15 ms·

Only works if you find someone to pay. I listened to a lengthy (German) podcast about international maritime law. To sum it up: you can’t do that much, because

by WA 9mo ago

Only works if you find someone to pay. I listened to a lengthy (German) podcast about international maritime law. To sum it up: you can’t do that much, because you won’t find the responsible person/company/state.

bena 9mo ago
The Outlaw Sea, https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780865477223/theoutlawsea/ https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780865477223/theoutlawsea/ , is a book about all of the ways international water is essentially lawless.
jopsen 9mo ago
Most of the water isn't internal.. getting in and out of the baltic sea goes past Sweden/Denmark. But we probably have promised not to blockade ships in some conventions. And little Denmark (or Sweden) do not benefit from setting a precedence that conventions can be broken. Getting payback is easy though: support Ukraine.
- actionfromafar 9mo ago
  There is no such convention as far as I can tell.
  - nradov 9mo ago
    Most nations have either signed the UNCLOS to otherwise agreed to follow most of those rules. This includes the right of innocent passage through territorial waters. Of course if a vessel engages in hostile acts then they're no longer entitled to exercise that right.
    - actionfromafar 9mo ago
      So escort and inspect then.
  - tokai 9mo ago
    There is. Its the treaty of Versailles. And it reaffirmed the Copenhagen Convention of 1857.
JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
> (German) podcast about international maritime law Russia isn’t even pretending to follow international maritime law. China hasn’t for a decade. And now America is being creative with its interpretations.
- lostlogin 9mo ago
  > And now America is being creative with its interpretations. The US follows the rules carefully when Russia encourages it to. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/31/us/politics/russia-oil-tanker-venezuela.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/31/us/politics/russia-oil-ta...
m4rtink 9mo ago
Still I don't see an issue - basically you either pay the armed coast gard cutter that stands in your way or you don't go through the straight. If you don't cause any trouble, the other cutter on the other end will pay you back. No money, no transit - unless you really like being boarded.
- nradov 9mo ago
  Regardless of what specific rules could be set you have to consider rules of engagement and potential escalation. What happens if a Russian merchant vessel (either legitimately flagged or shadow fleet) refuses to cooperate? Do you use force to stop them? What if they're being escorted by a Russian warship or combat aircraft?
  - dzhiurgis 9mo ago
    You put mines and wait. We need to stop with “what if escalation” mantra when it was always Russians escalating.
    - nradov 9mo ago
      Put mines where? How do you prevent neutral vessels from hitting them? What happens when they inevitably break loose in a storm and drift away? Naval mines are quite effective for closing down a body of water in an unrestricted hot war but we haven't reached that stage yet. EU and NATO countries still want to be able to use the Baltic Sea and Gulf of Finland for their own purposes. You haven't really thought this plan through.
      - dzhiurgis 9mo ago
        Smart mines. There are thousands of them deployed already.
        nradov 9mo ago
        Huh? What are you even talking about? Which models specifically? And how sure are you that they can reliably discriminate between Russian vessels versus others that look and sound identical? You haven't really thought this plan through.
makeitdouble 9mo ago
> German podcast There was a Planet Money episode touching on Maritime law: https://www.npr.org/2025/10/17/nx-s1-5577076/shadow-fleet-russian-oil-tanker-sanctions-boracay https://www.npr.org/2025/10/17/nx-s1-5577076/shadow-fleet-ru... It was about Russian tankers breaking the sanctions, but with a well put explanation of why we can't just stop these ships even with extreme confidence in their fraudulency.
- JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
  > why we can't just stop these ships To be clear, why we don’t want to. Freedom of navigation makes all of us tremendously richer, even if it permits such fuckery. Every great power has, at this point, rejected the notion in limited contexts. And if you’re not concerned about trashing trade, there is no incoherence to ignoring these rules.
  - nradov 9mo ago
    In a hypothetical future where sailing under flags of convenience becomes untenable, all the legitimate merchant vessel owners would rush to register in the US or China. Those vessels would still be able to sail anywhere unmolested. Outside of a few pirate gangs, no one would be stupid enough to screw with them and risk kinetic retaliation. This might increase shipping costs by a few percent. Russia can bluster and threaten but their navy is weak and shrinking. Most of their commissioned warships never venture far from port. Outside of their territorial waters they have minimal capability to protect their own merchant vessels or interdict anyone else's sea lines of communication.
    - MangoToupe 9mo ago
      > all the legitimate merchant vessel owners would rush to register in the US or China The US can't afford to field the navy necessary to back this ams hasn't been able to for many decades
      - JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
aqme28 9mo ago
Or at least a responsible person with money to pay for it. There are plenty of cases of some poor sailor getting stuck with the bill and forced to live on the abandoned boat as a result.
TulliusCicero 9mo ago
You can always make the regulations such that they're actually effective. You could require the company providing the bond be from a reputable country, for example.

by WA 9mo ago

bena 9mo ago

The Outlaw Sea, https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780865477223/theoutlawsea/ https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780865477223/theoutlawsea/ , is a book about all of the ways international water is essentially lawless.

jopsen 9mo ago

Most of the water isn't internal.. getting in and out of the baltic sea goes past Sweden/Denmark. But we probably have promised not to blockade ships in some conventions. And little Denmark (or Sweden) do not benefit from setting a precedence that conventions can be broken. Getting payback is easy though: support Ukraine.

actionfromafar 9mo ago
There is no such convention as far as I can tell.
- nradov 9mo ago
  Most nations have either signed the UNCLOS to otherwise agreed to follow most of those rules. This includes the right of innocent passage through territorial waters. Of course if a vessel engages in hostile acts then they're no longer entitled to exercise that right.
  - actionfromafar 9mo ago
    So escort and inspect then.
- tokai 9mo ago
  There is. Its the treaty of Versailles. And it reaffirmed the Copenhagen Convention of 1857.

JumpCrisscross 9mo ago

> (German) podcast about international maritime law Russia isn’t even pretending to follow international maritime law. China hasn’t for a decade. And now America is being creative with its interpretations.

lostlogin 9mo ago
> And now America is being creative with its interpretations. The US follows the rules carefully when Russia encourages it to. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/31/us/politics/russia-oil-tanker-venezuela.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/31/us/politics/russia-oil-ta...

m4rtink 9mo ago

Still I don't see an issue - basically you either pay the armed coast gard cutter that stands in your way or you don't go through the straight. If you don't cause any trouble, the other cutter on the other end will pay you back. No money, no transit - unless you really like being boarded.

nradov 9mo ago
Regardless of what specific rules could be set you have to consider rules of engagement and potential escalation. What happens if a Russian merchant vessel (either legitimately flagged or shadow fleet) refuses to cooperate? Do you use force to stop them? What if they're being escorted by a Russian warship or combat aircraft?
- dzhiurgis 9mo ago
  You put mines and wait. We need to stop with “what if escalation” mantra when it was always Russians escalating.
  - nradov 9mo ago
    Put mines where? How do you prevent neutral vessels from hitting them? What happens when they inevitably break loose in a storm and drift away? Naval mines are quite effective for closing down a body of water in an unrestricted hot war but we haven't reached that stage yet. EU and NATO countries still want to be able to use the Baltic Sea and Gulf of Finland for their own purposes. You haven't really thought this plan through.
    - dzhiurgis 9mo ago
      Smart mines. There are thousands of them deployed already.
      - nradov 9mo ago
        Huh? What are you even talking about? Which models specifically? And how sure are you that they can reliably discriminate between Russian vessels versus others that look and sound identical? You haven't really thought this plan through.

makeitdouble 9mo ago

> German podcast There was a Planet Money episode touching on Maritime law: https://www.npr.org/2025/10/17/nx-s1-5577076/shadow-fleet-russian-oil-tanker-sanctions-boracay https://www.npr.org/2025/10/17/nx-s1-5577076/shadow-fleet-ru... It was about Russian tankers breaking the sanctions, but with a well put explanation of why we can't just stop these ships even with extreme confidence in their fraudulency.

JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
> why we can't just stop these ships To be clear, why we don’t want to. Freedom of navigation makes all of us tremendously richer, even if it permits such fuckery. Every great power has, at this point, rejected the notion in limited contexts. And if you’re not concerned about trashing trade, there is no incoherence to ignoring these rules.
- nradov 9mo ago
  In a hypothetical future where sailing under flags of convenience becomes untenable, all the legitimate merchant vessel owners would rush to register in the US or China. Those vessels would still be able to sail anywhere unmolested. Outside of a few pirate gangs, no one would be stupid enough to screw with them and risk kinetic retaliation. This might increase shipping costs by a few percent. Russia can bluster and threaten but their navy is weak and shrinking. Most of their commissioned warships never venture far from port. Outside of their territorial waters they have minimal capability to protect their own merchant vessels or interdict anyone else's sea lines of communication.
  - MangoToupe 9mo ago
    > all the legitimate merchant vessel owners would rush to register in the US or China The US can't afford to field the navy necessary to back this ams hasn't been able to for many decades
    - JumpCrisscross 9mo ago

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]

aqme28 9mo ago

Or at least a responsible person with money to pay for it. There are plenty of cases of some poor sailor getting stuck with the bill and forced to live on the abandoned boat as a result.

TulliusCicero 9mo ago

You can always make the regulations such that they're actually effective. You could require the company providing the bond be from a reputable country, for example.