The legal grounds: The oil was shipped by a US company in violation of US law. American companies can’t do business with an organisation that the US government has designated as a terrorist organisation. Thus American authorities siezed the ship and its cargo.
Yes. And were fined. But that’s perfunctory so that they can make more money smuggling oil. The sanctions are solely enforced by the U.S., without consent of the UN.
"But the Suez Rajan case was unique at the time of the transfer because it was owned by the Los Angeles-based private equity firm Oaktree Capital Management. "
At the time the ship was being used for moving US sanctioned oil, it was own by a US company. That supports @NateNate60 's statements.
That is correct and why they could prosecute this case. But they have been seizing oil since 2019. And even if all those tankers were partially owned by US companies, it still doesn’t change the fact that this amounts to piracy. Defending international injustice with legalese doesn’t absolve what this is. When China seizes our tankers because the parts were made in China, will you defend them?
And even if all those tankers were partially owned by US companies,
If the tankers or company is operating in the US, then they are bound by US laws no matter where they are in the world. A company can’t benefit from the protection of the US government and laws at home only to go abroad to commit US crimes.
It’s not an act. I care about this world I live in. I don’t debate to convince the people that disagree with me. I do it to show that those people don’t use logic and reason to decide their beliefs. They want the illusion of confirmation bias. I try to disrupt that illusion. We need to see the world from different perspectives.
It’s difficult when you first begin to realize that what you’ve been told is the truth your whole life is lie. It happened to me with the Iraq war and the PNAC report. I try to remain compassionate, because, as an American, I’ve been there. The truth sucks. It’s easier to believe the lies.
I hate that “confirmation bias” have become moo words with people nowadays.
The logic is pretty sound:
A company that does business in the United States must comply with American laws.
It is forbidden under American law for a company that operates from the United States to do business with Iran.
The company, through its child, shipped oil from Iran.
American authorities, enforcing American law, ordered the company to divert the ship and turn over the oil for confiscation because the shipment was illegal.
Oil is confiscated.
I remark that sanctions do not require the approval of the United Nations. Under customary international law, it is an application of sovereign authority. Any country can apply sanctions and can do so in any way you like. What the USA has said is that “if you want to do business here, we forbid you from doing business with Iran”.
I appreciate you going the distance with that guy. I don’t think they changed their mind, nor do I think they have the capacity to. You certainly kept it on level for us in the peanut gallery though. Cheers!
You owe me $250 million for using the word “moo.” I sanctioned you 5 hours ago, without your knowledge or approval. You have to do what I want, because I have a bigger stick. I can make up whatever law or sanction I want, and you have to follow it or I’ll destroy your town. Pretzel logic. Call it confirmation bias or sucking your own dick, but that’s what is going on.
It was an analogy. I don’t want to block you. I want to have an intelligent discussion about the merits of this act. But people just want to defend America despite its despotic acts. It makes me sad.
The analogy is closer to you getting banned by a lemmy instance for breaking their rules when replying to comments from another instance. Just because you’re abroad doesn’t mean you’re ungoverned.
International law (also known as public international law and the law of nations) is the set of guidelines, norms, and standards usually forming the default behavior between states. Inter means between thus outside of territories thus absent of sovereignty, thus isn’t a law at all (See: Westphalian System) and is rather a common-practice between states - unless they wish otherwise due to their own reasoning. (Source](en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_law).
This isn’t an action between states. A US based company bought oil from Iran (hence why it’s Iranian oil, they’re referencing origin, not ownership) to sell to China. That us based company was found to be in violation of US sanctions against Iran. They capitulated because they still wish to do business in the US.
As a side note, all private equity firms should have their assets seized and board members guillotined. They bring absolutely nothing of value to society.
I could not give less of a fuck what a people like you think or believe. Your “arguments” are born out of propaganda. Hell, half of your fucking posts I’ve seem were “this is written by a website based in a country I don’t like”, too bad truth is not written by propaganda websites you love to browse.
Go back to hexbear, grad, or whatever shithole you crawled out of, degenerate tankie scum
The contraband cargo is now the subject of a civil forfeiture action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The United States’ forfeiture complaint alleges that the oil aboard the vessel is subject to forfeiture based on U.S. terrorism and money laundering statutes.
The complaint alleges a scheme involving multiple entities affiliated with Iran’s IRGC and the IRGC-Qods Force (IRGC-QF) to covertly sell and transport Iranian oil to a customer abroad. Participants in the scheme attempted to disguise the origin of the oil using ship-to-ship transfers, false automatic identification system reporting, falsified documents and other means. The complaint further alleges that the charterer of the vessel used the U.S. financial system to facilitate the transportation of Iranian oil
I am proud that America is finally doing something about this illegal oil trade. We have always turned a blind eye, and now we are actually forcing our hand to keep Iran from becoming a potential world-ending regime with no human rights for Iranians.
Yep. Anyone can do that, actually. I can declare you a terrorist. It’s totally my right to do so, but the question is–so what? What am I going to do about it?
The US government has declared the Iranian organisation a terrorist organisation. What have they done about it?
The amount of outrage on this thread is just ignorant people learning how international geopolitics and the concept of absolute state sovereignty work for the first time. Yes, it is the case that big countries get to stick their fingers into the business of little countries. Yes, it is unfair. But that’s how it is and that’s how it’s always gonna be for the foreseeable future. That’s how it always has been for all of human history. From Ur to Rome to Vienna to London to Washington. From Chang’an to Beijing to Nanjing to Tokyo and now back to Beijing. In the next century maybe it will be some other country kicking around everyone else instead of the US. But I can practically guarantee that there will be kicking and there will be people continuing to complain about how unfair it is, because it is and always has been.
I’d like to say we should do better as a species, but in reality, what we have now is really fucking amazing compared to when Genghis Khan would come romping around town destroying your villages and murdering your people, or the Romans coming and demanding fifty talents of silver by sunset or else, or the Belgians planting rubber trees in your backyard.
we should do better as a species, but in reality, what we have now is really fucking amazing
I always say this when people say we should burn it all down. Sometimes they say it flippantly but some people actually think it’s a good idea to hit the reset button. Like it’s a good idea to go back to subsistence agriculture and hunter gatherer lifestyle. No, thanks, overall, things are actually going really well all things considered.
If China sanctioned the US as a terrorist state and discovered a Chinese company was illegally selling oil to the US, would you be upset with the Chinese government bringing that company to court? And would you say it’s wrong that as part of the court proceedings, the company in violation agrees to ship the oil to a Chinese port, for the Chinese government to seize?
If that sounds acceptable to you, you should really consider why you find it unacceptable and propaganda when the roles are switched.
Im not disputing that, I was asking for the rational behind the worlds largest terrorist state (the US) trying to dictate who is and who isnt a terrorist.,
Some states do use their own definitions of terrorism to explain why it’s bad when other people do it but OK when they do it, but that’s definitely not a uniform definition.
the calculated use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective.
Britannica
The use of violence or the threat of violence, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political goals.
American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
the use of intentional violence and fear to achieve political or ideological aims. The term is used in this regard primarily to refer to intentional violence during peacetime or in the context of war against non-combatants.
Wiki
(Government, Politics & Diplomacy) systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve some goal
Collins English Dictionary
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes… government or resistance to government by means of terror.
It’s an American ship. They can’t transport Iranian oil for the same reason they can’t transport cocaine. It’s illegal.
The DoJ told the company they were breaking the law. The company admitted wrongdoing and told the captain to turn around and bring the oil to the US. By handing over the oil, the company hopes their fines will be reduced.
No naval forces were involved. No piracy, no interception at sea. Just a company trying to get out of hot water after it was busted
It’s like no one reads the stories anymore. There was no military involvement here. The company was notified through legal channels they they were in violation and willingly relinquished the ship/oil.
Well, isn’t that what they said? With universal free trade, there would be no concept of dirty money, no money laundering, no need to counter anything… /s
I’m not sure how long the Chinese are going to tolerate this. They can surely seize American assets in retaliation. All because the orange guy had to replace the JCPOA Iran nuclear deal with nothing but sanctions.
All because the orange guy had to replace the JCPOA Iran nuclear deal with nothing but sanctions.
Biden has maintained and increased those sanctions in response to Iran maintaining and increasing their human rights abuses. This isn’t a fuck up.
Chinese are going to tolerate this.
Remember, China has the upper hand in trade with Russia, and extracting value from that. Iran is blending its oil with Malaysia, and so China is paying a reduced rate for contraband oil there, too.
I mean… yea… but Saudi Arabia is only our partner if we have Trump as president, Israel we are starting to see discussion about it. Obviously it is egregious but we don’t have enough left wing politicians to stop it just yet. And France? They aren’t even worse than the US itself! ;3
They cant keep blaming the guy thats been gone 3 years, when the new one has had a trifecta and did nothing. Other than keep most of Trumps worst policies in place.
I mean we have held this sanction against Iran for 40 years, Trump left the nuclear deal and we are trying to rejoin it. These newest sanctions make sense in the context of uprisings in Iran, and the nuclear deal.
In their view propaganda only comes from rouge nations, and their superior intellect safeguards them from the impact of foreign propaganda. Despite living in the worlds most propagandized country.
most is an overstatement. Yeah I think we are, it seems to take a lot of work to get past my American biases when reading world news. I could fall into “America Bad” leftist takes, and that would be just as lazy.
Guess it depends on what we call “censorship”. Is it state enacted censorship of personal opinions? Is it censorship of porn? Is it how many reporters get killed each year?
At least the US has the 1st amendment; a lot of countries don’t, or circumvent free speech laws with censorship in one way or another (free speech for me, not for thee).
I somehow don’t think the US is more propagandized than, say, North Korea. I want a source on this or I’m just going to assume you’re pulling it out of your ass.
Just from the sheer fact that Americans probably consume more media than North Koreans, you would expect Americans to be more propagandized than North Koreans.
Yeah I’m pretty sure if I were being propagandized I would have heard about it on the news. In North Korea they believe that Kim Jong Un doesn’t poop. And I know that’s true because I saw it on the news.
There are two types of propaganda, the north Korean one which boils down to the party and leader who can do nothing wrong, and as a result there is only one truth, because the government controls it.
The western method is to flood the person with a constant barrage of information, stimulus, and dopamine, it doesn’t matters the subject “the conservatives are sucking off and swallowing the loads of corporations again” “some trannny will ask you to call him she, and eat your children” in this case the truth doesn’t matter either, as truth has become another commodity to be bought as capital demands, you can buy your own truth, you can even get your own prophet, for the low price of 5 each month.
“In addition, pursuant to a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) and a seizure warrant issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Empire Navigation, the operating company of the vessel carrying the contraband cargo, agreed to cooperate and transport the Iranian oil to the United States – an operation which has now concluded.”
Link came from this CNN article. Would you say that ignoring the facts of a situation and using it to push an agenda would be, perhaps, propaganda?
You didn’t answer my other question – if China seized oil from an international shipping company, because China had sanctions against selling oil to the US after designated them a sponsor of terror, and a Chinese vessel was going to be used, would you be just as upset?
Because I’m fine with the US seizing goods from a US ship if they’re violating US trade sanctions – just like I’m fine with China seizing goods from a Chinese ship if they’re violating Chinese trade sanctions. If the company didn’t want to have their cargo seized, they shouldn’t have used a US/Chinese ship to act against US/Chinese sanctions.
"In addition, pursuant to a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) and a seizure warrant issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Empire Navigation, the operating company of the vessel carrying the contraband cargo, agreed to cooperate and transport the Iranian oil to the United States – an operation which has now concluded."
DOJ Press Release
Is playing fast and loose with the facts also okay when you do it?
Human rights abusers when they aren’t our allies. US has been pretty chill with Saudi Arabia and they literally dismembered someone on foreign soil because they vocally opposed the tyrannical regime.
Saudi Arabia is allies only with our Republican governments. They have been and are going to keep effectively sanctioning us by raising the price of oil before our next election.
The court filings also show allegations that “profits from oil sales support the IRGC’s full range of malign activities, including the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery, support for terrorism and both domestic and international human rights abuses.”
Plenty of hell states deserve sanctions, including the US. Being a hell state isn’t a criterion for sanctions. You’re just parroting US propaganda which pretends human rights are why it applies sanctions when in reality that is the last thing on their mind.
I said “Being a hell state isn’t a criterion for sanctions.” Sanctions don’t work the way you think they do. They don’t actually punish the people who make hell states the hell states that they are. If they did, then the hell state that would be among those that deserve it the most would be the USA. Do you agree with this?
Yeah I’m all for destabilizing them too. Let’s do it in lieu of carbon taxes since it will have the same net result for the average American.
I am most definitely pro-intervention. Freedom is non-negotiable, and free countries have a moral imperative to spread liberal democracy across the planet. The strong have an obligation to protect the weak.
There is a lot of misreporting and misunderstanding about this. OFAC (Office of Foreign Asset Control) exists within Treasury and is responsible for enforcing sanctions usually created by executive order ("EO"), or very rarely, Congress. EOs and OFAC interpretation are very specific: some sanctions, such as the ones on the export of Iranian crude/products, are explicitly extraterritorial. Meaning, the US reserves the right to come after you no matter what country you are a citizen of or where you company is domiciled. It's very rare for them to try this one anyone who doesn't have US nexus since there is not much practically speaking they can do, but they could in theory. OFAC has, no pun intended, FAQs for all of this easily found at their site.
Now, this case was extra stupid. Oaktree is the single biggest PE investor in shipping, going in heavy starting a bit before the financial crash and going in really big with Eagle Bulk c. 2012 or so. Oaktree is, as stated, a US company, but that wasn't the main reason: they did this transaction in USD. Which was stupid, but having met the bastards at Empire a few times, I can say they are not the brightest bunch (as as far as I understand they are doing most of this kind of work in EUR with some shady banks nowadays anyway). Anyway any transaction in USD goes through the SWIFT system (which is why kicking Russia out of it was such a massive deal). This means there was simply no way this was not going to get eventually scanned since banks have repurposed their AML programs into sanctions programs or subscribe to sanctions-specific services like PoleStar's PupleTrac (what my company uses) or Windward or Lloyd's, etc. Now the dirty secret is that the banks don't really understand movement data that well, but Empires has done this (and Venezuela) so often for so long, someone at Treasury probably said, "OK, since we got Oaktree all up in this, let's make an example of of these guys to scare others away from these trades."
[spoiler alert: it did not scare others away from these trades and most folks estimate there are about 1,000 large tankers that form a so called "Dark Fleet" trading in Iran, Venezuela, and now Russia since both crude and product have broken the price cap at all Russian export locations. You cam make about 40% more shipping such cargos than legal ones.]
Anyway, I digress, The the point is that OFAC doesn't care if you have US nexus; it just makes you easier to catch if you do. Source: I am the head of credit and compliance for a large oil company that works closely with the shipping industry.
OFAC stole a wire transfer to my landlord. I assume it’s because he has a Middle Eastern-sounding name.
They provided me a case number and I mailed in the forms I found online to dispute the seizure. They sent me a letter saying that they had no record of that case. I realized the futility of fighting the government over a couple of grand and switched to depositing money orders into his account and let it go. Created a lot of extra effort (not that it was difficult, just tedious) on my end.
It's far more complicated than that. You need X amount of energy density to do Y amount of work, and there is certain specialized work that is only now beginning to look for replacements, although well-to-wake is tough to do.
Eh, for one we are hyper specialized oil company so not quite as evil as your run of the mill ones. We sell fuel to ships, so unless everyone suddenly agrees they don't need the 90% of the world's commodities and manufactured goods anymore, you gotta use ships. And in a moderate defense, ships by far the least polluting way to transport stuff by ton/mile.
Me personally I'm a big old lefty, even here within the EU's context (where the American Democrats would be a center-right party).I just fell into this role and happened to be good at it. My function is far too niche for any green energy projects. At the core of what we do and the bit I supervise, we are basically providing short term liquidity to shipping companies, since you sell fuel on unsecured credit. Believe me I've looked (and keep looking) at green and adjacent spaces.
Lemmy isn’t just programmers and cryptobros fyi. Lots of people have interesting jobs and hardly anyone works 100% of the time. Gotta shitpost somewhere.
This entire thread is a masterclass on how a corrupt country can brainwash it’s citizens into accepting violence against others on the whims of a stock portfolio.
What? In the article it does state, that the company had to pay for the significant expenses of bringing the ship to the US. So it was likely seized somewhere, where the US has no jurisdication. This is just piracy and it is in line with US crimes like murdering an Iranian diplomat, they invited to negotiations.
Critizising these blatant crime sby the US, that are similiar to what China is trying to pull in the Sea around East Asia has nothing to do, with being pro Putin or pro China.
But it is no wonder, that China and Russia can muster support around the world, despite the shit they pull, if the US is still acting high and mighty, while being drenched in blood.
I’d point out that this ship was owned by American capitalists trying to boost the value of their stock portfolio, but I think that might cause your head to explode.
“In addition, pursuant to a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) and a seizure warrant issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Empire Navigation, the operating company of the vessel carrying the contraband cargo, agreed to cooperate and transport the Iranian oil to the United States – an operation which has now concluded.”
Damn this is some new age piracy with the company itself transporting the contraband.
This is why venture capitalists win. You choose hills to die on that have no bearing whatsoever and fabricate the existence of violence on the hills.
The cargo wasn’t american and the company was owned by an american equity company. By that logic half of the US is under chinese jurisdication, because it is owned by chinese companies.
Also nice, that instead of interacting with half of what i said your immediate go to is to insult me as tankie. China is pulling a lot of shit, but if that is the best the US can measure itself by, then the US is just incredibly pathetic.
The contraband cargo is now the subject of a civil forfeiture action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The United States’ forfeiture complaint alleges that the oil aboard the vessel is subject to forfeiture based on U.S. terrorism and money laundering statutes.
The complaint alleges a scheme involving multiple entities affiliated with Iran’s IRGC and the IRGC-Qods Force (IRGC-QF) to covertly sell and transport Iranian oil to a customer abroad. Participants in the scheme attempted to disguise the origin of the oil using ship-to-ship transfers, false automatic identification system reporting, falsified documents and other means. The complaint further alleges that the charterer of the vessel used the U.S. financial system to facilitate the transportation of Iranian oil
I called you a tankie cause your blatantly being a goof about it.
America is not the arbiter of international law. Just because you can bomb people back to the Stone Age, doesn’t make you right. No one agreed to these laws and sanctions.
I don’t know how many times I have to say this: **Iran is not bound by US law ** Can Iran just make up laws and apply them to the US? It works both ways. Tomorrow morning, if you see a yellow bus, get on it. Any yellow bus.
You’re correct. This applies to other countries America is doing this to, like Venezuela. There is a reason they have borders and different names. Because they a law unto themselves. Sovereign.
So Iranians trying to subvert American law is different though? Like they intentionally moved the funds through numerous companies to disguise it. Also using USD, property of the US government.
That has nothing to do with the idea of sovereignty?
Literally clear as day lol they incriminated themselves by trying to hide the transaction. They even knew what they were doing was illegal, why can’t you accept that?
The same reason bootleggers smuggled alcohol during Prohibition. Or the same reason reason abolitionists smuggled slaves with the Underground Railroad. But a moron wouldn’t understand analogies. You clearly don’t have the capacity to comprehend the logic. Mendacity only works in small groups. Your reasoning might sway the masses, for a time. But truth will always win in the end, because lies have no foundation in society.
Russia invaded Ukraine. China is literally waging a genocide. Saudi Arabia murdered Khashoggi in an embassy. Iran literally sprayed live ammunition into crowds last year because their citizens didn’t want their rule anymore.
But the US took oil that was meant to fund militant groups who intentionally did things to disguise the transaction because they knew it was illegal.
No, the US spent 20 years killing various random Middle Easterners and several decades killing democratic elections and voters in central and South America.
And now they’re trying to start a war with China over…factories in Taiwan which were oart of the great capitalist plan to remove jobs from the US and send them elsewhere so labor laws wouldnt apply.
You dont grasp basic jusrisdiction. If that “US-owned” (read: private equity/ hedge fund owned) ship is used for nefarious purposes outside of US waters then tough fucking titty, you have no jusrisdiction. You arrest the hedge funders.
was with you until your dumbass said the US is trying to start a war with China. Fat wrong sis.
Also the middle east is a religious backwards shit hole and while American imperialism and the reasoning for it was lies and wrong, doesn’t change the fact the middle east is ruled by blood money oil tycoons and religious psychopaths.
But no. The fact they tried to disguise their money handling is fact enough, they were attempting to evade the US and failed because they knew they were doing something that would cause the US to act because it was under US jurisdiction sorry sis.
The company’s vessel, Suez Rajan Limited, transported the contraband to the US and “incurred the significant expenses associated with the vessel’s voyage to the United States,” according to the DOJ.
Here.
Literally just try reading the fucking article instead of acting high and mighty without any effort because you want to be right.
Where does it state blood was spilled? If the US seized the ship out in the open ocean (piracy), how would the company have incurred any expenses on the journey to the US? They wouldn’t be the ones piloting the ship.
What? What? You aren’t even making sens and not talking as if you read the article or understand what is being talked about here.
They told a ship of an American finance holding company to get it’s butt to their borders or suffer consequences and made the company pay for fees, and it’s own gas usage.
I quoted the part of the article where it says they piloted the ship back to the US? Also you could still have the company pay all costs associated. So many people in here who don’t read.
Yes it’s clear people don’t read. For example, when someone is asked to provide evidence to the claim that “blood was spilled” or “piracy occurred,” people respond with a quote about the company “incurring expenses” as if that is in any way relevant or satisfies the question.
It would be better for the US if we didn’t sanction Iran, actually. But it might be better for China that we are. We are sanctioning against human rights violations, not just cuz muh money.
This is like arguing you shouldn’t get prison time after committing a murder because you have kids and they’ll struggle without you around. These sanctions can be more targeted like in cases of Russian oligarchs having their properties seized. In this specific case, a US company was transporting oil in violation of US law and were served a court order. Iran is free to send their own tankers to China and Russia. I doubt the US would blow one of them up.
No, see, sanctions also keep those kids from being able to stand up against the regime. The leaders are still getting everything they need; the people are not. Your analogy was bad.
Well I have to agree they target the people and have unintended consequences. BUT I disagree that they don’t hurt the rich and powerful.
Just like here, the rich absorb 90% of the new wealth created. If wealth isn’t being created, they lack power in capital to exert.
We have recently sanctioned Iranian individuals. This means they have trouble leaving their country, and any trade with them is illegal, which again reduces their bargaining power - so that actors like China can swoop in and take advantage of Iran.
The iranian citizens are standing up and revolting. Iran has seen a lot of direct action over this 40 year history during sanctions. The idea that we are keeping evil people in power is new to me and feels really abstract. In my mind the only way we are making the situation worse is by increasing poverty in Iran. But are sanctions also stopping political upheaval, and how?
All countries do that. Then all countries also want you to “pay us taxes where you live”. Double taxation is a problem for many people, even between countries with tax agreements like in the EU.
The contraband cargo is now the subject of a civil forfeiture action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The United States’ forfeiture complaint alleges that the oil aboard the vessel is subject to forfeiture based on U.S. terrorism and money laundering statutes.
The complaint alleges a scheme involving multiple entities affiliated with Iran’s IRGC and the IRGC-Qods Force (IRGC-QF) to covertly sell and transport Iranian oil to a customer abroad. Participants in the scheme attempted to disguise the origin of the oil using ship-to-ship transfers, false automatic identification system reporting, falsified documents and other means. The complaint further alleges that the charterer of the vessel used the U.S. financial system to facilitate the transportation of Iranian oil
If I were wrong, there would be no wars. Why do you think countries fight with each other? It’s because sovereign nations can’t tell other sovereign nations what to do.
The EU also has sanctions on Iran so a Greek company broke the sactions imposed by its country. They used the US banking system to transfer the money as well and the USA upheld the sanctions of another country.
Okay, so the Russian sanctions are hurting the American economy, causing unemployment and starvation. So, the US thinks the sanctions are illegal and decide to smuggle hamburgers to Europe for money. Russia intercepts the ships and confiscates the burgers. America objects, but is overruled by Russia and its financial institutions. Should the United States agree with the legality of the situation, even though they never agreed to the sanctions and their people are starving? Also, is it okay for Russia to do this even though it unduly hurts the people of America?
Well it’s not smuggling if the hamburgers go to Europe and there is no sanctions. So yes that would be wrong as the trade never touched Russia. Unless the EU is also sanctioning the USA then no it would be enforcing sanctions of the EU countries.
Sanctions are enacted usually in reaction to something so as I don’t know why these hypothetical sanctions are in place I can’t comment on the ethicality of them.
Countries also don’t agree to sanctions being imposed on them. That doesn’t make sense. Thats like saying a murderer who was sent to prison should agree with the punishment or it’s wrong.
Just to point out that isn’t similar to the original article for the points I made in my previous comment.
Great job at avoiding the dilemma. I too can use words to avoid answering questions that place my argument in an uncomfortable position. Better to pretend to be answering the question than have to admit that I don’t have an answer. That’s why this makes perfect sense. /s
…Okay ask plainly then. What is the problem you have with my answers?
Are you a free market absolutist who thinks anything that prevents people trading with whoever they like is wrong? I am going to have to disagree with you if you are.
Are you mad that it was a ship from the USA enforcing the embargo rather than a Greek one? The USA does the heavy lifting protecting all international trade routes so, in all likelihood it is the USA who is going to enforce sanctions especially when it is in there interest to do so.
Do you think a Greek company that resides in a country that is also sanctioning Iran should be allowed to facilitate a trade that breaks the law of the country it is based in? The company should be punished for breaking the law of the nation it resides in.
If this was a Chinese company and they used CNY it would have been wrong for the USA to seize the cargo and fine the company but it wasn’t so that is irrelevant.
Why? You need to say why you think that. I think I have said more than enough on why I think what they did is legitimate enforcement of two countries (Greece and USA) laws.
Thanks for asking a good question. 😉 I’m no expert with human rights and sanctions. I would like to think that they could be relaxed, but that might be difficult. Iran would find loopholes and ways to subvert the regulations. So, I think they need to be removed and let the UN 🇺🇳 take over.
I should have said unethical or extrajudicial. The United States is preventing a sovereign country from trading. Just because it is “legal” by American law doesn’t make it ethical. You can argue the legality. You may even agree with the ethics. But it is outside international law and condemned by the UN. I never argued the legality of the U.S. law. I am arguing that the sanctions are inhumane and unnecessary. So the ship should have never been seized.
Trade embargoes do not violate international law. Otherwise, we would condemn Iran for its embargo against Israel. But Iran is free to pursue whatever trade policy it wants.
And don’t confuse a statement by a UN employee for a statement by the UN.
Iran sanctions are meant to slow their nuclear program and thus de-escalate the region. It’s possible they are now counterproductive. But it’s also possible that without them, a paranoid right wing Israeli government would have openly attacked Iran by now. So it may well be the lesser evil.
International laws do not exist. Source. Thus, the unilateral sanctions of the U.S. is beyond the law, and could be considered an act of war. The geopolitics of the region is not my concern. The unethical sanctions are.
And don’t confuse a statement by a UN employee for a statement by the UN.
The United States will not allow a vote in the UN on sanctions. That’s why they have to do press releases. It is from the UN. The nuclear sanctions are supported by the UN, but not the economic sanctions. Which is why the tanker was seized.
States have an obligation under international human rights law
Make up your mind. If they don’t exist, then what she said is meaningless.
And on the subject of Ms Douhan…
The Special Rapporteurs are part of what is known as the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council. … Special Procedures’ experts work on a voluntary basis; they are not UN staff and do not receive a salary for their work. They are independent from any government or organization and serve in their individual capacity.
Looks like she was speaking for herself, not for the UN.
This is pedantic and not worthy of my time. You have no interest in the truth, only in winning. So, great you won. We should sanction the world into panic and starvation until countries destabilize and launch wars that destroy humanity. Nice win!
States have an obligation under international human rights law
The Human Rights law, is “international”, as in more than one nation recognizes it… and only 160+ of ~200 nations routinely break it with little consequence.
“Acts of trespassing on tankers carrying Iranian oil are a clear example of piracy,” Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Nasser Kanaani said last month.
“Iran will not stand idly by in relation to any violation of the nation’s rights and will cut the hands of the aggressors.”
Look it’s the guy who brings up sovereignty but ignores Iran’s own populace doesn’t want these leaders or the fact this (illegal) trade financially supports that oppression of the people.
Says he’s a commie yet supports the religious oppressors? No care for the will of the people
It’s an entirely different scenario and even then it would depend on where the guns are coming from and where they’re going. There has so be some limit on what countries can do on the international stage.
Which the West tries and places like Iran want to circumvent it.
America sucks and has issues but some countries out there really need to get it together. Iran is easily one of them.
America did nothing wrong here this was legit and there was punishment for it, tried to hide transactions and go around sanctions, get caught lose your shit.
If China had a law against shipping oil to the US, and a Chinese ship was going to ship oil to the US, would it be wrong for China to prosecute the ship owners and seize the oil?
The US is not prosecuting the US owners of the ship.
If it was only technically a “Chinese ship” in that a Chinese equity firm temporarily owned the ship and they used that as an excuse to seize the cargo and prosecute the foreign operator, that would also be wrong.
Add comment