COVID-19 INFORMATION What you need to know about the coronavirus if you are living in Japan or planning a visit.
world

Tehran fumes as Britain seizes Iranian oil tanker over Syria sanctions

15 Comments
By Jonathan Saul and Parisa Hafezi

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2019.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

15 Comments
Login to comment

Problem reaction solution, tried and tested way to start a war and look like the victim.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Highway robbery.

There's no legal authority to seize the tanker whatsoever.

Iran has the right to do business with Syria.

The UK is not some global police force.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Did Iran threaten to launch air strikes (missiles) at British military bases on Gibraltar?

That would be 'fuming', whereas lecturing a representative on the illegality of their act, and threatening legal action seems more like 'annoyed'.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Seems like a step in the wrong direction

5 ( +6 / -1 )

The EU has banned oil shipments to Syria. Gibralter couldn't ignore this as the vessel passed through it's waters.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

They should build a pipeline go through Iraq and pumps oil to Assad's Syria! That will ease a lot troubles!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

This is an act of piracy. The EU (and US) has no business telling other countries who they can and cannot trade with. It doesn't matter whose waters the ship was sailing through: aren't we told all the time (particularly by the US with regard to the South China Sea) that freedom of navigation is essential?

Suppose China were to impose sanctions on Taiwan and then seize all third party ships heading there: would that be OK?

The EU and US are free to impose sanctions their own trade with Iran, but they have no right to extend those sanctions to third parties.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The EU and US are free to impose sanctions their own trade with Iran, but they have no right to extend those sanctions to third parties.

Read the article. The vessel was seized because it was taking oil to SYRIA and the EU has banned oil shipments to SYRIA. The tanker, which was registered in Panama, was in EU waters, should have sailed further south.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Isn’t the UK attempting to leave the EU or is the command from the US too strong to resist?

Maybe, the UK is in on the plot to start a war with the Iranians?

Wouldnt the Royal Marines be better deployed in London preventing knife crime?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The tanker, which was registered in Panama, was in EU waters

Was it? I thought there was a right of passage through the Strait of Gibraltar.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Was it? I thought there was a right of passage through the Strait of Gibraltar.

Gibralter has it's own, small, maritime territory. Spain provocatively infringes on it all the time when the government of the day wants to distract it's citizens from it's incompetence.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

That tanker went thru an extraordinary amount of trouble sailing all the way around Africa, full heavy with oil, just to avoid Egypt's Suez Canal, to get to the Mediterranean Sea

It doesn't matter whose waters the ship was sailing through: aren't we told all the time (particularly by the US with regard to the South China Sea) that freedom of navigation is essential?

Freedom of navigation is essential............... on INTERNATIONAL waters! Lol

Ya can't just go thru someone else's waters; otherwise, Iran wouldn't have been shooting down drones over its waters.

So yes, it does matter whose waters the ship was sailing through. International waters though - that's nobody's waters. The South China Sea is international waters - nobody owns that.

Suppose China were to impose sanctions on Taiwan and then seize all third party ships heading there: would that be OK?

If knowing that and they were still stupid enough to go through China's own waters, then yeah, stupid is as stupid does.

But again, the South China Sea is not Chinese waters - it's international waters.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Just what the 'ell is Britain doing seizing goods in the water. Let the US do their own seizing. Don't enable a bully because what goes round comes round

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Lamilly - Just what the 'ell is Britain doing seizing goods in the water. Let the US do their own seizing. Don't enable a bully because what goes round comes round

According to the article -

"British Royal Marines seized a giant Iranian oil tanker in Gibraltar on Thursday for trying to take oil to Syria in violation of EU sanctions."

1 ( +1 / -0 )

This is an act of piracy. The EU (and US) has no business telling other countries who they can and cannot trade with. It doesn't matter whose waters the ship was sailing through: aren't we told all the time (particularly by the US with regard to the South China Sea) that freedom of navigation is essential?

This happened in the U.K.'s territorial waters, the waters within 12 nautical miles of the mainland or habitable islands. A country has absolute authority in these waters. Waters beyond that are international, although exclusive economic rights are given in the form of EEZs.

Most of the Strait of Gibraltar is the former; most of the Strait of Taiwan and the South China Sea are the latter.

Suppose China were to impose sanctions on Taiwan and then seize all third party ships heading there: would that be OK?

If those ships entered China's actual territorial waters, China would be well within their rights.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites