Quote:
Originally Posted by Exocet25fr
Righting peoples wrongs!  |
Can I ask what wrong you intend to right?
Territorial seas are stated in part II, section 3 of UNCLOS.
Further more, all parties have agreed (including Russia) that all ships regardless of type, propulsion enjoy the right of innocent passage, for which neither prior notification or authorization is required.
The signatories also recognize under UNCLOS article 19 there is a set list that denotes what can be considered non innocent passage, any ship that passed through without undertaking any practices on the list would be deemed by the international courts to have conducted innocent passage.
If a warship does engage in conduct that breaks innocent passage then a host state may require the vessel leave its waters, however; it cannot use force.
UNCLOS article 25 allows a coastal state to take the necessary steps in its waters to prevent passage that is not innocent, even so if the British warship was conducting operations and maneuvers that breach the right of innocent passage international law only requires Russia to ask the vessel to leave under UNCLOS article 30.
A sovereign state may not use force to compel a sovereign immune vessel to leave its waters, unless it is acting in self defense or has demonstrated hostile intent.
UNCLOS article 32 is very clear nothing in the convention affects the immunities of warships and other government ships operated for non commercial purposes.
The Russian federation has acknowledged and ratified the bilateral interpretation and uniform interpretation of the rules of international laws governing innocent passage.
It is noted by the international community that the British warship complied with UNCLOS, that they conducted an innocent passage in an internationally recognized shipping lane that was under a traffic separation scheme (TSS) which is shown on the Russian navigation suite in the video.
It is also noted around two weeks prior to the transit the Russian federation put out a notice to mariners for exercises in the area.
The firing of the gun you see in the video is a AK630 CIWS and in the distance which I estimate to be at least 3nm you can see the stern of HMS Defender, the ship at no time was in danger to me this is the Russian ship making a statement and the ship was also involved in exercises.
It appears the bomb story also has not surfaced yet so I'm skeptical on that, note also the Dutch frigate Everstein was in the area also.
I shall also add the following:
Under COLREGS it is entirely upon the master of the vessel being over taken to maintain course and speed, it is equally upon the master of the vessel over taking to do so in a safe manner.
The Russian coast guard vessel is alleged to have over taken and cut across the bow of HMS Defender forcing her to slow and alter course which is in direct violation of COLREGS (international law) to which the Russian Federation is a signatory too.
COLREGS rule 10 part B (note HMS Defender was transiting in a traffic separation scheme)
(b) A vessel using a traffic separation scheme shall:
(i) proceed in the appropriate traffic lane in the general direction of traffic flow for that lane;
(ii) so far as practicable keep clear of a traffic separation line or separation zone;
(iii) normally join or leave a traffic lane at the termination of the lane, but when joining or leaving from either side shall do so at as small an angle to the general direction of traffic flow as practicable.
Rule 13
(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Rules of Part B, Sections I and II, any vessel overtaking any other shall keep out of the way of the vessel being overtaken.
(d) Any subsequent alteration of the bearing between the two vessels shall not make the overtaking vessel a crossing vessel within the meaning of these Rules or relieve her of the duty of keeping clear of the overtaken vessel until she is finally past and clear