• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Greenpeace piracy?

timhau said:
Could well be. One of the dolts that was trying to climb to the rig is a Finn, and according to the local papers she was whining about not getting vegan food at the local jail.
Click to expand...

Greenpeace have been giving both "green" and "peace" a bad name since '71.
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
I would applaud the Greenpeace members for their courage to stick to their beliefs if they weren't whining so much about it.
Click to expand...

It pretty standard practise for protestors who are unjustly imprisoned to protest against their imprisonment. When US state imprisoned blacks during the Civil Rights movement were calls for their release also "whining"?


Lukraak_Sisser said:
It's a well known fact that Russia is taking a very tough line against the west recently to play the nationalistic us vs them line that helps politicians keep the public opinion away from internal problems.
The target is a property of said Russian government, thus a severe reaction is to be expected.
Click to expand...

As recently as August this year the same vessel was conducting protests in the area without problem. A year ago they boarded another rig to hang a protest sign, without repercussions. And the representation of the protesters as "westerners" is a little dishonest; they represent eighteen countries, including Russia.


Lukraak_Sisser said:
Had they done that and then said, look we care about our cause SO much we are willing to risk that, I'd be impressed.
Click to expand...

This just doesn't stand up to logical scrutiny.


Lukraak_Sisser said:
Whereas now I get the feeling that they want publicity, but no consequences. Spoiled rich children getting punished and wanting to buy their way out.
Click to expand...

Do you have anything remotely resembling evidence to support such an allegation? Do you think that protestors should silently accept whatever happens to them, including illegal arrest, seizure of property, and violation of their human rights? Or are protestors entitled to express their views and speak out against illegal acts intended to repress their protest?
 
Let's be absolutely clear, irrespective of the arrest of the two individuals who attempted to climb onto the oil rig, Russia's actions the following day against the Greenpeace vessel are a blatant violation of international maritime law.
 
Gumboot.

While I applaud your sentiment.

They would have had to be complete idiots not to realise something like this would happen.

It is Russia and involves political posturing.

Whether it is fair or not is a moot point.

They chose to do it and have to deal with the consequences
 
cullennz said:
Gumboot.

While I applaud your sentiment.

They would have had to be complete idiots not to realise something like this would happen.

It is Russia and involves political posturing.

Whether it is fair or not is a moot point.

They chose to do it and have to deal with the consequences
Click to expand...


I don't accept that reasoning. No one should have to accept violations of international law. One might as well shrug at Syrian civilians being gassed by their own government and say "well, it's Syria, what did they expect?" You might as well shrug at the US seizing people all over the world and torturing them and say "Well, thy're associated with the USA's enemies, what did they expect?" You might as well shrug at French government agents planting a bomb in the Rainbow Warrior and say "Well, it's France, what did they expect?" We could shrug at Somali pirates seizing hostages off western vessels and say "Well, they chose to sail near the Somali coast, what did they expect?"

What we, as a global community, should expect is that international law is adhered to, and we should never, ever accept violations of that law.

Personally, I think Greenpeace are pretty misguided, and a lot of them are activists who don't even properly understand the issues they're championing. Some of them are outright idiots. But Russia should be held accountable for violating international law. It should never be acceptable for a country to flaunt international law, and I'll never shrug and say "Well, it's country X, what do you expect?"
 
gumboot said:
Let's be absolutely clear, irrespective of the arrest of the two individuals who attempted to climb onto the oil rig, Russia's actions the following day against the Greenpeace vessel are a blatant violation of international maritime law.
Click to expand...

Citation needed. They were in international waters when their ship was seized but they had broken Russian laws in Russian waters the day before (or at the very least were willing accomplices to those breaking the laws). Running to international waters doesn't mean that you can get away from the country of the laws that you just broke. "International waters" isn't some sacred place where you are safe from being boarded and\or being charged for breaking the laws of the nation boarding you and many nations have recognized this in the past, usually by recognizing extended areas of responsibility outside of the legal 12 mile limit.

Unless you want to say that the claims of Southern Ocean whale sanctuaries, that I know that you want to see protected, are completely bogus and that neither NZ or AUS have any right to claim them as such which opens a whole new kettle of fish for discussion.
 
Sam.I.Am said:
Citation needed.
Click to expand...

Part VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea details the rights and duties of nations with regard to the High Seas.


Sam.I.Am said:
They were in international waters when their ship was seized but they had broken Russian laws in Russian waters the day before (or at the very least were willing accomplices to those breaking the laws).
Click to expand...

Completely wrong on all counts. The oil rig is in Russia's EEZ, but is not in Russia's Territorial Waters. It's an offshore oil rig. The UN Convention on the Sea grants states jurisdiction only with regard to exploitation and preservation of resources in the EEZ; in all other regards the EEZ is treated in the same way as the High Seas (International Waters). That's the reason the activists are being held under suspicion of piracy - because it's one of the few crimes for which universal jurisdiction is recognised.

The ship was seized in the vicinity of the rig, which they never left. The entire incident occurred in the vicinity of the rig, in Russia's EEZ.


Sam.I.Am said:
Running to international waters doesn't mean that you can get away from the country of the laws that you just broke. "International waters" isn't some sacred place where you are safe from being boarded and\or being charged for breaking the laws of the nation boarding you and many nations have recognized this in the past, usually by recognizing extended areas of responsibility outside of the legal 12 mile limit.
Click to expand...

The Convention allows for the principal of "hot pursuit" whereby a ship which has violated a state's laws inside its territorial waters can be seized in international waters and brought back to that state if the vessel has been continuously pursued from within territorial waters. However "hot pursuit" is not relevant in this instance as the ship at no time entered Russian territorial waters.

Under Part VII of the Convention, with the exception of piracy it is illegal for any state to board and seize any vessel or arrest the crew of any vessel on the High Seas unless that vessel flies the flag of that nation.

The Convention states that a nation which interferes with a vessel on the High Seas under the provisions of anti-piracy, without adequate cause or reason to do so, is liable to the state whose flag the vessel flies. This is why the Netherlands has filed a protest under the Convention against Russia for violating the sovereignty of a vessel flying under its flag.



Sam.I.Am said:
Unless you want to say that the claims of Southern Ocean whale sanctuaries, that I know that you want to see protected, are completely bogus and that neither NZ or AUS have any right to claim them as such which opens a whole new kettle of fish for discussion.
Click to expand...

The Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary has been established by the International Whaling Commission, which is an international entity, thus the ban on whaling in the Sanctuary is international law, and not an attempt by an individual nation to extend its jurisdiction into international waters.
 
It's got even more complicated

Russia says there are "hard drugs" on board the greenpeace ship.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24461644

'Hard drugs found' on Greenpeace ship seized by Russia

Russian investigators say they have found what appear to be hard drugs on board the Greenpeace ship seized during a protest in the Arctic last month.

"During a search of the ship, drugs (apparently poppy straw and morphine) were confiscated," Russia's Investigative Committee said.

Poppy straw, or raw opium, can be used to produce morphine or heroin.

Greenpeace said in a statement that any suggestion of illegal drugs being found was a "smear".

"We can only assume the Russian authorities are referring to the medical supplies that our ships are obliged to carry under maritime law," it said.............
Click to expand...
 
gumboot said:
They're protesting, something which is a fundamental right in free society.
Click to expand...
Then they should have protested in a free society. These idiots went to Russia.

Maybe they should go to N. Korea next to hang a banner from their nuclear weapons plant.
 
gumboot said:
You have evidence that the Arctic Sunrise entered Russian territorial waters?
Click to expand...
Nope. But they entered Russian property.

I'm sure Putin will do the right thing here, he's well known for that. The man has a heart of gold, he's just a big softy. Who wouldn't throw themselves at the mercy of Vlad the Merciful?
 
WildCat said:
Nope. But they entered Russian property.
Click to expand...

Two of them tried to, and failed. I have zero issues with Russia charging those two with trespass, criminal nuisance, protesting (is protesting legal in Russia?) or whatever Russian laws are appropriate.

(Piracy isn't, as their actions don't constitute piracy under Russian law).

None of that excuses Russia's violation of Dutch sovereignty by illegal boarding and seizing a Dutch vessel on the high seas.


WildCat said:
I'm sure Putin will do the right thing here, he's well known for that. The man has a heart of gold, he's just a big softy. Who wouldn't throw themselves at the mercy of Vlad the Merciful?
Click to expand...

What should happen is that the international community should get behind the Netherlands' protest and demand that Russia respect International Law.
 
gumboot said:
Even if it were true, Russia has no right to do anything, only the Netherlands does.
Click to expand...

They have a doctor on board so I can't see morphine being an issue.

But apparently trafficking is another reason to grab them.

Its pretty obvious Russia know they are onto a loser with piracy and have thought of another reason.

They are just trying to make an example I think.
 
Last edited:
cullennz said:
They have a doctor on board so I can't see morphine being an issue.

But apparently trafficking is another reason to grab them.
Click to expand...


Nope.

2. Any State which has reasonable grounds for believing that a ship flying its flag is engaged in illicit traffic in narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances may request the cooperation of other States to suppress such traffic.

UN Convention on the Law of the Sea
Article 108
Click to expand...

Unless the Netherlands suspected the ship was involved in trafficking, and requested that Russia seize the ship, Russia has no right to interfere.
 
gumboot said:
Two of them tried to, and failed. I have zero issues with Russia charging those two with trespass, criminal nuisance, protesting (is protesting legal in Russia?) or whatever Russian laws are appropriate.

(Piracy isn't, as their actions don't constitute piracy under Russian law).

None of that excuses Russia's violation of Dutch sovereignty by illegal boarding and seizing a Dutch vessel on the high seas.




What should happen is that the international community should get behind the Netherlands' protest and demand that Russia respect International Law.
Click to expand...
The international community can't even be bothered with going after Assad for gassing thousands of people. If they can't do that for a Russian client state how the hell are they going to be bothered with Russia itself over this? The international community and what army? Winter is coming up, people in western Europe will want that Russian natural gas to keep warm. They'll dance to Putin's tune to get it. Thanks in no small part to Greenpeace much of Europe has shut down their nuke plants and stopped building new ones, they're more dependent on Russia than ever before. Oh, the irony!
 
gumboot said:
Nope.



Unless the Netherlands suspected the ship was involved in trafficking, and requested that Russia seize the ship, Russia has no right to interfere.
Click to expand...

That is not going to stop them holding the ship and putting them on trial
 
That rule doesn't mention what happens if the Russians suspect.

Long trial
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom