China wants a canal to cross Thailand into the Indian Ocean

[Stocky]

11 minutes ago, PatOngo said:

It's been considered for decades!

Centuries, it was first proposed nearly 400 years ago by King Narai.

 

With Chinese backing and finance it may actually happen this time, and a welcome economic boost for the south. Though Singapore might be less happy with the idea. 

[Forza2002]

The Chinese will be able to use the submarines that Thailand wants as a bargaining tool.... Let us build this canal and we'll give you a sub for free! ????

[PatOngo]

13 minutes ago, Stocky said:

Centuries, it was first proposed nearly 400 years ago by King Narai.

 

With Chinese backing and finance it may actually happen this time, and a welcome economic boost for the south. Though Singapore might be less happy with the idea. 

If it aids Chinese expansionism, I hope they give it a wide berth!

[tomazbodner]

Had my nose in the project some 20 years ago, but learned that it really had nothing with building that canal. It was a means of blackmailing Singapore to send more money to stop the project. Thai politicians were aware that once they do that, the southern push for separation from Thailand would increase and wherever they make the canal would be the southern border of Thailand. They were never serious about it. But they knew that the Singapore port, which was at that time responsible for much of Singapore's revenue, would take a major hit if this shortcut was used, bypassing Singapore and the pirate infested Malacca Straits, so they'd do all they can to stop it... with money. It is a "project" that resurfaces nearly like clockwork every 20 years.

As for nuclear blasts someone mentioned before - yes, that was proposed some 60 years ago as an "easy" way to dig the canal, but apart from suggestion, it didn't get anywhere.

 

Personally, I'd prefer if they built it like this (Sart canal, Belgium):

 

[richard_smith237]

IF Thailand could build such a canal itself - it would be an excellent money spinner. 

 

Info here. 

 

Shipping time could be reduced by 2-3 days at a saving of US$350,000 per journey (for a tanker).

 

It could also dramatically increase the revenue of ports such as Laem Chabang.

[Misterwhisper]

As I read it, China is becoming more and more of a threat to the whole region. The primary reason why they want that canal is so they can send warships into the Indian Ocean faster without having them to take the longer route through the Malacca Straits. As always, the CCP only pursues its own benefits and objectives under pretense of "helping develop" other nations. If there is another World War, it will surely be triggered by China's unrestrained "in-your-face" neo-colonialism and aggressive expansion.

 

And to think that Thailand is steadily transforming into little more than a client kingdom and CCP lackey... 

[thaibeachlovers]

47 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

What they need is a rail yard at each coast and loading cranes on each side.

Boat pulls up to the port. multi destination shipments are distributed by train car to specific ships on the other side, pick them up and off you go. All computer controlled. You get the benefit of distribution as well as not needing to divide the country. Ships only need to go part of the distance. No inherent canal problems, like having special pilots, and bottlenecking. You can also choose the location based on land based benefits rather than the place being determined by the narrowness of the land and sea depth. of course this is mainly for container ships.

Oh dear, the opportunities for goods to never get to the other side should prevent that solution. Besides, that's doubling the number of loading and unloading plus the opportunity for corruption at each end.

 

That solution was suggested some years ago, and not proceeded with.

[blackcab]

A post which altered the quoted post of another member has been removed.

 

16) You will not make changes to quoted material from other members posts, except for purposes of shortening the quoted post. This cannot be done in such a manner that it alters the context of the original post.

[thaibeachlovers]

18 minutes ago, tomazbodner said:

Had my nose in the project some 20 years ago, but learned that it really had nothing with building that canal. It was a means of blackmailing Singapore to send more money to stop the project. Thai politicians were aware that once they do that, the southern push for separation from Thailand would increase and wherever they make the canal would be the southern border of Thailand. They were never serious about it. But they knew that the Singapore port, which was at that time responsible for much of Singapore's revenue, would take a major hit if this shortcut was used, bypassing Singapore and the pirate infested Malacca Straits, so they'd do all they can to stop it... with money. It is a "project" that resurfaces nearly like clockwork every 20 years.

As for nuclear blasts someone mentioned before - yes, that was proposed some 60 years ago as an "easy" way to dig the canal, but apart from suggestion, it didn't get anywhere.

 

Personally, I'd prefer if they built it like this (Sart canal, Belgium):

 

The problem for crossing are the big hills in the way. Can't put an elevated waterway over them

[Tagged]

23 minutes ago, tomazbodner said:

Had my nose in the project some 20 years ago, but learned that it really had nothing with building that canal. It was a means of blackmailing Singapore to send more money to stop the project. Thai politicians were aware that once they do that, the southern push for separation from Thailand would increase and wherever they make the canal would be the southern border of Thailand. They were never serious about it. But they knew that the Singapore port, which was at that time responsible for much of Singapore's revenue, would take a major hit if this shortcut was used, bypassing Singapore and the pirate infested Malacca Straits, so they'd do all they can to stop it... with money. It is a "project" that resurfaces nearly like clockwork every 20 years.

As for nuclear blasts someone mentioned before - yes, that was proposed some 60 years ago as an "easy" way to dig the canal, but apart from suggestion, it didn't get anywhere.

 

Personally, I'd prefer if they built it like this (Sart canal, Belgium):

 

Looks good, and with ship tunnels to, it will be a masterpiece of 7 earth wonders. 

[tomazbodner]

A view on this from Malaysia, alas 3 years ago, nearly to the date.

 

https://cilisos.my/thailand-is-proposing-an-rm112-billion-river-near-hatyai-and-it-might-change-southeast-asia-forever/

[Hayduke]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

China wants a canal to cross Thailand into the Indian Ocean

 

If China really wants this...

 

They will front the money...but it will be a 'loan' that Thailand have to pay back at 21.5% (or whatever number China chooses) interest. Thailand's Uncle General has already sold out and will sign anything the Chinese put in front of him....and he will then do whatever they tell him to do.

 

So China will have what they want....and Thailand will pay for it.

 

 

[bodga]

Let them build and pay for it then  they can do a Suez  takeover later, good  plan Id  say

[Poet]

34 minutes ago, Misterwhisper said:

The primary reason why they want that canal is so they can send warships into the Indian Ocean faster

My understanding is that it has more to do with ensuring the continued supply of oil from their Middle East suppliers. Today, the US can block that supply by placing a warship in the Straits of Malacca. Oil blockades are a terrifically powerful weapon. Part of the reason why the Japanese launched the attack on Pearl Harbor was that the Americans were about to be in a position to block their oil, so, they figured they needed to strike first.

If China gets into a conflict with America in the South China Sea, oil continuing to arrive via the Kra canal would put them in a far stronger position.
 

[fangless]

6 minutes ago, bodga said:

Let them build and pay for it then  they can do a Suez  takeover later, good  plan Id  say

The brits were in decline when Nassar took back the Suez,  China in in the ascendancy now. No chance of Thailand taking it back any time soon if it is built

[Fex Bluse]

China also wants to build military bases in Thailand. 

 

[fangless]

2 hours ago, Poet said:

You know, if you did a little research you could discover all of this for yourself.

And get it wrong like you!

 

[Surelynot]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No need for locks on the Kra canal, and there isn't a sufficient water supply to use them- just make it at sea level. The spoil could be used to create an artificial island to build the container terminal and shipyards on.

Then that island can be claimed by the Chinese??? Very clever.

[Moonlover]

2 hours ago, baansgr said:

Under the Anglo-Thai peace treaty signed in 1946, they are not allowed to build a canal without permission from the British Government....along with the fact it would offer the resurgents in the South advantages, it isn't going to happen...

 In 1897, Thailand and the British empire agreed not to build a canal so that the regional dominance of the harbour of Singapore would be maintained. An arrangement that is now moot following the end of colonial rule in the region.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_Canal

[warcy]

2 hours ago, PatOngo said:

China, spreading communism to the world! Any takers?

Europeans spreading their language and culture to Americas and Australia is alright?

 

Why the double standard?

 

China is a capitalist country now.

[Surelynot]

3 minutes ago, warcy said:

Europeans spreading their language and culture to Americas and Australia is alright?

That is a fair point.....the English, in particular, wrecked havoc around the world with their missionaries, zealots and flag planting.....the only argument in favor of the West is that 'we' promote democracy rather than communism and dictatorships.

[ICELANDMAN]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

IF Thailand could build such a canal itself - it would be an excellent money spinner. 

 

Info here. 

 

Shipping time could be reduced by 2-3 days at a saving of US$350,000 per journey (for a tanker).

 

It could also dramatically increase the revenue of ports such as Laem Chabang.

Perfect timing of the Chinese government as the Thai government is now desperate for foreign investment

 

[NanLaew]

2 hours ago, Poet said:

... Past governments have rejected the idea, mainly because there would be no particular financial benefit to Thailand while encouraging the Muslim separatists to claim the entire area south of the canal. ...

Correct. It would reduce Bangkok's Klongtoey on the banks of the mighty Chao Phraya and Laem Chabang and Mabtaphut ports in the Gulf of Thailand to nothing more than parochial backwaters, wistfully gazing south at what might have been.

 

Oh, wait...

[cmarshall]

2 hours ago, PatOngo said:

It's been considered for decades!

And rejected for decades.

[Tagged]

23 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

That is a fair point.....the English, in particular, wrecked havoc around the world with their missionaries, zealots and flag planting.....the only argument in favor of the West is that 'we' promote democracy rather than communism and dictatorships.

Any dictatorship that favors us (the west) is acceptable, double standard is the rule as long its beneficial. 

[Moonlover]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

IF Thailand could build such a canal itself - it would be an excellent money spinner. 

 

Info here. 

 

Shipping time could be reduced by 2-3 days at a saving of US$350,000 per journey (for a tanker).

 

It could also dramatically increase the revenue of ports such as Laem Chabang.

I disagree. Using approximate figures, a ship running from off the coast of HCMC, Vietnam to a point in the Andaman Sea off the west coast of the proposed canal routes would cover around 1,200 miles. At 30mph (forget knots for now) the journey would take around 40 hours.

 

If a canal were available the distance would be reduced to 800 miles so, in theory the journey time would be reduced to 26 hours, a saving of 14 hours. However one must factor in the increase in time it would take to negotiate the canal at a much reduced speed plus possible waiting time for a 'passage slot'. 

 

The cost of passage through the canal would have to very cheap (in shipping terms) to temp shipping companies and their captains to undertake the arduous undertaking that a canal transit would involve. Both the Panama and the Suez canals have the great advantage of greatly reduced distances. This project does not.

 

[fangless]

2 minutes ago, Moonlover said:

At 30mph (forget knots for now) the journey would take around 40 hours.

According to "ship and bunker Average speed of VLCC's is under 15knots.  the average is 12.57 laden and 13.3 bunkered.  

[Poet]

Looking at the map I posted at the start of this thread, it occurs to me that Vietnam could end up being the biggest beneficary of this proposed shortcut. The Thai government are talking about developing ports in Thailand to service ships as they pass by on their way to China, but the south of Vietnam is actually in a better geographic position.

In particular, HCMC is hardly any detour, ships wouldn't have to veer up into the gulf. From what I've seen of both countries, I suspect that Vietnam might be better than Thailand at providing the level of service that Singapore has been providing so far.

[fangless]

8 minutes ago, Moonlover said:

Suez canals have the great advantage of greatly reduced distances. This project does not.

The Suez Canal is 193 Km.  Most of the routes under discussion here are less.

[Radar501]

US$30 billion?........far canal!!!!