5 February 2016 19: 45
            -1
            So I also wanted to say about the mountains. This is a serious obstacle. I didn’t hear the canals running through the mountains.


            Read the text carefully.

            project of the Caspian shipping channel - Persian Gulf. Developed by Russian engineers in 1889–1892, it ensured Russia's shortest exit to the Indian Ocean basin

            Back in those years, the territory through which the canal will pass was investigated. So there is an opportunity to go around the mountains. And do not climb into the breach.
            1. Seal
              Seal 5 February 2016 20: 59
              0
              Back in those years, the territory through which the canal will pass was investigated.

              These were the most preliminary studies. It didn’t even reach the preliminary design.
              And most importantly. What was relevant for the Russian Empire at the end of the 19th century is now sometimes harmful for Russia. At the end of the 19th century, this project was relevant and necessary for us because it could be the best way to quickly transfer large masses of troops to our Far East to ensure its security in the event of a threat. Otherwise, if the British close the Suez for us, we had a way only around Africa. For a long, dangerous, unreliable and again not do without visits to the English colonies.
              But in May 1891 we began to build our Great Trans-Siberian Railway. And the theme of this channel quietly, peacefully died. And now even transporting troops on trains is a waste of time. Shoigu, if anything, everyone who is needed will be transferred to the Far East by military transport aviation. Moreover, the Ministry of Emergency Situations will also attract aviation if the aviation of the Ministry of Defense cannot cope :))
    8. Pajamas
      Pajamas 5 February 2016 12: 58
      +3
      Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
      It’s time to dig ... 735 kilometers. Not one decade for sure. In addition, it will not be a narrow Panama Canal, but wide (probably no less than a kilometer wide), which significantly increases both financial and time costs for construction.

      And how much do you think, if not one dozen, then how many 20-30 years? But you probably did not read carefully 450 km these are river fairways, you may have to deepen, but digging only 250 km, what are the decades? The tunnel under the English Channel in 3 branches 3x50 = 150 km was built in 6 years, it is much easier here, so construction work is quite enough in 5 years. Master 1-1.3 lard per year nonsense at normal capacity. Panama The width of the locks is 33 meters, the depth is 12, we take 40 and 20 for 250 km, we get 400 m000 of soil. Quarry "Vostochny" is digging under 000 a year and this is not Iran, but Siberia.
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 5 February 2016 13: 09
        0
        Quote: Pajama
        And how much do you think, if not one dozen, then how many 20-30 years? But you probably did not read carefully 450 km these are river fairways, you may have to deepen, but digging only 250 km, what are the decades? The tunnel under the English Channel in 3 branches 3x50 = 150 km was built in 6 years, it is much easier here, so construction work is quite enough in 5 years. Master 1-1.3 lard per year nonsense at normal capacity. Panama The width of the locks is 33 meters, the depth is 12, we take 40 and 20 for 250 km, we get 400 m000 of soil. Quarry "Vostochny" is digging under 000 a year and this is not Iran, but Siberia.

        Deepening and expanding the fairways of the rivers also takes a lot of time, 250 km of digging, you still need to see what kind of terrain, the physical map of Iran is shown above, there are many mountains that need to be overcome, blown up, leveled, etc. etc.
      2. sisa29
        sisa29 5 February 2016 13: 09
        +1
        You correctly counted the width of 30-well 50 meters, But the sentence 1 km wide sounded above, you count everything to 1 km wide and you understand that it makes no sense to prove something. If, in your calculations, 30 meters-5 years, then with a width of 1000 meters -166 years, and this is only on a flat, excluding elevations
        1. Lt. Air Force stock
          Lt. Air Force stock 5 February 2016 13: 45
          -1
          Quote: sisa29
          You correctly counted the width of 30-well 50 meters, But the sentence 1 km wide sounded above, you count everything to 1 km wide and you understand that it makes no sense to prove something. If, in your calculations, 30 meters-5 years, then with a width of 1000 meters -166 years, and this is only on a flat, excluding elevations

          The Panama Canal is 150 meters wide, and here you propose to dig a canal 30-50 meters wide (container ships have a width of 30 meters). You see, this canal could potentially become an alternative to the Northern Sea Route. If Russia also begins to expand the Volga (now the maximum tonnage is 5000 tons), then through this channel the Chinese container ships will theoretically be able to go to Europe, and Russia will receive money for passing through its sea routes. Faster than going around Europe through the Mediterranean.
          1. Professor
            Professor 5 February 2016 14: 27
            +2
            Quote: Lt. air force reserve
            Panama Canal is 150 meters wide

            This is how you live and learn. With such a width, supertankers with aircraft carriers can be passed along the channel, but tankers and aircraft carriers do not know about this and are wandering around America. wink
            1. Lt. Air Force stock
              Lt. Air Force stock 5 February 2016 14: 45
              +4
              Quote: Professor
              This is how you live and learn. With such a width, supertankers with aircraft carriers can be passed along the channel, but tankers and aircraft carriers do not know about this and are wandering around America.

              The professor is 150 meters wide and 33 meters wide.
              You are a former naval officer and you don’t know this ...
              1. Professor
                Professor 5 February 2016 14: 52
                -7
                Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                The professor has a channel width of 150 meters and a width of locks 33 meters.

                And how do I know the "channel width" if it has nothing to do with shipping?

                And anyway, where is this nonsense about 150 m from? At least open a map and measure it.

                Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                You are a former naval officer and you don’t know this ...

                You have no idea what I know. lol
                1. Lt. Air Force stock
                  Lt. Air Force stock 5 February 2016 15: 05
                  +5
                  Quote: Professor
                  And anyway, where is this nonsense about 150 m from? At least open a map and measure it.

                  I have other data. In general, type in the search engine the phrase Panama Canal Width.
                  Moreover, the professor on the screen has a width of 0,26 kilometers, which is 260 meters if I understand English correctly. You yourself have denied your statement.

                  Quote: Professor
                  And anyway, where is this nonsense about 150 m from? At least open a map and measure it.

                  How not to? It discusses how wide the Iranian channel should be. Obviously not 30-50 meters. The wider the channel, the more expensive it is.
                  Quote: Professor
                  You have no idea what I know.

                  Apparently you do not know anything.
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 5 February 2016 15: 17
                    +1
                    Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                    I have other data. In general, type in the search engine the phrase Panama Canal Width.
                    Moreover, the professor on the screen has a width of 0,26 kilometers, which is 260 meters if I understand English correctly. You yourself have denied your statement.

                    Open and measure the card. The width of the channel is determined by its bottleneck, that is, the width of the gateway. But if you decide to measure the width of the channel outside the locks, then there it is also not 150 m. Likbez.

                    Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                    How not to? It discusses how wide the Iranian channel should be. Obviously not 30-50 meters. The wider the channel, the more expensive it is.

                    There will be no Iranian channel. Well, if it were then the width of 40m is more than enough.

                    Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                    Apparently you do not know anything.

                    Oh yeah. wassat
                    1. Lt. Air Force stock
                      Lt. Air Force stock 5 February 2016 15: 27
                      +3
                      Quote: Professor
                      There will be no Iranian channel. Well, if it were then the width of 40m is more than enough.

                      40 m did you mean the width of the locks? If yes, then enough. And sailing 730 kilometers with an average channel width of 40 meters will dramatically hinder navigation, as some ships will not be able to disperse with each other or will, but they will need to slow down.
                      Quote: Professor
                      Open and measure the card. The width of the channel is determined by its bottleneck, that is, the width of the gateway. But if you decide to measure the width of the channel outside the locks, then there it is also not 150 m. Likbez.

                      And I did not say that the width of the locks at the Panama Canal is 150 meters. It was you who decided to demonstrate erudition, to think up a contradiction and to flash your mind.
                      The average width of the channel is important, since the ships can diverge with each other in it, not waiting for their turn before entering the channel (the queue only in front of the gateways), so the speed of passage of the channel increases.
                      1. Professor
                        Professor 5 February 2016 15: 34
                        -3
                        Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                        40 m did you mean the width of the locks?

                        Width limits for ships and ships.

                        Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                        And sailing 730 kilometers with an average channel width of 40 meters will dramatically hinder navigation, as some ships will not be able to disperse with each other or will, but they will need to slow down.

                        Do not swim, but walk or walk.

                        Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                        And I did not say that the width of the locks at the Panama Canal is 150 meters.

                        Open the map and show us 150 m. I've shown you 260 m.

                        Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                        The average channel width is important

                        Like the average body temperature in all patients in the ward. bully
                      2. Lt. Air Force stock
                        Lt. Air Force stock 5 February 2016 15: 44
                        +1
                        Quote: Professor
                        Open the map and show us 150 m. I've shown you 260 m.

                        Professor I initially read the width of the Panama Canal in the directory and indicated it. Here you did not like the accuracy. It’s like I would write that the number P is 3,14, and you say no, the number P is 3,1415926535897932384626433832795 ...
                    2. Bakht
                      Bakht 5 February 2016 15: 46
                      +3
                      Sorry to interrupt the argument. But .. if there is a queue in front of the gateways, then the speed of the channel no longer matters. We have to wait. There is no waiting in the Panama Canal. Ships go towards each other. The picture shows that the Grand Diamond container ship is coming towards us. I can’t put a few photos at once, so I will limit myself to only one photo. In general, we parted without interfering with each other. But how is he going !!!! Very tightly.

                      In general, we waited in line for two days BEFORE ENTRANCE (big traffic) and passed the channel in one night. The ship was 18 meters wide and could be added to the shore. There are hardly more than 30 meters (one way).
          2. sisa29
            sisa29 5 February 2016 15: 46
            +3
            Dear Oleg You must have read "Twelve Chairs" There is Ostap's most interesting monologue about New Vasyuki. Does it remind you of today's discussion about a 1 km wide canal?
        2. Pajamas
          Pajamas 5 February 2016 14: 32
          0
          Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
          Quote: sisa29
          You correctly counted the width of 30-well 50 meters, But the sentence 1 km wide sounded above, you count everything to 1 km wide and you understand that it makes no sense to prove something. If, in your calculations, 30 meters-5 years, then with a width of 1000 meters -166 years, and this is only on a flat, excluding elevations

          The Panama Canal is 150 meters wide, and here you propose to dig a canal 30-50 meters wide (container ships have a width of 30 meters). You see, this canal could potentially become an alternative to the Northern Sea Route. If Russia also begins to expand the Volga (now the maximum tonnage is 5000 tons), then through this channel the Chinese container ships will theoretically be able to go to Europe, and Russia will receive money for passing through its sea routes. Faster than going around Europe through the Mediterranean.

          Aha and the Gateway 150 meters. fool
          1. Lt. Air Force stock
            Lt. Air Force stock 5 February 2016 14: 46
            +3
            Quote: Pajama
            Aha and the Gateway 150 meters.

            Gateway 33 meters, channel width 150 meters. fool
            I did not write that the width of the gateway is 150 meters ...
            1. Pajamas
              Pajamas 5 February 2016 15: 23
              0
              Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
              Quote: Pajama
              Aha and the Gateway 150 meters.

              Gateway 33 meters, channel width 150 meters. fool
              I did not write that the width of the gateway is 150 meters ...

              What did you write? I wrote that Panama has a gateway width of 33, I suggested taking 40 to the gateway. It started from you about 150 meters. Only you all bustle, YOUR statement is that building for more than a dozen years. Now what is it about how to measure the width of the channel, on the gateway or on Google, or that you are going to build a channel for at least 20 years?
              1. Lt. Air Force stock
                Lt. Air Force stock 5 February 2016 15: 38
                -1
                Quote: Pajama
                What did you write? I wrote that Panama has a gateway width of 33, I suggested taking 40 to the gateway. It started from you about 150 meters. Only you all bustle, YOUR statement is that building for more than a dozen years. Now what is it about how to measure the width of the channel, on the gateway or on Google, or that you are going to build a channel for at least 20 years?

                Gateways is a tiny stretch of the 735 kilometer route. What the average width of the channel should be, I never saw you, but digging it will cost the lion's sum of money. You mentioned the rivers, but you didn’t mention their depth and width, they must certainly be thoroughly expanded and deepened.
                The gateway is generally not the main problem of this project.
      3. Pajamas
        Pajamas 5 February 2016 14: 19
        -1
        Listen to the project cost of 6 billion, well, what’s the right, to master these funds in 5 years, like two fingers on asphalt, it would be difficult to cost 600 billion.
      4. Pajamas
        Pajamas 5 February 2016 14: 30
        0
        Quote: sisa29
        You correctly counted the width of 30-well 50 meters, But the sentence 1 km wide sounded above, you count everything to 1 km wide and you understand that it makes no sense to prove something. If, in your calculations, 30 meters-5 years, then with a width of 1000 meters -166 years, and this is only on a flat, excluding elevations

        Yeah, in the 19th century they proposed to build and the issue was solved, and now 166 years, fool 5 years this is with hydraulic structures, dig there, well, 2-3 years maximum. Where did you read about 1 km wide? I counted the thread of the fairway of this channel at 40 meters, add to the return the same amount, 800 m000, the problem to be solved.
        Path
        1. sisa29
          sisa29 5 February 2016 15: 24
          0
          I just agreed with your opinion with the width as you thought. a proposal to dig a canal 1 km wide came from our friend
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          Lt. Air Force Reserve Today, 12:18
          It’s time to dig ... 735 kilometers. Not one decade for sure. In addition, it will not be a narrow Panama Canal, but wide (probably no less than a kilometer wide), which significantly increases both financial and time costs for construction.

          I just use your calculations brought the figure of 166 years on his proposal to dig 1 km
  4. Yarik76
    Yarik76 5 February 2016 13: 06
    0
    No, not long . Real earthworks are about 200 km 'further by hydromechanics.
  5. Aleksandr69
    Aleksandr69 5 February 2016 14: 28
    0
    And why so wide? Better to take depth for special borea vessels. Due to the climate, your kilometer canal will be noticeable by sandstorms and will require such maintenance that it will pay off in a hundred years
  • KBR109
    KBR109 5 February 2016 12: 18
    +1
    Preparations for the construction continue - not enough information. And the project is very tasty. winked
  • oldav
    oldav 5 February 2016 12: 19
    +1
    If not for the obstinacy and religious fanaticism of the Iranians. Iran could completely replace Turkey, Egypt, Morocco for us on such items as tourism, the supply of fruits and vegetables, construction, joint production, etc.
  • polite people
    polite people 5 February 2016 12: 20
    -6
    This is a project. Nothing will overpower ours. God help you. soldier
  • Bulrumeb
    Bulrumeb 5 February 2016 12: 21
    -3
    Preparations for the construction of the Caspian - Persian Gulf shipping canal continue in Iran.

    Lord, I can imagine how the "partners" will howl. Erdogan will do his own hair removal of all available places.
  • Mjohn
    Mjohn 5 February 2016 12: 21
    +1
    Iran hasn’t done any back stabs to us yet angry
    1. kuz363
      kuz363 5 February 2016 13: 58
      +4
      It is for now. They did not expect from Turkey either
      1. Seal
        Seal 5 February 2016 21: 11
        +1
        They did not expect from Turkey either


        But this
        http://rosgeroika.ru/geroi-nashego-vremeni/2013/july/lejtenant-shapovalov-oruzhi
        ya-ne-predal
        Is not a treacherous stab in the back?
        And nothing, now they are our "best friends and allies" negative
    2. Igor V
      Igor V 5 February 2016 14: 16
      +3
      "Iran has not yet stabbed us in the back ..."
      Especially in the 41st, when one BAP was bombed, the second was deployed over the target, Iran agreed to the introduction of the Red Army.
    3. Igor V
      Igor V 5 February 2016 14: 16
      0
      "Iran has not yet stabbed us in the back ..."
      Especially in the 41st, when one BAP was bombed, the second was deployed over the target, Iran agreed to the introduction of the Red Army.
    4. Hey
      Hey 5 February 2016 19: 48
      +1
      Iran has not yet hit us in the back


      But remember Griboedov.

      These are still those bugs.
    5. Seal
      Seal 5 February 2016 21: 09
      +1
      Iran hasn’t done any back stabs to us yet

      You mean the Armenians who in 1992 in Stepanakert (Gyumri) meanly shot our five paratroopers, and their commander, Lieutenant Shapovalov killed the wounded, and now the Armenians are our best friends and allies? Moreover, a certain Abrahamyan, who commanded the shooting of our paratroopers, was soon appointed to the post of Deputy Minister of Defense of Armenia.

      http://rosgeroika.ru/geroi-nashego-vremeni/2013/july/lejtenant-shapovalov-oruzhi
      ya-ne-predal
  • alstr
    alstr 5 February 2016 12: 21
    -1
    If implemented, then the ships of the CF will be able to quickly get into the Persian Gulf and restore order with 4 calibers.
  • Mikhail Krapivin
    Mikhail Krapivin 5 February 2016 12: 22
    +9
    All projects categorically opposed by the United States, England, Turkey should be interesting for Russia.
  • A1L9E4K9S
    A1L9E4K9S 5 February 2016 12: 22
    +5
    If Iran agrees and the project is implemented, it will not be a stud stuck in one place in the West, but fucked scrap.
    1. AlexTires
      AlexTires 5 February 2016 12: 42
      0
      Quote: A1L9E4K9S
      If Iran agrees and the project is implemented, it will not be a stud stuck in one place in the West, but fucked scrap.

      The United States will best give its entire annual budget to Iran than they will build it ....
      1. Corsair0304
        Corsair0304 5 February 2016 12: 58
        -2
        Quote: AlexTires
        The United States will best give its entire annual budget to Iran than they will build it ....


        Rather, all the fleets will be sent there to bomb, but not allow the construction of the canal. They are familiar and understandable.
        "Oh, you have no democracy? It flies on the wings of our missiles!"
  • Powder
    Powder 5 February 2016 12: 23
    +5
    That's where you had to invest, not American bonds.
    Best regards
  • itr
    itr 5 February 2016 12: 23
    +1
    Damn and how to master it ????? there is no money in the country and will not be in the near future
    Build at their own expense for Iran let go the forest
    1. severbob
      severbob 5 February 2016 12: 56
      +1
      Lenin Stalin Khrushchev and Brezhnev will attend the opening of the channel
    2. aleks26
      aleks26 5 February 2016 13: 57
      0
      Quote: itr
      there is no money in the country and will not be in the near future

      And $ 70 billion in US bonds? What to expect? When will they freeze them? Everything goes to that - after all, GDP is not only a terrorist, but also a GREAT one. it remains to declare him a cannibal and demand his removal, and before that freeze all the savings of the Russian Federation.
  • Wolka
    Wolka 5 February 2016 12: 24
    +1
    Well, here it is another missing link in the entire politics of the Middle East, i.e. alternative transport routes between Europe and the Middle East and North Africa
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 5 February 2016 12: 25
    +2
    There is no “extraterritoriality” status, no status - no power. At any time, the Iranians will be able to ban anyone from using the channel, for whatever reason. Rather, it is a hook on which Iran can hang Russia when it needs it.
    1. barclay
      barclay 5 February 2016 13: 34
      0
      Everything is mutual. If the project takes place, then many countries will use transit, including the North European ones. For this, Iran, as well as Russia, will receive a very good commission on a contractual basis. It is unlikely that Iran will benefit from interruptions in such a cash flow.
      In general, the project is very attractive with very great prospects for Russia.
      One must be prepared for the fact that the "hegemon" will definitely stick his sting in these questions. And Russia and Iran need to prove themselves here as two equal and independent powers.
      1. chunga-changa
        chunga-changa 5 February 2016 14: 19
        0
        Transit is fine, but it does not solve the problem. We need an alternative to the Bosphorus, a passage for warships and cargoes, all other needs calmly close land routes. And here the nuances begin. The military may or may not. They may initially prescribe a ban on the use of the channel for the passage of warships. They can make demands, they can ask for discounts, a lot of things they can, we do not affect it.
      2. Seal
        Seal 5 February 2016 21: 31
        0
        If the project takes place, then many countries will use transit, including the North European ones.

        Yeah, they will. Five months a year. So far, there is no ice on the entire inland waterway from Astrakhan to St. Petersburg and the gateway is operating.
  • Thunderbolt
    Thunderbolt 5 February 2016 12: 25
    +6
    I don’t understand hydrology at all, but if such a canal is built, the main thing for me is that the water from the Caspian and my Volga to the Indian Ocean does not leak to irrigate Iranian farmland.
    1. vbatov
      vbatov 5 February 2016 12: 37
      +6
      This is impossible in principle, the level of the Caspian is lower than the Indian Ocean, rather the opposite, but in general this channel is impossible because the coast of the Caspian in Iran is bordered by mountains through which you can’t throw water, there is no canal, there you need to dig a tunnel.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Nikolay K
      Nikolay K 5 February 2016 12: 52
      +2
      The level of the Caspian Sea is lower than the world ocean at 27m, so that, on the contrary, the Caspian takes in the water of the ocean. Given the Caspian area, the canal is unlikely to seriously name its level.
    4. madjik
      madjik 5 February 2016 13: 11
      0
      It will flood me how to drink! The Caspian lowland will flood. People will need to be relocated. With large water in the Caspian, you can expand the old channel through Manych to the Black Sea
      1. Rostovchanin
        Rostovchanin 5 February 2016 16: 01
        +3
        It will flood me how to drink! The Caspian lowland will flood. People will need to be relocated. With large water in the Caspian, you can expand the old channel through Manych to the Black Sea

        I grew up in Manych, there, too, the project was ready to connect the Caspian with the Azov-Black Sea basin along the Manych depression, it practically stretches from the Taganrog Bay to the Caspian. Manych, by the way, was navigable and the mouth of Yegorlyk in Soviet times, although locks still operate in the Veselovsky and Proletarsky reservoirs. So, theoretically, it will be possible to get into the Black Sea from the Caspian bypassing the Volga-Don canal.
    5. Neighbor
      Neighbor 5 February 2016 16: 15
      +2
      In addition to a closed ecosystem, the Caspian is also minus 28 meters above sea level. What will happen to the seal, sturgeon, Volga delta?
      1. Seal
        Seal 5 February 2016 21: 33
        0
        What will happen to the seal, sturgeon, Volga delta?

        Most likely for all of them from the Indian Ocean will come one big arctic fox am
    6. Bayonet
      Bayonet 5 February 2016 20: 16
      +1
      Quote: Thunderbolt
      I don’t understand hydrology at all, but if such a canal is built, the main thing for me is that the water from the Caspian and my Volga to the Indian Ocean does not leak to irrigate Iranian farmland.

      And how will it "flow away" if the level of the Caspian is 27 meters lower? smile
  • NKVD
    NKVD 5 February 2016 12: 26
    +2
    Of course, you will have to dig a lot, isn’t it easier to build a good railway between the Caspian and the Gulf.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 5 February 2016 12: 27
    +2
    The longest navigable canal - 163 km. - Suez.

    Even taking into account technological growth, how long will it take to build a canal of 735 km?

    And, rightly, there is still the option of laying a channel through peaceful nuclear explosions; there was such a project. laughing
    1. faridg7
      faridg7 5 February 2016 12: 41
      +3
      Well, this project is suitable for the expansion of the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles, but then the 735 km canal will be in demand - very few people will want to walk the old route. And as for the sanctions and financial difficulties, so it is necessary to throw off the state papers and build a canal with these funds, and there will be enough not only for the canal.
    2. pv1005
      pv1005 5 February 2016 12: 44
      -1
      Quote: Gormengast

      Even taking into account technological growth, how long will it take to build a canal of 735 km?

      Have you tried reading before writing? request
      Quote: Gormengast
      The total length of the shipping route will be about 700 kilometers, including on the fairways of the rivers of northwestern (Caspian) and southwestern Iran, including the international Shatt al-Arab channel bordering Iraq 450 kilometer.

      Further mathematics will help you how much to dig.
    3. Nikolay K
      Nikolay K 5 February 2016 12: 54
      +2
      We have already built gas storages near Astrakhan with the help of nuclear explosions, go away. Now we begin to disentangle.
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 5 February 2016 20: 21
        0
        So then underground explosions, and if ground fool then in general there will be a radioactive desert! request
  • Woodman
    Woodman 5 February 2016 12: 28
    -1
    The idea is good, it's up to politicians.
  • screw cutter
    screw cutter 5 February 2016 12: 35
    0
    The Caspian will cease to be a large lake and become a full-fledged sea. Only how much rock do you need to shovel?
    I liked the idea "to be friends with Iran" than not Sharm el Sheikh, only closer.
  • Aleksey888
    Aleksey888 5 February 2016 12: 35
    +4
    Yeah, first dig up, and then they will ask us from there.
  • donavi49
    donavi49 5 February 2016 12: 41
    14
    The project at this stage is not actually implemented. Since there is no base, that is, it will not be possible to use existing water resources with a partial deepening. The rivers there are all small and go not quite on the right route. The plot near Eshafan can still be used but it is 20-30 km. Digging the rest from scratch is actually trillions of investments. No one will pull. Plus, this channel will have to be maintained, maintain depth, which also will result in a billion to maintain, and who will pay so much money? It will not pay off in a trite way (that is, it will be cheaper to go through Gibraaltar + Suez + fuel oil and time - than to pay for passage through Iran if you try to make an economic justification).

    Another project is much more real - a high-speed highway + 2 of a powerful terminal.

    A ferry arrives in the Caspian - a container ship - a tanker - a gas carrier = it is converted into railway trains and transported via a high-speed highway to the Persian Gulf coast, where it is converted into a sea vessel at the terminal and it is already being delivered to the final customer. Such a project:
    a) Real.
    b) Cost-effective.
    c) Will be in demand.
    e) In terms of speed of passage through Iran, even with unloading / loading, it will outperform the canal with advanced logistics.
    1. Stirbjorn
      Stirbjorn 5 February 2016 12: 57
      +7
      At least one common thought - otherwise they gathered 735 km. There will be no channel
      1. afdjhbn67
        afdjhbn67 5 February 2016 13: 33
        +2
        Quote: Stirbjorn
        - otherwise they gathered 735 km.

        But what are they picking in the earth .. Let's immediately build a bridge to the moon (a thing of the same order with the channel) wassat
        PS.And if some idiot writes an article about the bridge to the moon, will they also be discussing so hotly? no one thought arises that rave?
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Nikolay K
      Nikolay K 5 February 2016 13: 06
      0
      I agree. Only if such a global project is implemented, then it is necessary to build not a railway, but immediately something advanced, such as a vacuum train. Similar projects are now being actively developed around the world, in particular, the American venture billionaire Ilon Mask (author and investor in PayPal projects (international payment system), Tesla Motors (electric car of the same name), SpaceX (Falcon 1, Falcon 9 launch vehicles, Dragon spaceship )) suggested the Hyperloóp project, which allows developing speeds of 400-1000 km. / hour and higher
  • AlexTires
    AlexTires 5 February 2016 12: 41
    +1
    This project will not just be gold - platinum ... Although if the issue is political, anything is possible. There, some drove their silk road through the Georgians ...
  • LÄRZ
    LÄRZ 5 February 2016 12: 42
    +2
    Well, this project will be more specific than the turn of the northern rivers. winked In Nicaragua, it seems, work has begun on the construction of the Atlantic-Pacific Ocean canal. Now here we need to "stir up". Dangerous, of course, no words, but it is necessary.
  • Corsair0304
    Corsair0304 5 February 2016 12: 44
    -1
    And did anyone pay attention that if it were not for the "potential partners" in the person of England, France, Austria-Hungary and Germany did not spoil Russia in 1878, then these problems would not have happened? Oh, what a pity that the story has no subjunctive mood.
    The idea is not new. Even Peter I connected Peter and Moscow with a railway line to facilitate logistics. And since our ancestors thought about this at the beginning of the last century, why not participate now, when Russia is again being pressured from all sides? Certainly, China is indispensable here - a powerful economy, human resources. Yes, this is probably good, because the trilateral agreement on the channel will be much more resistant to all political changes (Russia-Iran: we are friends, then we are not friends at intervals of 20-30 years).
    Oh, and howl will be from the "enlightened sailors" !!! Come on, I am howling - if only there was no direct armed intervention in Iran, because the capitalists can forgive everything and close their eyes to everything except the loss of income and will never agree to suffer losses. Therefore, before starting such an ambitious project, it is necessary to prepare in the military sphere, to cover the whole of Iran with an air defense umbrella, to install "Bastions" and so on. on the coast ... Del, in short, a wagon and a small cart.
    1. Kachesgm
      Kachesgm 5 February 2016 13: 38
      +3
      Hmm ... Peter I managed to found Peter and rebuild it a bit. The piece of iron was already done by Nicholas I ... I'm not trying to learn, but it's just that the eras are different ...
  • bad
    bad 5 February 2016 12: 56
    -2
    ... heh .. dream .. agreed, cooperating
    fox, they found an immense amount of money, they dug it out, even in shock terms! .. pride and joy ... and the mattresses were again imposed sanctions against Iran and imposed the entire Persian Gulf with their AUG with UN sanction with the consent of "allies and partners" .. and it will turn out expensive "river" from Russia to Iran .. and then what's the point in this channel, the construction of the century? .. more than for us, it is vital that we need the Turkish (so far Turkish) straits .. with full control and without third countries in complicity .. and the matter is in the redistribution of the world to that and goes .. Russia is not the first time to beat the Turkish face, and the centuries-old blackmail on the Bosphorus has pissed us off .. apparently so it will be .. recourse
  • Amurets
    Amurets 5 February 2016 12: 58
    -1
    Interest project
    clear, but costly. I read the article and all the comments. On the one hand it is tempting, on the other hand there are a lot of risks; political, economic and even geological. It is difficult to think and make a weighted decision, but it seems to me that the project should be supported politically at the first stage. With sanctions it’s clear no one is going to cancel them. The European Parliament in Strasbourg is already urging not to lift the sanctions from Russia until Russia returns Crimea to Ukraine, and there they will find a bunch of reasons.
  • Winter cherry
    Winter cherry 5 February 2016 12: 59
    0
    If China joins with investments, it will already be easier.
    1. sherp2015
      sherp2015 5 February 2016 14: 00
      0
      Quote: Winter cherry
      If China joins with investments, it will already be easier.

      ))) Yeah ... Human resources for a handful of rice. 200 million Chinese diggers)))
    2. Seal
      Seal 5 February 2016 21: 27
      0
      Quote: Winter cherry
      If China joins with investments, it will already be easier.

      Yes, China with the canal in Nicaragua began to slip. There is not enough money. Moreover, if the canal in Nicaragua is interesting to China, then this canal to China is like an fish umbrella.
  • Bakht
    Bakht 5 February 2016 13: 09
    10
    It seems to me that the idea is utopian.

    Technical points. The level of the Caspian is lower than the level of the oceans. Plus mountain range across the channel. The canal can be built 100 meters wide. This is if in two directions. But at the same time, no one will allow security to move towards safety. It is possible and narrower, but then you have to build two, like Panama. Need gateways and huge infrastructure. The depth of the channel is at least 6-7 meters. Otherwise, he will never pay off in his life. Large vessels will not pass through the Volga. And to carry small things does not make sense.

    Ecology. The salinity of the Persian Gulf is three times higher than the salinity of the Caspian Sea. Plus the fact that the vessels will be brought to the bottom. The ecology of the Caspian will be destroyed in the bud. With the salinity of the Caspian at 13 ppm, it is impossible to irrigate farmland. Need a desalination plant. Increased earthquake risk. The north of Iran is already seismic. Carrying out a channel means increasing the risk of earthquakes. Water consumption in the Caspian will require the consent of all five littoral states.

    Political cons. To quit dependence on Turkey (the Bosphorus is protected by an international convention) and become dependent on Iran (the channel will have interstate status and may be closed at any time). Shat-El-Araba Delta is a disputed territory. For her 10 years, Iraq butted. True, the situation is different now, but who gives a guarantee?

    Much more interesting is the proposal that was voiced here. High-speed railroad highway through all Iran to the Persian Gulf. It seems to me much cheaper. And there is no need to build maritime infrastructure and overload cargo. The North-South highway through the territory of Azerbaijan is promising. You just need to improve the existing transport capabilities and launch high-speed freight trains to the Persian Gulf coast. And for this you need just a little thing: to interest Azerbaijan. Economically, we are already interested in transit payments. But politically ... Well, let Moscow think about it.
    1. Koshak
      Koshak 5 February 2016 14: 37
      0
      The most logical, thoughtful comment +100500 good
    2. Seal
      Seal 5 February 2016 21: 21
      0
      launch high-speed freight trains to the shore of the Persian Gulf.

      And the fig? We need to run trains to the Far East !!! To Japan, Korea, China !! From there goes the largest cargo flow to Europe. And if in Japan or China they were loaded onto a marine vessel, then the cargo on it will reach the recipient. In FIG, the Chinese or Japanese will unload their goods on the Persian Gulf and then drag smaller vessels through the canal and the Caspian to Europe. Moreover, the Volga is navigable only from May to October. And then in Gorodets, the depth in the summer is a little over 2 meters.

      As of 8:00 on 09.09.2015, the smallest actual dimensions of the shipway on the river. Volga make up:
      - section Gorodets locks - Gorodets - depth 240/285 cm, width 80 m;
      - section Gorodets - Balakhna - depth 240/285 cm, width 100 m;
  • Suharik.inline
    Suharik.inline 5 February 2016 13: 12
    -2
    As a taxpayer, I’m ready to pay for it.
  • bad
    bad 5 February 2016 13: 19
    +2
    heh..someone afraid of the truth? .. and the truth is such-RUSSIA overlaid, squeezed, and still shit watered, it can’t and will not continue .. though zamusnuyte completely, but the big war is just around the corner and it is inevitable. . just like in any war of grief, everyone will grab ... but the Turks will rake because they never rake .. I don’t wang .. I’m moving what is already obvious .. and as a veteran, I believe only in our VICTORY! and I don’t care about anyone ..
  • Rostislav
    Rostislav 5 February 2016 13: 19
    0
    And what will happen to Iran in 40 years? Where is the guarantee that in 40 years the Donald Cooks will not climb into the Caspian Sea via this channel?

    Therefore, the question of the extraterritoriality of the channel is raised. So that Russia could defend its rights not only with loud cries. This is still understood in the Russian Empire.
  • mitrich
    mitrich 5 February 2016 13: 21
    -2
    I didn’t even hear about it before, I just read it!
    Cool thing if you negotiate with Iran on equal terms. It is possible to recapture the money over time and get a strategic outlet to the Indian Ocean, bypassing the "narrow" Dardanelles and Suez.
    But here expect from sworn partners all that you want, primarily Iran. Exceptional with mongrels, they will first put sticks in the knitting needles, and in the case of the project, they will try to get it for themselves, destabilizing Iran.
    And so yes, we would have had almost ours, for two, and Suez, and Panama1 and Panama2.
    And in conjunction with the Northern Way .... oh, dreams ..... fellow
  • Vladimir
    Vladimir 5 February 2016 13: 29
    0
    In the modern era of wars, economic instability, it is somehow not enough to believe in the implementation of such a project.
  • capitosha1rang
    capitosha1rang 5 February 2016 13: 30
    +4
    It is easier and cheaper to build a railway with P-65 rails and arranging ports at the starting and ending points of the route.
    Which ship-ships from Russia will sail to the Persian Gulf, or from the Persian Gulf to Russia? Supertankers, bulk carriers with their 10-15 meter draft? Or river-sea vessels with draft of 3,50 meter - guaranteed depth at the kings of the Volga locks?
    What is the meaning of the project: twenty years of work to move the soil and billions of dollars for what, what will be transported-transported on the channel, if you do not mean the corruption component? What are these high-demand products in mind?
  • triglav
    triglav 5 February 2016 13: 37
    -2
    We must calculate everything. But the idea is good. Moreover, we have never had open hostility with Iran.
  • Star Huntsman
    Star Huntsman 5 February 2016 13: 38
    -1
    rather than attract the descendants of ancient ukrov to the channel digging ?? although .... no, they will. it's a pity. the project is really profitable, they need to deal with the day before yesterday
  • valentina-makanalina
    valentina-makanalina 5 February 2016 13: 41
    0
    The idea is certainly good. If a canal is to be built, then not only "river-sea" ships should pass through it, but also many types of warships.
    But, at the moment there are questions:
    - where to get the money?
    - Will it not be "analogous to the Ukrainian pipeline" for Russia?
    East is a delicate matter.
  • fa2998
    fa2998 5 February 2016 13: 52
    +3
    Quote: Black
    The channel is primarily interested in IRAN !!! This is not only shipping, but also irrigation of vast territories. And for us, in any case, having two exits is in every way better than one ...

    Well, of course, you turned down about salt water irrigation! It looks excellent on the map. BUT THE RELIEF, solid highlands, mountain ranges (Elburs, Kuhrut) up to 4-5 thousand meters high. It’s not a canal, but solid lock structures. Yes and ships. Okay, the river-sea ships can go along the Caspian Sea, the canal, and in the Persian Gulf. But you will have to reload into the open ocean. But it’s not easier to go through Persia to the railway, and then load on a normal ship! along the border river between Iran and Iraq. Anyone count how many years they fought among themselves EXACTLY FOR THIS AREA. It is doubtful all this, it is necessary to analyze and count! yes hi
  • Roust
    Roust 5 February 2016 14: 04
    -1
    All this is good, but there is a tricky thought: let’s say (as usual) we swell billions into this project and at first everything will be super, but what about the future operation of the channel, if Iran turns its back on us over time or worse: like Turkey, stabbing in the back due to any political differences. The East is a delicate matter, and where it is delicate, it breaks.
  • Darth Revan
    Darth Revan 5 February 2016 14: 08
    +1
    The most optimal option is a high-speed railway. Less costs - and much more benefits. Plus, the development of transport infrastructure in the North Caucasus, Azerbaijan and Iran, in the long term - a branch to Pakistan with access to India.
    1. Igor V
      Igor V 5 February 2016 14: 35
      -1
      Freight transported by rail in hundreds of tons, by sea in thousands
      1. Bakht
        Bakht 5 February 2016 15: 06
        +5
        All right. The cheapest transport is by sea. But ... If there are OPEN sea routes. What is more profitable faster and cheaper: to transport a container from Hong Kong to St. Petersburg by sea through half the globe or by rail along TransSib?

        According to the channel. We drove the ship from Okiyan to Baku. To the Caspian. Repeatedly. Used the ways through Peter and through the Volga-Don. In both cases, the stage was limited by bridges. I had to chop the upper bridge and the mast. Satellite dishes and radars had to be removed unconditionally. Plus upset limit. 6 meters - maximum.

        Well, they will cut a canal through the whole of Iran. No container ship will pass through it. Not sure why supertankers and RO-ROs don't use channels? Maybe cheap, but the dimensions do not allow. And if you build something wider, then these ships will not enter either the Volga or the Don.

        I still think the idea is utopian. But if you need to bury money, then there is no problem. And if you attract the Chinese, then a handful of rice per day and a shovel in your hands. Dig up in a week. laughing As the saying goes "the first million diggers - go ahead"!
        1. Igor V
          Igor V 5 February 2016 19: 10
          -2
          The Transsib is loaded, shipping a container by sea is still cheaper. There are also all kinds of container ships, depending on the purpose of the construction. But there are also "general" cargoes - coal, ore, etc. In any case, it is more profitable to move them in large quantities and without unnecessary transshipments. The idea, of course, is fantastic, but if there were elaborations, then it is quite feasible.
          Forgive my utopianism, but this construction can bring together many different nations, and universal peace and friendship will come. fellow
        2. Igor V
          Igor V 5 February 2016 19: 10
          0
          The Transsib is loaded, shipping a container by sea is still cheaper. There are also all kinds of container ships, depending on the purpose of the construction. But there are also "general" cargoes - coal, ore, etc. In any case, it is more profitable to move them in large quantities and without unnecessary transshipments. The idea, of course, is fantastic, but if there were elaborations, then it is quite feasible.
          Forgive my utopianism, but this construction can bring together many different nations, and universal peace and friendship will come. fellow
          1. Seal
            Seal 5 February 2016 21: 39
            0
            The transsib is loaded, shipping a container by sea is still cheaper.

            Well, let's build a second TransSib on our land. High-speed, modern, with a track of 3,0-3,5 meters. That will allow you to really take on a significant part of the sea cargo flow. Well, except for the most oversized cargo and, perhaps, that of liquefied gas.

            There is a German development, times, sorry, even Hitler. But it was worked out by German engineers to the smallest detail. Up to the detailed development of a new locomotive and carriage. And the routes were planned, and it was calculated how many new tunnels in Europe it would be necessary to break through. The program was closed in January 1945.
            Nothing prevents us from realizing the same thing, but on our territory.
            http://www.popmech.ru/technologies/7403-magistrali-tretego-reykha-proekt-gigants

            kikh-zheleznykh-dorog / # full

            Now, if we do this, then peace will come. Since Russia will become the most important element of international trade. And where they trade, they don’t fight there wink
  • 23424636
    23424636 5 February 2016 14: 13
    -1
    a very interesting article about the Soviet aid to the Turks in the murderous war against Greece in 23-25 ​​years. The comrades were stupidly silent about this, and the flag of the USSR is very similar to the Turkish one. Looks like Stalin was really a Turk, as Tolmud's New York Times wrote in the 20s.
    1. Seal
      Seal 5 February 2016 22: 05
      +1
      About this comrades stupidly silent

      No one was silent. Everyone knew. If you have gaps in education, this is your problem. Only not in 1923-1925, but earlier. Back in 1920.
      Now to the point. Let me remind you that Greece was a member of the Entente and was among the interventionist countries that sent their troops to our land to fight Soviet Russia. By the way, to Odessa. And Ataturk in Turkey was just fighting against the Entente. But please note that we started helping him AFTER he helped us. Atatürk deceived Azerbaijan, stating that our 11th Army was in transit through Azerbaijan to help Turkey fight the Entente. And so that Azerbaijan does not have any provocations against the Red Army. Perhaps Azerbaijan had suspicions that the Turks were deceiving them, but Ataturk, who was already the master of the entire eastern part of Turkey, was for the Azerbaijanis the only hope for help against us. And the Azerbaijanis pretended to believe. As a result, we occupied all of Azerbaijan almost without a fight for 2 days. Moreover, all the oil fields fell into our hands safe and sound. The Turks followed wink

      As the Azerbaijani M.E. Rasulzade wrote:
      Quote: 23424636
      “A part of the Ottoman Turks operating in Baku involuntarily misled people with these words:“ The approaching Red Army is led by a Turk named Nijat-bek. The regiments of this army are made up of Turks. A large number of soldiers come from the Turks of the Volga region. This Army goes to the aid of Anatolia, fighting against deadly enemies. The resistance shown to this Army will be tantamount to hampering the salvation of Turkey. From the point of view of great Turkic unity and the Muslim community, this is tantamount to betrayal. " A day later, it turned out that all these high words were a bluff. It was just a political ploy. ”


      The former head of the organization to combat the counter-revolution of Azerbaijan, Nagy Sheikhzamanli, in his memoirs evaluated the role of the Turks in this way:

      Quote: 23424636
      When the Red Army approached our northern borders, Azerbaijani authorities ordered the governor of Cuba to dismantle the rails for at least one kilometer. The governor executed this order the next day. However, the lying Khalil Bey deceived our general, saying: “My Pasha, the government dismantled the rails on the border. The Red Army will not be able to proceed from here to Anatolia to assist Ataturk. Please take appropriate action. ” The deceived Azerbaijani general ordered the restoration of the railway
  • Nikolay71
    Nikolay71 5 February 2016 14: 29
    0
    I also think the railway option is more real, although there, along the way, you will have to break through tunnels.
  • fa2998
    fa2998 5 February 2016 14: 38
    +4
    Quote: capitosha1rang
    What is the meaning of the project: twenty years of work to move the soil and billions of dollars for what, what will be transported, transported through the channel, if you do not mean the corruption component? What are these high-demand products in mind?

    That’s the most important question! If people used to need sea from one sea to another, camel caravans dragged through the Sinai, corsairs rode through the Panama jungle. Then there came progress — they laid railway and good roads. Then they stopped coping with the load, overloaded, they started to build a canal . I want to ask, WHO NOW USES THROUGH IRAN from the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf? Iran’s territory is riddled with roads and railroads, and there are a lot of people who want it — Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Russia, Kazakhstan — but NO TRANSIT! So before digging, find out WHY ! request hi
  • iouris
    iouris 5 February 2016 14: 40
    0
    It was smooth on paper, but they forgot about the ravines, and walk on them.
    Are tunnels also supposed to be cut through in the mountains?
    In this area, peace must first be established, and this is still very far away. Many states will not be there soon.
  • Igor V
    Igor V 5 February 2016 14: 46
    0
    Iran is not a particularly stable country. The Islamic revolution greatly complicated our relations, although it was directed against the United States. Russia is also unstable, from their point of view. Our country has vast experience in the construction of hydraulic structures. They have an iron argument: the entire channel passes through their territory. If we get involved in this project, we will get unconditional preferences, at least for the loading of enterprises. If we don’t get involved, then the Chinese will build.
  • Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 5 February 2016 14: 49
    +1
    Quote: Thrall
    The Russian opposition supported the project of the new channel at a rally with the slogans "Digging a hole for Russia is not possible in the homeland!" and demanded to urgently give them shovels from the budget))

    It will be possible to hire Ukrainians with their experience in genes! They dug up the sea and then some kind of canal and almost 800 km nonsense.
    1. iouris
      iouris 5 February 2016 16: 42
      +1
      There is experience in the construction of Belomor: there is no need to hire personnel for the implementation of such projects - efficiency will decrease. Will work for parole.
  • Bakht
    Bakht 5 February 2016 14: 58
    +1
    I still had to climb into my archive. laughing

    Here is the Panama Canal. I went through it more than once. Where is the width of 100 meters? And nearby parallel for oncoming vessels. Pay attention to trains. Under the reins lead ships. And the gateway is visible
    1. iouris
      iouris 5 February 2016 16: 45
      +2
      By the way, not so long ago it was planned to build the Nicaraguan Canal. The entire sofa army wholeheartedly supported that project. So what? What result?
  • Kirill
    Kirill 5 February 2016 16: 51
    0
    Wow! It may turn out the White Sea-Persian Gulf highway, the Baltic Sea - the Persian Gulf. Our channels will earn even more! And Moscow has a port of six seas