Sure. Read up on Iran Airflight 655 to see what happens when you “shoot at anything”.
It’s a bit more nuanced than that, or at least should be. (See: Russia, Azerbaijan Airlines Flight 4283.)
Sure. Read up on Iran Airflight 655 to see what happens when you “shoot at anything”.
It’s a bit more nuanced than that, or at least should be. (See: Russia, Azerbaijan Airlines Flight 4283.)
If sabotage is a problem, access to the Baltic should be limited to responsible vessels. Requiring permits and scheduled trips is one way. That can be enforced by a coast guard like service that knows who is supposed to be out there. And inspects the rest.
Cumbersome but workable. Its extra paperwork for honest shippers but could easily be routine. And sends a warning to the others.
A “responsible vehicle” like the Chinese commercial tanker that deliberately damaged infrastructure with its anchor.
Wendy
A responsible commercial tanker company that damaged infrastructure probably would lose its permit. And would at minimum require a pilot to return.
More common sense obviously.
Who gets to be boss of the open ocean when it is not wartime?
The problem is that missile launchers are manned by 18 and 22 year olds who have been playing video games for the past decade. So “common sense” might not be the strongest attribute they have.
Russia, according to this YT, has blockaded the passage between the Azov n the Black seas. See 7:10 minutes.
If Russia can blockade a passage, then politically/legally Denmark, Sweden n Norway etc can do so at the entry to the Baltic.
It just takes the ca Jones.
ralph
Again, that part is less than 2 miles wide. Not hard to patrol. The narrowest entrance to the Red Sea is 18 miles wide.
Not impossible, but not nearly so easy.
The relevant issue is the 40 km wide Gulf of Finland at the passage between Talinn, the capitol of Estonia, and Helsinki, capitol of Finland, both members of NATO.
d fb
When surrounded by Nato countries, why not Nato?
The blockade doesn’t have to be perfect… Just “good enough”.
Given that there are limited “safe” passages, the required length to effectively blockade the entrance from the North Sea to the Baltic might be relatively easy?
This map suggests Denmark, Sweden n Germany could do it.
It does require the ca Jones to do it.
ralph
Yes, perfect for that end of the Baltic. However, blocking the entry to the Baltic from St. Petersburg is needed to stop sabotage at that end, and the Finns and Estonians are, let us say, historically experienced in close up confronting Russia.
d fb
And the rest of the world is going to think that is cool?
a different problem.
The North Sea end appears to me to be the low hanging fruit.
Preventing Chinese or “dark fleet” or other “unfriendly country” ships from entering the Baltic from the North Sea would perhaps send a message to those who are supporting and collaborating with Russia/Putin that there are consequences?
ralph
The US n the West might be bullies, but they are my bullies, supporting the way of life I WANT TO LIVE. So, I choose US n West over the autocrat bullies - Putin n xi n Khomeini n jong il etc.
Cool, maybe not. But nothing to get into more than a minor snit about given that Russia
d fb
Isn’t there a “law of the sea” thingy, that says you cannot block international seaways in peacetime?
Steve
Yeap. That word peactime is the crux, as their is an enormous realm of grayness between true peace and full war.
d fb
Yes. That’s why I wrote it requires ca Jones.
In a perfect world where all sides act like “gentlemen”, such a “law of the sea” might be functional.
As @flyerboys says, in the current environment, there’s a lot of gray area. So much so that there’s a statecraft term for it: the Gray Zone.
China, Russia, Iran, PRNK are pushing that gray zone.
They’ll continue, until the pushees, push back.
Are the US n West also Gray Zoning? Of course we are. And I choose to support us, cause I don’t want to live under an authoritarian ruler. I don’t want “our” children to live under an authoritarian ruler.
ralph
Ralph
Bingo!, bingo!!, and again bingo!!!
d fb