4 ms·

https://www.businessinsider.com/us-north-korean-seize-ships-international-waters-2018-3?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/us-north-korean-seize-ships-...

alistairSH 3y ago
Yes, that falls within the exceptions I mentioned - in this case, NK ships are suspected of transferring sanctioned good from ship to ship to avoid sanctions. Like manythings involving the high seas, there’s a fair bit of gray. But Iran’s propensity to stop, search, and seize vessels in international waters isn’t generally one of those gray things.
- salek110 3y ago
  What exactly are US ships doing 10,000 miles from home?
  - vkou 3y ago
    In the case of this part of the ocean, various things, but they've recently been seizing Iranian ships.
  - alistairSH 3y ago
    In this case, working with our allies to enforce international sanctions.
- synetic 3y ago
  The ship the Iranians tried to stop violated sanctions of the Iranian government. The U.S. is a bit hypocritical. We ignore U.N. resolutions when it suits us in case you think violating U.N. sanctions somehow is a higher standard than violating Iranian sanctions.
  - tptacek 3y ago
    As you can see from the Iranian reaction to USN assets arriving on the scene, Iran simply doesn't get to enforce sanctions on other countries in international waters. Reasonable people will read USN interdiction of Iranian-based tankers as lawful enforcement of sanctions, and Iranian retaliatory seizures as piracy.
    - synetic 3y ago
      You may define “reasonable” any way you want to. The fact is that U.S. has sufficient military power to enforce its will on others while having enough soft power to, usually, wrap those actions in a cloak of U.N. legitimacy. One should not confuse this with morality or justice or righteousness of action. The U.S. has a long history of hypocritical justifications against those it deems foes. For instance we didn’t really care all that much when Israel acquired nuclear weapons but suddenly care when the Iranians want to acquire them. We look askance when others do to us as we do to them but we shouldn’t. It’s ok to admit that we (the U.S.) are hypocrites when it comes to this stuff. We decry (justly in my opinion) the Russian invasion of Ukraine while having engaged in even more pointlessly stupid and evil invasions of other nations (like Iraq).
      - tptacek 3y ago
        That is correct. The US has sufficient military power to enforce a global sanctions regime on Iran, and everybody knows it, very much including Iran. Iran, meanwhile, has no such ability. Sovereign states relate to each other in a Hobbesian state of nature, not under the due process laws of any one country. If Iran could do anything other than prey on hapless commercial vessels, people might look at the situation differently. But they can't, and people see it for what it appears to be: illegitimate.
        synetic 3y ago
        But they can't, and people see it for what it appears to be: illegitimate. During the Revolutionary War British officers were aghast when American soldiers deliberately tried to shoot British officers during battle. It was considered uncivilized by the British to do this. People fight back any way that they are able to. It’s convenient for the superpower to say forms of warfare or striking back are “illegitimate” when those forms are contrary to how they want things to be fought. It is not illegitimate for Iran to fight back the only way they can.

alistairSH 3y ago

Yes, that falls within the exceptions I mentioned - in this case, NK ships are suspected of transferring sanctioned good from ship to ship to avoid sanctions. Like manythings involving the high seas, there’s a fair bit of gray. But Iran’s propensity to stop, search, and seize vessels in international waters isn’t generally one of those gray things.

salek110 3y ago
What exactly are US ships doing 10,000 miles from home?
- vkou 3y ago
  In the case of this part of the ocean, various things, but they've recently been seizing Iranian ships.
- alistairSH 3y ago
  In this case, working with our allies to enforce international sanctions.
synetic 3y ago
The ship the Iranians tried to stop violated sanctions of the Iranian government. The U.S. is a bit hypocritical. We ignore U.N. resolutions when it suits us in case you think violating U.N. sanctions somehow is a higher standard than violating Iranian sanctions.
- tptacek 3y ago
  As you can see from the Iranian reaction to USN assets arriving on the scene, Iran simply doesn't get to enforce sanctions on other countries in international waters. Reasonable people will read USN interdiction of Iranian-based tankers as lawful enforcement of sanctions, and Iranian retaliatory seizures as piracy.
  - synetic 3y ago
    You may define “reasonable” any way you want to. The fact is that U.S. has sufficient military power to enforce its will on others while having enough soft power to, usually, wrap those actions in a cloak of U.N. legitimacy. One should not confuse this with morality or justice or righteousness of action. The U.S. has a long history of hypocritical justifications against those it deems foes. For instance we didn’t really care all that much when Israel acquired nuclear weapons but suddenly care when the Iranians want to acquire them. We look askance when others do to us as we do to them but we shouldn’t. It’s ok to admit that we (the U.S.) are hypocrites when it comes to this stuff. We decry (justly in my opinion) the Russian invasion of Ukraine while having engaged in even more pointlessly stupid and evil invasions of other nations (like Iraq).
    - tptacek 3y ago
      That is correct. The US has sufficient military power to enforce a global sanctions regime on Iran, and everybody knows it, very much including Iran. Iran, meanwhile, has no such ability. Sovereign states relate to each other in a Hobbesian state of nature, not under the due process laws of any one country. If Iran could do anything other than prey on hapless commercial vessels, people might look at the situation differently. But they can't, and people see it for what it appears to be: illegitimate.
      - synetic 3y ago
        But they can't, and people see it for what it appears to be: illegitimate. During the Revolutionary War British officers were aghast when American soldiers deliberately tried to shoot British officers during battle. It was considered uncivilized by the British to do this. People fight back any way that they are able to. It’s convenient for the superpower to say forms of warfare or striking back are “illegitimate” when those forms are contrary to how they want things to be fought. It is not illegitimate for Iran to fight back the only way they can.