4 ms·

I don't know the details but if private citizens can find these fishing boats, surely the AR Navy could. AR has 3 full-size destroyers, I imagine sailing one

I don't know the details but if private citizens can find these fishing boats, surely the AR Navy could. AR has 3 full-size destroyers, I imagine sailing one through a fishing fleet and even firing a couple shots could chase them off for good? Unless people are getting paid off to look the other way?

fencepost 5y ago
Firing on them could be problematic - at least if you actually sink one. I suspect seizing the vessels and keeping them (returning after payment of ruinous fines) would be more effective.
- heartbeats 5y ago
  Wouldn't that cost them too much in administrative costs? Impounding a vessel is fairly cumbersome, let alone 100 plus crew. Game-theoretically, it seems preferable to sink them without any warning. Consider: the fines would only be paid if they are less than the cost of acquiring a new ship. So if they have to pay fines of 90% of the value, you're still saving them 10% compared to getting a new ship. And if the fines are >100%, they would just ignore it and leave Argentina with the ship. Unless Argentina can turn it into a revenue stream, sinking them unconditionally seems preferable. The Chinese fishing boats don't have anything to give them in a negotiation. All they have to give them is leaving the area, and that is accomplished by sinking the boats too.
  - CameronNemo 5y ago
    Sinking the boat would also provide proof that the vessel was invading.
  - fencepost 5y ago
    Firing on and sinking a flagged vessel and possibly killing crew (also, how do you then prove that you DIDN'T kill anyone?) is exactly the kind of thing that gets governments openly involved. Seizing a private vessel and fining the owners? That's a civil matter and while there may be backroom discussions everything stays civil. "The military of Country X is firing on and sinking our country's vessels" is much more likely to lead to retaliation. China may not have the navy or willingness to project power across the Pacific, but I guarantee they have the capability if focused to utterly destroy the computing infrastructure of the country - and while enthusiastic private parties may not get involved in civil penalties, "Argentina just declared war on us!" is a hell of a rallying cry. Edit: also keep in mind that even governments are not monolithic entities with a single mind. Those costs are coming out of someone's budget.
    - heartbeats 5y ago
      Will China bother to defend their fishing boats, though? Are they that entrenched in the governmental structure, or are they basically just petty thugs?
- CameronNemo 5y ago
  Why would you give China a fishing vessel back? Keep the boat, repurpose it for naval purposes, tell the invaders to fuck off. Of course you gotta cut a lot of economic ties before you start poking pooh bear.
  - gpm 5y ago
    > returning after payment of ruinous fines This sounds a lot more like "selling back". Which makes a lot of sense if you don't have anything better to do with it... just make sure you're selling it back for enough money to make a good profit.
  - fencepost 5y ago
    It's not China that would be (re)purchasing it, it's almost certainly a private entity. Seizing vessels and levying fines are fully within the normal activities and responsibilities of governments, and civil actions plus maybe a few relatively minor criminal charges are much less likely to draw public condemnation and retaliation from the Chinese government.
ridaj 5y ago
It would probably chase a few of them off that day. And then they come back the next. There would likely need to be much more concrete repercussions (imprisonment, fines, asset seizures) for it to actually matter...
phreack 5y ago
They are. There's also a very high political cost of going against China, even illegal Chinese boats, in a country such as Argentina with a high dependence on Chinese relationships, poor sovereignty enforcement, poor military might, massive debt and inflation. There's just not enough of anything to do something about it.
- rorykoehler 5y ago
  I don’t understand this perspective. It’s getting clearer by the day that trying to appease China will come at a far greater cost than virtually any other approach.
  - swagasaurus-rex 5y ago
    “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile-hoping it will eat him last.“ - Winston Churchill
  - FranchuFranchu 5y ago
    The Argentinian government needs to get loans somehow.
- fnord77 5y ago
  yeah, I guess the chinese govt could put a lot of pressure on a country like AR.
jb775 5y ago
Destroyers require a whole crew. Why not get a handful of WW2 era planes with machine guns to patrol the coast? Would be cheap and should be enough firepower to scare off fishing boats.
- phobosanomaly 5y ago
  You'd need boats in the area anyway to gather up the crew when the vessel started taking on water.
  - jb775 5y ago
    ...or you don't guarantee the poachers that luxury.
    - crooked-v 5y ago
      You may want to reconsider the perverse incentives that result from treating illegal fishing as a death sentence.
      - _theory_ 5y ago
        Such as more fish in the ocean

fencepost 5y ago

Firing on them could be problematic - at least if you actually sink one. I suspect seizing the vessels and keeping them (returning after payment of ruinous fines) would be more effective.

heartbeats 5y ago
Wouldn't that cost them too much in administrative costs? Impounding a vessel is fairly cumbersome, let alone 100 plus crew. Game-theoretically, it seems preferable to sink them without any warning. Consider: the fines would only be paid if they are less than the cost of acquiring a new ship. So if they have to pay fines of 90% of the value, you're still saving them 10% compared to getting a new ship. And if the fines are >100%, they would just ignore it and leave Argentina with the ship. Unless Argentina can turn it into a revenue stream, sinking them unconditionally seems preferable. The Chinese fishing boats don't have anything to give them in a negotiation. All they have to give them is leaving the area, and that is accomplished by sinking the boats too.
- CameronNemo 5y ago
  Sinking the boat would also provide proof that the vessel was invading.
- fencepost 5y ago
  Firing on and sinking a flagged vessel and possibly killing crew (also, how do you then prove that you DIDN'T kill anyone?) is exactly the kind of thing that gets governments openly involved. Seizing a private vessel and fining the owners? That's a civil matter and while there may be backroom discussions everything stays civil. "The military of Country X is firing on and sinking our country's vessels" is much more likely to lead to retaliation. China may not have the navy or willingness to project power across the Pacific, but I guarantee they have the capability if focused to utterly destroy the computing infrastructure of the country - and while enthusiastic private parties may not get involved in civil penalties, "Argentina just declared war on us!" is a hell of a rallying cry. Edit: also keep in mind that even governments are not monolithic entities with a single mind. Those costs are coming out of someone's budget.
  - heartbeats 5y ago
    Will China bother to defend their fishing boats, though? Are they that entrenched in the governmental structure, or are they basically just petty thugs?
CameronNemo 5y ago
Why would you give China a fishing vessel back? Keep the boat, repurpose it for naval purposes, tell the invaders to fuck off. Of course you gotta cut a lot of economic ties before you start poking pooh bear.
- gpm 5y ago
  > returning after payment of ruinous fines This sounds a lot more like "selling back". Which makes a lot of sense if you don't have anything better to do with it... just make sure you're selling it back for enough money to make a good profit.
- fencepost 5y ago
  It's not China that would be (re)purchasing it, it's almost certainly a private entity. Seizing vessels and levying fines are fully within the normal activities and responsibilities of governments, and civil actions plus maybe a few relatively minor criminal charges are much less likely to draw public condemnation and retaliation from the Chinese government.

ridaj 5y ago

It would probably chase a few of them off that day. And then they come back the next. There would likely need to be much more concrete repercussions (imprisonment, fines, asset seizures) for it to actually matter...

phreack 5y ago

They are. There's also a very high political cost of going against China, even illegal Chinese boats, in a country such as Argentina with a high dependence on Chinese relationships, poor sovereignty enforcement, poor military might, massive debt and inflation. There's just not enough of anything to do something about it.

rorykoehler 5y ago
I don’t understand this perspective. It’s getting clearer by the day that trying to appease China will come at a far greater cost than virtually any other approach.
- swagasaurus-rex 5y ago
  “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile-hoping it will eat him last.“ - Winston Churchill
- FranchuFranchu 5y ago
  The Argentinian government needs to get loans somehow.
fnord77 5y ago
yeah, I guess the chinese govt could put a lot of pressure on a country like AR.

jb775 5y ago

Destroyers require a whole crew. Why not get a handful of WW2 era planes with machine guns to patrol the coast? Would be cheap and should be enough firepower to scare off fishing boats.

phobosanomaly 5y ago
You'd need boats in the area anyway to gather up the crew when the vessel started taking on water.
- jb775 5y ago
  ...or you don't guarantee the poachers that luxury.
  - crooked-v 5y ago
    You may want to reconsider the perverse incentives that result from treating illegal fishing as a death sentence.
    - _theory_ 5y ago
      Such as more fish in the ocean