Ships under attack in the middle east

[Radox-0]

Well yes it is obvious that it has some potential repercussions but that in itself doesn't mean it is the wrong move to make. I mean as an example the shooting of Mark Duggan sparked the London riots but it doesn't mean the police weren't correct to enforce the law and shoot an armed suspect that had apparently just pointed a gun at them.

Likewise what is the point in agreeing to the EU having sanctions if we're not prepared to enforce them/have a situation where a quite blatant suspected breach of them won't result in a vessel being seized and investigated.

I think that just indicates that it isn't just US leaders like Trump that can be rather ignorant/silly. The line "Iran is not a member of the EU" just says it all really... he's completely clueless regarding what has actually happened here.

Going to have to agree to disagree. I think given the larger scale issues, namely the nuclear treaty and the fact to date we were trying to walk a more soft approach meant that by doing this it was only going to inflame things and cause things to blow up in our face. Plenty of officials knew the ramifications and fact we cannot protect every ship and government no doubt also when they were going to give the tanker back based on promises it will not go to Iran. So yes, in certain situations, given the larger goal trying to be achieved and when retaliation is basically done in the adversary's back yard. More so when things are not actually concrete, hence use of words "allege" and "suspect". While the counter argument would be to impound it and use the time to investigate, the end result will be the exact same as impounding it and inflame tensions. Of course we going to disagree on this point anyways.

I think that just indicates that it isn't just US leaders like Trump that can be rather ignorant/silly. The line "Iran is not a member of the EU" just says it all really... he's completely clueless regarding what has actually happened here.

Or others can read into his line beyond that single part and see he sees this as a untypical escalation and view possibly shared by others on his council.

 

[Radox-0]

But in the same vein, you are using negatives to back your argument: the statement, or lack there of, by the EU on the matter of these sanctions. You make the leap that because nothing has been said, it is clear that this is all about the US and not the EU. Personally, I just think the EU don't want to be drawn into what is now a military matter. Of course, they're not the right entity to do such a thing.


Stop feeding the troll! Lol

Absolutely its an opinion, just like most post in this threads are and plenty have their view points and not going to change. Like how I believe the wall of silence is telling, others think its due to EU wanting to keep quiet in respect to the nuclear peace treaty and yourself believing its down to EU wanting to avoid what is a military matter.

 

[i know nothing]

In regards to the varying opinions on the legal aspect of the seizure, already posted the comments from former head of Sweden, will post it again:

I think this is the fourth time in this thread that you have posted that quote! It's almost as if you're implying that this is the official EU line, which it is not.

So yeah, when you get former EU heads and those on foreign relations council questioning the move, even if legal then says it all really.

What's so special about what a few individuals and this 'think tank' have to say? As above, it appears that you're holding them up as if they're the official EU representatives or suchlike, they're a think tank, nothing more, nothing less. Their 'opinion' will no doubt reflect their previously published position that allows Iran to export oil etc, it's hardly a surprise their views would differ.

 

[Firestar_3x]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49061675

 

[Jokester]

If someone breaks the law and I tell the police, is their arrest at my request?

Once this was highlighted to the authorities they would be duty bound to react.

 

[Nasher]

To be fair could have just ignored the EU tbh. What are they going to do?

The EU are useless in a crisis like this. Notice how silent they are over the whole thing when it's their sanctions which are the reason for it. They should be dealing with it.

 

[IronWarrior]

If someone breaks the law and I tell the police, is their arrest at my request?

Once this was highlighted to the authorities they would be duty bound to react.

International politics isn't as black and white as that, especially with a country like Iran, everyone and everywhere I seen people talk about this, everyone expected Iran to respond in a heavy way by taking a tanker, they already attempted to capture one a week or two before this, it wasn't a question on if, it was when they was gonna take one and now they have, they did have two but released one.

Don't see that tanker being released until their tanker being released.

 

[Jokester]

It would be a massive gaff if the UK was shown to ignore EU sanctions on Syria, they certainly couldn’t feign ignorance if other parties informed them about it.

 

[Nasher]

It would be a massive gaff if the UK was shown to ignore EU sanctions on Syria, they certainly couldn’t feign ignorance if other parties informed them about it.

The other members ignore them so who cares. What are they going to do? Kick us out?

 

[Danny75]

The existing EU sanctions (which were not being enforced in such a heavy-handed way by the EU, nor was this action ordered by Brussels) were chosen by the British establishment as an excuse with which to further help Trump squeeze Iran into negotiating a new deal, and so gain some favour when it comes to the upcoming US/UK trade deal.

I don't agree with the action. Although it's pretty smart - distribute blame to EU as well not just UK and US. And the EU cannot complain much because it was their sanctions despite probably not liking the action either.

Iran's capture of the tanker was pretty smart too - get one of their fishing boats to send out a distress call, and either the tanker sails into Iranian waters to attend the distress call, or it doesn't and is guilty of ignoring maritime law.

So the laws are being used and abused on either side, it's not just a simple matter of enforcing them without any added context.

 

[dowie]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49061675

Interesting, wonder if the pro Iranian posters will condemn the seizure now.

The existing EU sanctions (which were not being enforced in such a heavy-handed way by the EU, nor was this action ordered by Brussels) were chosen by the British establishment as an excuse with which to further help Trump squeeze Iran into negotiating a new deal, and so gain some favour when it comes to the upcoming US/UK trade deal.

It certainly isn't clear that the sanctions have previously been knowingly breached in this way thus obliging a member state to react to the breach in the first place.

The idea that it was done to gain favour or was used as an excuse seems rather dubious especially given the UK's current stance re: Iran which certainly isn't in line with that of the US (though wouldn't be surprised if that did start to change going forwards given Iran's actions here). The reality is that the UK was informed of this likely breach of sanctions (and it seems was monitoring the ship too/already aware) they can hardly then turn around and decline to intervene/just blatantly not enforce sanctions that the UK agreed to enforce.

 

[Nasher]

The existing EU sanctions (which were not being enforced in such a heavy-handed way by the EU, nor was this action ordered by Brussels) were chosen by the British establishment as an excuse with which to further help Trump squeeze Iran into negotiating a new deal, and so gain some favour when it comes to the upcoming US/UK trade deal.

I don't agree with the action. Although it's pretty smart - distribute blame to EU as well not just UK and US. And the EU cannot complain much because it was their sanctions despite probably not liking the action either.

Iran's capture of the tanker was pretty smart too - get one of their fishing boats to send out a distress call, and either the tanker sails into Iranian waters to attend the distress call, or it doesn't and is guilty of ignoring maritime law.

So the laws are being used and abused on either side, it's not just a simple matter of enforcing them without any added context.

But now they will probably all be ignored, so Iranian civilians are at risk due to their own actions.

 

[Danny75]

The reality is that the UK was informed of this likely breach of sanctions (and it seems was monitoring the ship too/already aware) they can hardly then turn around and decline to intervene/just blatantly not enforce sanctions that the UK agreed to enforce.

I don't think there's any doubt that they were monitoring the ship. The marines weren't called upon by Gibraltar authorities but rather the other way around. Locals in Gibraltar (where I am) know how things work. This is not an action that any Gibraltarian chief minister chooses to take or to suggest to the UK. Way above his pay-grade because of the impact on Foreign Affairs (which the UK is responsible for concerning Gibraltar). He will have been asked by the UK if he would help them, and when Fabian Picardo says it was an independent decision it means he decided to help without needing to be squeezed. Not an uncommon trick for a politician to say something which isn't a lie in one sense but intended to give the wrong impression to others. It was not an independent action.

I would rather he would have urged the UK to reconsider the action as it does look like piracy and/or unfair to many people (Iran is not in the EU and the straits need to be free for navigation or it could have a domino effect on other important shipping lanes, and there is also worldwide sympathy for how the people in Syria are suffering), and also because in ensuing weeks the mood displayed in Gibraltar on social media has been clearly against keeping the Iranian tanker much longer, and now Picardo is scrabbling and attending high level talks in the UK to try and de-escalate. Do have some sympathy with him, because at the end of the day it was either choose to help and say it was an independent decision and just look like a bit of a Pinocchio. Or refuse and be forced, and prepare for a negative campaign against him directed by the Foreign Office until he would have to step down and someone else filled his shoes. In reality, the same situation as with the US and the UK being its proxy/puppet.

 

[i know nothing]

The existing EU sanctions (which were not being enforced in such a heavy-handed way by the EU, nor was this action ordered by Brussels)...

Since when has Brussels had the power to order military intervention? All Brussels can do is rely on its membership to carry out its will with regards to sanctions. Are you suggesting that Brussels passing these sanctions was a complete waste of time?

...were chosen by the British establishment as an excuse with which to further help Trump squeeze Iran into negotiating a new deal, and so gain some favour when it comes to the upcoming US/UK trade deal.

So damned if you do and damned if you don't? So how would you go about applying sanctions? Throw a dice?

I don't agree with the action. Although it's pretty smart - distribute blame to EU as well not just UK and US. And the EU cannot complain much because it was their sanctions despite probably not liking the action either.

Who is distributing blame to the EU? Iran doesn't appear to be doing that, the U.K. doesn't appear to be doing it either. Who is to say the Spanish wouldn't have done exactly the same thing and could have ended up in the same position as the U.K.? It stands to reason that the first people to respond were going to be the ones who would draw the Iranians ire.

Iran's capture of the tanker was pretty smart too - get one of their fishing boats to send out a distress call, and either the tanker sails into Iranian waters to attend the distress call, or it doesn't and is guilty of ignoring maritime law.

Ti-for-tat is smart now?

So the laws are being used and abused on either side....

That remains to be seen.

 

[dowie]

I would rather he would have urged the UK to reconsider the action as it does look like piracy and/or unfair to many people (Iran is not in the EU and the straits need to be free for navigation or it could have a domino effect on other important shipping lanes, and there is also worldwide sympathy for how the people in Syria are suffering),

Sorry, just to clarify, this didn't happen in the part of the strait itself where freedom of navigation applies but was only able to happen because the ship decided to enter Gibraltar's waters. If the ship hadn't done that it could have just carried on as most Iranian owned vessels probably do already.

I don't see how they could have just ignored it and ignored the US here, it would be completely ridiculous, especially when the UK was apparently fully aware of it too in addition to the US monitoring it.

I mean from the US perspective it would be like calling the police because you've seen say a black youth with a knife and the police replying that they're aware of the black youth with the knife too but they don't want to arrest him as they're worried that the community might kick off a bit and they're having a tense time at the moment and have already committed to reducing stop and search etc...

 

[Radox-0]

I think this is the fourth time in this thread that you have posted that quote! It's almost as if you're implying that this is the official EU line, which it is not.

What's so special about what a few individuals and this 'think tank' have to say? As above, it appears that you're holding them up as if they're the official EU representatives or suchlike, they're a think tank, nothing more, nothing less. Their 'opinion' will no doubt reflect their previously published position that allows Iran to export oil etc, it's hardly a surprise their views would differ.

Actually no. First time was a awkward Edit after another post was made hence a repost. I was then asked later in the chain what I am referring to so posted it again. So sure you can accuse me of posting it twice.

Where have I holding them up as official EU representatives? On the contrary my position has been, the lack of EU representatives mentioning anything after we first enforced the sanctions spoke volumes to me, other people not so much, take you pick. As I have clearly mentioned the only comments have been from Spain's ministry and that single comment, while not someone who is a current head, is a former head and still an interesting take.

 

[i know nothing]

Actually no. First time was a awkward Edit after another post was made hence a repost. I was then asked later in the chain what I am referring to so posted it again. So sure you can accuse me of posting it twice.

I'll take your word for it.

Where have I holding them up as official EU representatives? On the contrary my position has been, the lack of EU representatives mentioning anything after we first enforced the sanctions spoke volumes to me, other people not so much, take you pick. As I have clearly mentioned the only comments have been from Spain's ministry and that single comment, while not someone who is a current head, is a former head and still an interesting take.

It seems rather strange that you would put so much stock into what one retired politician and a think tank had to say on the matter. It was almost as if you were implying that they represented the EU, that's how it came across to me when I read your comments.

I note NATO has now condemned Iran's move, so I guess that will have to do as far as EU representation goes, seeing as the EU comprises the majority of NATO's members.

 

[Radox-0]

I'll take your word for it.


It seems rather strange that you would put so much stock into what one retired politician and a think tank had to say on the matter. It was almost as if you were implying that they represented the EU, that's how it came across to me when I read your comments.

I note NATO has now condemned Iran's move, so I guess that will have to do as far as EU representation goes, seeing as the EU comprises the majority of NATO's members.

I do not put so much stock into a single retired persons position and not even the single Spanish Ministry's comments. However seeing as they are the only comments from a ministry inside the EU or a former head (who is on a think tank who comprises of similar power people and I suspect have a similar view to their head) then they are interesting. Hopefully I have cleared up the implication in that case though I have said many times, and with my position being contrary to that through the virtue of there being no EU comment in regards to our seizure of Grace 1 throughout is evident.

As one would expect of Nato and even the EU to condemn the tit-for-tat action. You can actually look further and see France and Germany put comments out: https://www.dw.com/en/germany-and-france-condemn-irans-seizure-of-british-tanker/a-49665532

France expressed its "full solidarity" with Britain, adding that its was "very concerned" by the seizure of the tanker.

and

"This is an unjustifiable interference in commercial shipping that dangerously escalates an already tense situation," the German Foreign Office wrote on Twitter.

Indeed even the external action arm put out a brief statement: https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters...seizure-two-ships-iranian-authorities-gulf_en

The seizure of two ships by Iranian authorities in the Strait of Hormuz is of deep concern. In an already tense situation, this development brings risks of further escalation and undermines ongoing work to find a way to resolve current tensions.

We urge the immediate release of the remaining ship and its crew, and call for restraint to avoid further tensions. Freedom of navigation must be respected at all times.

 

[Danny75]

Sorry, just to clarify, this didn't happen in the part of the strait itself where freedom of navigation applies but was only able to happen because the ship decided to enter Gibraltar's waters. If the ship hadn't done that it could have just carried on as most Iranian owned vessels probably do already.

You'll know how narrow the straits are, and so much shipping traffic. Unlike Sarah Palin and her Alaska/Russia claim, Morocco can actually be seen from Gibraltar. In fact slightly west of Gibraltar there are no "international waters" in the actual straits - it's half Spanish and half Moroccan. The first bit of international water as you sail east is very close to Gibraltar's own waters.



Even if the tanker briefly entered Gibraltar waters, it's neither here nor there other than for pseudo-justification for something unjustified. Big ships have to alter course to avoid each other in the straits. I don't believe Iran was warned "your ships may not pass through EU waters. If they do they will be arrested", either. That would still have been harsh but with fair warning. The sanctions were meant for EU countries cooperating with anything to do with oil going to Syria. So to have done this is a huge stretch. Sure, they will have looked at the laws and decided how to dress it up. And we're watching their theatre now.

The UK is partly responsible (along with Morocco and Spain) for ensuring freedom of navigation through the straits, had done a great job historically, and this action is a big blow to that in my opinion. Similar to the UK not releasing Venezuela's gold. It can be dressed up in a myriad of ways but at the end of the day others are not going to gain any trust that the UK is a safe place to keep gold/money. The UK pulling these stunts in the waters of its quasi-colony looks bad. Others won't gain trust that the UK continues to remain a reliable partner in ensuring freedom of navigation through the straits of Gibraltar. And rather than staying impartial, some countries may begin to support Spain on their claim to Gibraltar.

 

[Dis86]

Get in, everyone's favourite Russian shill has joined in! Not bothered to read the thread, not bothered to see that his opinions are not based on facts and is finding excuses to justify breaching sanctions. It's not as if the sanctions are free to view on the EU website and are easily found with a Google search. Nuh uh.