France says it has seized an oil tanker in the Mediterranean suspected of being part of Russia’s sanction-busting “shadow fleet”.
French President Emmanuel Macron said the tanker, named the Grinch, was “subject to international sanctions and suspected of flying a false flag”.
The French navy, with the assistance of allies including the UK, boarded the vessel on Thursday morning between Spain and Morocco. French maritime authorities said that a search of the vessel had “confirmed the doubts as to the regularity of the flag”.
Russia’s embassy in Paris said it had not been informed of the seizure.
For those who are talking about rules-based order and international law, please understand that those ideas are dead. You can’t pretend there is a morally-just world police while Gaza is being leveled, Venezuela was invaded, war in Ukraine has continued for years, and China bullies Taiwan and the Philippines.
If you haven’t listened to it yet, I highly recommend Mark Carney’s speech from earlier this week at Davos. World leaders are just now coming to terms with the new reality of “might makes right”.
Edit, just to be clear: along the lines of this new world order, France is entirely in the right here. They had the opportunity to seize this tanker and was powerful enough to do so. As far as motive, they aren’t happy with how Russia is treating Ukraine. That’s it. To make excusses such as “but international law” and “gotta follow the rules” is nothing short of pathetic drivel.
No, actually. Might does not make right. It is also not always the most efficient way to get what you want.
I’m not saying that force is never necessary in a chaotic world. Violence is often necessary and justified to protect ourselves and others. But violence is not “right” by virtue of being to most forceful, ruthless or effective. What’s right lives on a completely different axis from what can be taken.
The rules-based world order was imperfect, it was often hypocritical, but it wasn’t a straight-up lie. It reigned in a lot of chaos, and it gave us the best years of human civilization. Had the project succeeded, it could have removed weapons of mass destruction and shrunk armies around the world, eradicated hunger and diseases, and no doubt it could have fixed the climate crisis too. It did accomplish many of the things it set out to do. But it was sidelined, betrayed, by complacency and a belief that the dominoes would fall into place without any need for further effort or sacrifice.
I still believe. Fuck the UN. We need to build a new UN with blackjack and hookers, get some real environmental protections on the ground, round up capital, and progressively get rid of weapons. It can still be done.
Please don’t mistake my post for claiming that “might is right” is right. I agree it’s not the most efficient path, and in Mark Carney’s speech he acknowledges that this worldview will have a tremendous cost due to the risk-mitigation actions each country will have to take in response. However, he also seems optimistic when describing how middle powers can band together for common causes, while also working to advance their own individual interests. “If we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu.” Cooperation with each other is encouraged, not blind subjugation to the world’s superpowers.
I believe this acceptance, and the risk mitigation that needs to be taken in response, is necessary. Of course it would be better for everyone to follow a common rule of law and submit to a rule-based world order; however, it’s ignorant to believe that matches our reality. If every country’s sovereignty was respected, Ukraine would never have been invaded, Venezuela wouldn’t have been attacked, and genocide wouldn’t be occurring in Palestine.
This week the UN Relief and Works Agency headquarters was bulldozed by Israel in complete defiance of international law. In response, the UN strongly condemned this in a tweet. The current international institutions are toothless or worse. We have a new “board of peace” being formed with two founding members being wanted on international war crime charges. But if only the experiment had worked, we could have solved climate change and eradicated world hunger.
This is the same complacent dialogue I railed against in my first post. Yet in the end of your comment you still seem to recognize that change is needed. Let’s not reminisce on the status-quo fondly. It’s time to create something new. I hope to see strong independent nations who can band together in a federation when needed. And no, I don’t think disarmament would be in our common interest. I look to Libya and Gaddafi’s fate when considering what would happen after giving up nuclear ambitions. And I doubt Ukraine would have been invaded if they still had their nuclear weapons.
Carney’s speech was epic. He stuttered a bit, but the way it was written at the moment that it was delivered, I believe, will go down in history. I don’t know much about him as a politician overall, but the sentiment he expressed is one that is shared throughout Europe and surely much of the industrialized world.
If we’re going to establish a truly rules-based world order, we need to back up our words with actions, and force if necessary. We do hold imperialist and expansionist actors accountable, with force if necessary.
The issue of weapons of mass destruction is huge and hardly something we will solve here. But briefly: nobody should have weapons of mass destruction. We should have a situation where a supranational body ensures that weapons of mass destruction do not exist, similar to the IAEA but one that is compulsory. Yes it sucks that Ukraine and Libya were invaded, and I agree that it likely wouldn’t have happened if it could have devolved into the entire planet being destroyed. But the stakes of weapons of mass destruction is way to high. This is not how we ensure peace, an inch from the abyss, terrified to move lest we all slip and fall. We need something more robust and less based on the ensured destruction of the planet.
Laughing at all the vatniks complaining in the comments about those poor russian oligarchs having their assets seized. Cry me a fucking river.
so… stealing cargo ships is now okay.
i wonder what yall gonna think of this when russia and china start doing it.
Yeah you’re leaving about a tonne of relevant details and context out.
Like that I too can make idiotic assertions.
Ukraine bombed Russian oil refineries! How could they, they’re so evil, can you imagine them attacking European infrastructure?
See what I did there? I left out the little tid bit of Russia being a cruel dictatorship supported by oligarchs who invaded Ukraine for bullshit reasons and has committed genocide multiple times now, which is the reason for Ukraine fighting back.
Now you do you. Look at what you wrote and point out the list of issues that explains all you wrote, but that you conveniently left out.
Illt wait
Internternationally sanctioned.
If you agree to play by the rules then don’t be suprised when enforcement happens.
They chose to join this global economy and there are rules to follow.
The rules-based order is dead, and there is no world police. Countries just take what they think they can get away with. Otherwise, there would be aid flowing into Palestine, Venezuela wouldn’t have been attacked by the US, and everyone wouldn’t be fighting over Greenland.
unilaterally sanctioned* same applies to venezuela, cuba and others btw.
the “international community” isn’t composed solely of the western world, but that’s what it looks like from the global south.
Like how Russia invaded Ukraine and keeps committing war crimes?
When the US did this, everyone was quick to call it piracy. Which, to be fair, it practically was, although I can’t say I have any sympathy for Putin.
Atm France has a smidgen more credibility than the US
Russia are shit heels. The US are shit heels. Thanks for playing. Harrasing aggressors like Russia is good actually. Thanks for playing.
I wrote this on another post, but copying it here because it’s same shit, different user (or is it?)
Yeah you’re leaving about a tonne of relevant details and context out.
Like that I too can make idiotic assertions.
Ukraine bombed Russian oil refineries! How could they, they’re so evil, can you imagine them attacking European infrastructure?
See what I did there? I left out the little tid bit of Russia being a cruel dictatorship supported by oligarchs who invaded Ukraine for bullshit reasons and has committed genocide multiple times now, which is the reason for Ukraine fighting back.
Now you do you. Look at what you wrote and point out the list of issues that explains all you wrote, but that you conveniently left out.
Illt wait
Did you assume I was defending Putin on this?
Putin’s a piece of shit and I hope all his crap gets plundered and the proceeds transferred to the Ukrainian drone fund.
There’s a difference between seizing oil tankers because you want their oil, and seizing them because they’re funding an illegal and needlessly destructive war. The first is as explicitly piracy as you can get, the second might be justifiable as sanctions, though definitely in a grey area that most countries would have preferred to stay out of.
But I’m all for seizing the entire shadow fleet and sending the profits to Ukraine.
“we are stealing oil because of the rules”
There are literally dozens upon dozens of treaties and agreements signed by Russia which they are breaking. It’s fair no matter how you try to spin it in your own head.
you mean the ones western bureaucrats are openly saying don’t hold anymore?
coming up with the rules then saying the rules benefit only you is a sham anyway.
So either the rules hold, and the seizing was legitimate, or they don’t hold anymore, meaning it doesn’t matter it was seized?
What were you arguing again?
Do you enjoy submitting to bullies?
It’s Russia that threw the rules out of the window. The EU and Ukraine have been the most rules abiding powers here. The only ones, arguably. It’s hamstringing them, and en helping the aggressor that doesn’t respect any rules. Sometimes you just have to hit back. And this is still very mild.
the US is the biggest bully in the world for some decades now.
i don’t enjoy getting bombed and regime changed by the us, no.
“*.ml”
the fuck you talking about, you are french.
sorry to break it to you tiny little head but you are the problem.
I can’t help but notice you’re very careful not to say anything negative about Russia, despite their illegal invasion, their war crimes and their utterly brutal and inhuman tactics.
But do you and your children enjoy being bombed by Russia?
If you do, move to Ukraine.
So now the EU stealing oil as well?
When Finland has been boarding ships in the Gulf of Finland (not just oil, the last one was carrying steel), it has eventually let them go.
But the context has been different: Finland has boarded ships when they’ve dragged their anchors, which places a gas pipeline, electrical and communications cables in immediate danger, and has resulted in those breaking in the past, which is very expensive and threatens people with loss of services.
France boarded the ship because they suspected it was not displaying its true flag.
Last I checked, they ordered it to travel to an anchoring place and wait, while officials and courts move to sort out the matter. What will become of the ship is not yet known. But there is a precendent, if you read the article:
Last October, France seized another sanctioned tanker, the Boracay, off its west coast before releasing it a few days later.
Well technically it’s embargoed oil so not quite the same as the Venezuelan fiasco (and Venezuela just got a $300M cheque from Trump for some of that oil).
If you beat up someone and then leave some money in their pocket, this is still an assault, not a boxing match.
The difference is that the US is beating up someone who was sitting quietly in a corner, while the EU is beating up someone who has been beating Ukraine to a bloody pulp for the past 4 years.
I do agree, and tbh I am trying to work through what a world without a “rules based order” looks like.
I do not want to defend Russia by no means, but why when Russia invades a neighbor it is bad, but when the US kidnaps a president it isn’t(at least portrayed in the news as bad)?
Especially when both are threatening to invade Europe and allegedly sharing information?
It’s still bad when the US illegally invades a country (without congressional approval) and abducts its head of state. The only people who don’t seem to mind that are magas, and they don’t seem to mind fascist russia violating international law either.
This juxtaposition is a bit of a strawman, because both examples are bad and anyone with a moral conscience understands that.
Tell me you are an American without telling me you are an American…
And what exactly do you mean by that?
Is saying “What trump did is bad, and the only people who support it are maga lunatics” something only an american would do?
Kidnapping foreign presidents is also bad. Maybe not quite as bad as 4 years of bombing and killing, but still bad. I’m no fan of Maduro, and I think Venezuela will be better off without him (but maybe only if it’s also without his VP and her family’s extensive control of the government apparatus), but this is not a good way to accomplish that.
So reality is complicated and nuanced, and media doesn’t handle that very well. Especially not when they’re increasingly becoming propaganda outlets for a fascist regime.
Not at all better off. What just happened, since the news is not going to tell you apparently, is the administration made a deal with the military to give up maduro and stand down on the operation to become the de facto power, directing the selling out of concessions through their now puppet civilian leadership.
There will be resistance when they start moving oil out, the army will commit abuses, likely including paramilitary death squads financed with drug and gun sales on black markets.
Exactly what I said: not like this. Not with his VP in charge. It should become a democracy where the mineral wealth is used to help the people.
For your information, Russia invaded European country. This would be closer to Venezuela seizing US tanker, not US seizing Venezuela’s
You’re stretching it - it’s not highway robbery when you catch someone driving a car with fake plates and smuggled goods in the back
Your scenario makes sense only from the perspective of basically the police and in international relationships there is no police.
So countries should be entirely free to do anything they want and nobody is morally correct to stop them?
Of course not on either of the statements.
But I am wondering how can enforcement be done without concentrating power in one county like the US because as we can see this system is very easy to abuse.
Flying false flags is a valid reason for a country to board a ship, according to UNCLOS.
And america painted their planes as civilian ones.
This is a war crime. I am pointing it out because my point is that international law doesn’t exist. The only differentiating factor is wether you are strong enough avoid being judged.
The existence of crime is not a proof of the inexistence of law. Not that I disagree with the general sentiment that international law is applied to the convenience of whoever is stronger, but the US doing something wrong and not getting punished for it has very little to do with France doing something specifically allowed
