Miscellaneous News

Miragedriver

Brigadier
China and Russia Grow Even Closer

2tSgmg3.jpg

(The Atlantic) On Saturday, Russia staged a grand celebration in Moscow to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the country’s defeat Nazi Germany in World War Two. The occasion—which featured
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
through Red Square—did not include the leaders of the United States, France, and the United Kingdom, who declined to attend out of protest of Russia’s interference in Ukraine. But of the 30 or so world leaders who did arrive, only one had the privilege of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
: Chinese president Xi Jinping.

As Russia’s relationship with the United States and its European allies grows worse, its ties to China have never been closer. On the eve of the parade last Friday, the two countries announced
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, including a non-aggression pledge in cyber warfare. The deals complement a $400 billion deal made last May, when Russia agreed to ship 38 billion cubic meters of natural gas each year between 2018 and 2048 to China. And next week, Russian and Chinese naval vessels will conduct live drills in the eastern Mediterranean Sea.

We are strong if united but weak if isolated,” Xi said.

In remarks
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in Xinhua, China’s official news service, Xi Jinping ascribed the closeness between China and Russia to the their shared sacrifice in World War Two. “Decades ago, the Chinese and Russian nations shared weal and woe and forged an unbreakable war friendship with fresh blood,” he said. But in the seven decades since the war, relations between the two haven’t always been warm—when they existed at all. Ideological and geographical disputes triggered a Sino-Soviet split in 1960, and over the next three decades the two countries had a more adversarial relationship with each other than either had with the United States. This division was the primary geopolitical rationale behind Richard Nixon’s decision to re-engage China in 1972.By the late 1980s, Sino-Russian relations began to thaw, and in 2001 the two countries
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
“friendship agreement.”

Despite many differences and possible points of contention, China and Russia are united by a major strategic interest: disrupting the United States. Beijing and Moscow have found common cause on the United Nations Security Council, where they have repeatedly blocked U.S.-led foreign policy initiatives. And when Washington and its European allies slapped sanctions on Russia’s economy after Moscow’s forcible annexation of Crimea, Beijing remained neutral—despite non-interference being the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of Chinese foreign policy.

Both Russia and China have sought to challenge American hegemony by creating new multilateral institutions. The Moscow-led
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
links together Russia, Armenia, Kazakhstan and Belarus, economies with a combined GDP of more than $4 trillion. Meanwhile, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, headquartered in Beijing, has snapped up 57 members since its formation last year, including countries like the United Kingdom that joined over American objections. Major Chinese initiatives like the New Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st Century Maritime Silk Road—referred together as “One Road, One Belt”—will feature road, rail, port, and pipeline
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Europe with a combined population of 4.4 billion. In the United States, meanwhile, President Obama
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Congress to pass the far less ambitious Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Geopolitical analysts have argued that the Sino-Russian friendship is unequal, and that
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. China’s close ties with energy-rich nations like Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, once joined with Russia in the Soviet Union, gives it leverage in negotiating energy deals. Despite the bonhomie generated by Xi’s visit to Russia, the two sides
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
on a price for a new pipeline linking Western Siberia to China. Yet these details are unlikely to spark a rupture in ties.


Back to bottling my Grenache
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Guys, lets keep the Breaking World News, "Breaking," and "World."

We have separate threads for specific news on ME military and on the Yemen crisis. Post such news there, unless it is so stupendous that it has world-wide implications.

We have a separate thread for French Military News where the article speculating about the Mistrals has already been discussed.

A piece taking a comment by Putin explaining why Stalin signed the pact with Germany in 1939 and extrapolating it out to be Putin's support for such an agreement is not really Breaking World News. It is something that will just generate strife here on SD.

Thanks.

DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MODERATION
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



BN-IK946_iransh_J_20150514195044.jpg

The Diplomat said:
Five Iranian boats fired shots across the bow of a Singapore-flagged tanker in the Persian Gulf on Thursday.

The captain of the Alpine Eternity, an oil products tanker,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Channel NewsAsia that five Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy ships approached the vessel and several shots were fired. The captain refused orders to stop the vessel and head to the Iranian port of Abu Musa, choosing instead to head to Dubai’s territorial waters. The captain said he was 15 miles off the Iranian coast at the time of the incident – three miles outside Iranian territorial waters.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
CNN, while the ship did contact coalition warships in the vicinity to ask for help and a P-3 was sent overhead while the U.S. Navy began moving, the incident was over before it could get there. The UAE did send three of its coast guard boats out to the cargo vessel. Owner South Maritime later said in the statement that the ship had safely reached the port of Jebel Ali, and that there was no serious damage to the vessel and none of the crew members sustained any injuries.

Reuters
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
a U.S. official speaking on condition of anonymity as saying that Iran had attempted to intercept the vessel in international waters because it is liable for damage to an Iranian-owned oil platform it hit on March 22. If true, that would be the second time the IRG has used commercial justifications to intervene in such situations within the past month following an incident where Iranian patrol ships seized and temporarily held a Marshall Islands-flagged container vessel in the Strait of Hormuz to settle a years-old debt case

That in turn has negative implications for freedom of navigation for one of the world’s most important trade routes through which nearly a third of the world’s petroleum passes. The Pentagon, however, has thus far reportedly declined to say whether it will order U.S. warships to accompany commercial vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz this time as it did after the previous incident.

Iran is continuing to play with fire here.

They are looking for any slight commercial or civil issue and then using their military to try and force it. It is going to lead to an exchange if they keep it up...and I am afraid their Navy will come out very much rt end of that stick.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
Title of that article seems deliberately misleading.

The Iranians fired warning shots across the bow. Very different from 'firing on'.

I also wonder, if a foreign flagged vessel bumped an US oil rig and ran off, would the USN mere wave it on and do nothing? And what would happen if said vessel did not heed USN instructions to head to a nearby American port to explain themselves?
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
I also wonder, if a foreign flagged vessel bumped an US oil rig and ran off, would the USN mere wave it on and do nothing? And what would happen if said vessel did not heed USN instructions to head to a nearby American port to explain themselves?
Really? You wonder what other nations would do about a commercial/civil "bumping" incident at an oil platform? Emplying that the US Navy would even get involved...or the Royal Navy...or pretty much any other?

Come on Wolf...that's some kind of stretch, eh?.

The "bumping" allegation occurred on March 22 wolf...this is May the 15th. And my guess is that the "bump" was incidental to them being at the platform doing business.

But...to play along...what would happen with a US incident regarding such a "bump"?

1) The company owning the oil platform, would contact the company owning the ship and seek to get damages paid. Failing that, said company would take them to court.
2) If it was Government property, the US government would follow the same steps.

That's what civilized nations these days do in such commercial/civil incidents.

They do not send out a flotilla of gunboats on a civil allegations and try...through force of arms...almost two months later, to hijack the vessel in international waters and divert it to their port.
 
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Iran is continuing to play with fire here.

They are looking for any slight commercial or civil issue and then using their military to try and force it. It is going to lead to an exchange if they keep it up...and I am afraid their Navy will come out very much rt end of that stick.

The two recently reported incidents by the IRGC navy are looking somewhat illogical from most perspectives. The only sensible explanation I can think of is they are actions by Iranian hardliners (thereby the IRGC) to scuttle any potential nuclear deal with the US and/or chest thump towards the Saudis despite actual Iranian impotence regarding the situation in Yemen, and really across the region.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
Well Jeff, as you say, let's play along.

Firstly, that fact this incident happened 2 months after the initial 'bump' suggests that this wasn't some knee-jerk reaction or some hardliners jumping on any excuse to cause trouble.

It stands to reason that in the first 2 months after the incident, the Iranians didn't just sit in their hands and in all likelihood did exactly what you suggested and tried to resolve this through the usually channels, and that this incident happened because the ship owners either refused to comply or even participate with those attempts by Iran to get satisfaction.

Near as I can tell, your indignation stems from the fact that those were Iranian Revolutionary Guard ships, so you consider them navy.

Here is where I think the cultural differences might be colouring matters.

I do not share the cultural view of Americans about the paramount importance of arbitrarily seperating the roles of military from the police. I can see the original rational for it, but these days the lines are so very blurred and lawyered away as to be essentially meaningless in my view.

Both are instruments of the same national state and government, and act in co-operation.

The US 'coast guard' operate naval grade warships, often 'retired' USN ships, all over the world alongside regular USN ships. Often times, USN ships have a few token USCG officers on board to obstensivsly take over when conducting interception and boarding operations.

As far as I am concerned, that's pure cosmetics. You might as well give the same guy two hats and insist he is navy when he wears the navy hat and Coast guard when he wears the coast guard hat.

That's what the Iranians must be feeling.

But if you just cannot shed that cultural baggage, how about we play a bit of lawyering ourselves?

Near as I can tell, Iran does not actually have its own dedicated and separate Coast Guard, and it seems to be the IRGN that carries out the kind of duties their coast guard would normally perform.

So would this incident be all that irksome if those IRGN boat captains and crews all also have Iranian Coast Guard hats, and were in fact wearing those coast guard hats when they were trying to excute and Iranian civilian court ruling to seize the ship for investigations/fines?

There is enough distrust and emnity in that part of the world between Iran and the west without adding more to it through misunderstanding or media spin.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Sorry wolf, now you have to start using "culutrual baggage "and other subjective, ideological terms to try and explain, or defend something that cannot be excused.

Call if what you will...the Iranians sent out, into international waters, vessels to try and halt a commercial vessel and turn it into their port.

They did this with an excuse that the commercial vessel "bumped" an oil platform two months before.

I do not care how you cut it. Civilized nations do not act that way for such reasons.

Of course they thought about it. They are making a statement with each and every one of these actions. I understand this. And they are doing so to advance what they perceive to be their interests. If they continue to do so...ultimately they will provoke an incident.

But the point is simple, if a commercial vessel bumps a piece of property, you use the legal system within international law to resolve it. Iran knows this...they have used it numerous times. That is not the true reason they are doing so, no more than their allegtations were the reason the last time.

Last time they took a vessel, charged that the company owed them 100,000 dollars, and then released the vessel without payment. They did so because they said the company indicted to them that they would settle...but then did not demand the settlement before the release. Receiving settlement was not why they stopped it.

They are trying to prove a point that they can take on the US and allied nations Navy's in the region. One day, they will push it too far.

You do not send armed vessels into international waters to coerce z vessel at force of arms to turn into your port because of a small civil/commercial dispute. Those are the actions of a rogue and a pirate.

Now, if that vessel was alleged to have contained arms to be used by insurgents within Iran against Iran...or if that vessel were alleged to be carrying illicit drugs to be sold in Iran...that would be different. Those activities fall within the norm of threatening Iran directly as a nation..

But they did not allege any such thing.

Again, they alleged that a commercial vessel bumped into an oil platform and therefore owes money either to the state, or the company that owns the platform, for damages that occurred two months ago. They sent armed vessels into international waters to stop and turn aside the vessel. That is a factual, unbiased representation of it...and THAT you take to court.

No need to take this any further. It is clear that it will become a ideological/cultural/political discussion and we simply will not go there here on SD.
 
Last edited:

Blackstone

Brigadier
Baltimore comes to China. There are lots of pictures and videos for viewing at the linked site.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China
Tens of Thousands of residents of the southwestern county of Linshui gathered in the morning and marched about 3km. Photos posted by the protesters on social media also showed violent attacks by a police tactical team(SWAT)and the resistance that followed lasted all day and well into the night...
 

Ultra

Junior Member
US waves 'stick-shaped olive branch' at China in islands dispute
Pentagon warns of deployment, but Kerry likely to be more conciliatory

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



That made me laughed! "Stick-shaped olive branch".... brilliant! :D
 
Top