U.S. will act if Iranian tanker tries to deliver oil to Syria: Pompeo

[webfact]

U.S. will act if Iranian tanker tries to deliver oil to Syria: Pompeo

By Michelle Nichols and Michele Kambas

 

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo speaks during a meeting of the UN Security Council at UN headquarters in New York, U.S., August 20, 2019. REUTERS/Lucas Jackson

 

UNITED NATIONS/ATHENS (Reuters) - The United States will take every action it can to prevent an Iranian tanker sailing in the Mediterranean from delivering oil to Syria in contravention of U.S. sanctions, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned on Tuesday.

 

Greece said earlier in the day that it had not had a request from the Adrian Darya 1, the vessel at the centre of a dispute between Iran and the United States, to dock at one of its ports, as Washington warned Greece against helping the vessel.

 

The tanker, formerly called Grace 1, left Gibraltar on Sunday. Ship-tracking data on Tuesday showed the vessel was heading toward the Greek port of Kalamata on the southern coast of the Peloponnese and was scheduled to arrive next Monday.

 

"We have made clear that anyone who touches it, anyone who supports it, anyone who allows a ship to dock is at risk of receiving sanctions from the United States," Pompeo told reporters at the United Nations.

 

"If that ship again heads to Syria, we will take every action we can consistent with those sanctions to prevent that."

 

He said that if the tanker's oil was sold, the revenue would be used by elite units of Iran's Revolutionary Guards. "We want to deny them the resources to continue their horrific terror campaign," Pompeo said.

 

The tanker is carrying about 2 million barrels of oil.

 

"The vessel is cruising at low speed and there is still no formal announcement that it will arrive at Kalamata. The Merchant Marine Ministry is monitoring the matter along with Greece's Foreign Ministry," a Greek Shipping Ministry spokesman said.

 

The ship, which is now sailing under an Iranian flag, was released from detention off Gibraltar after a five-week standoff over whether it was carrying Iranian oil to Syria in violation of European Union sanctions.

 

Soon after the detention order was lifted, a U.S. federal court ordered the seizure of the vessel on different grounds, but that petition was rejected by Gibraltar.

 

Tehran said any U.S. move to seize the vessel again would have "heavy consequences". The United States in turn has also conveyed its "strong position" to the Greek government over the tanker.

 

Washington wants the tanker detained on the grounds that it had links to Iran's Revolutionary Guards, which it has designated a terrorist organisation.

The European Union, of which Greece is a member, bans oil sales to Syria and the United States has sanctions on Iranian oil sales.

 

IMPACT ON DETAINED UK TANKER?

The fate of the Adrian Darya 1 could also have a bearing on that of a British-flagged tanker seized by Iran in the Strait of Hormuz leading into the Gulf two weeks after British Royal Marine commandos seized what was then known as the Grace 1.

 

Speculation has mounted that the Stena Impero could be freed once the Adrian Darya 1 had set sail, although Iranian officials have denied any link between the two cases.

 

Deputy Transport Minister Mohammad Rastad said the case of Stena Impero had been submitted to a court in the southern port city of Bandar Abbas, the semi-official news agency Tasnim reported, without giving a date when it would be heard.

 

The handling of the Adrian Darya 1 will be a major foreign policy test for Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, a pro-Western conservative elected in July.

 

Any efforts to assist the tanker could be construed as providing material support to a U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organization, which has immigration and potential criminal consequences, a U.S. State Department official said.

 

A Greek diplomatic source cited by the state Athens News Agency said the country was in communication with the United States on the matter, but did not say what Greece would do.

 

"(The U.S.) position on the specific issue is known and has been communicated not only to Greece but other states and ports in the Mediterranean," the source said.

 

It is standard practice for a vessel to give 48 hours' notice before docking at a port, Greek officials said.

 

It was not clear where the ship might head if Greece refused it permission to dock.

 

Cyprus, farther east, has bitter experience from seizing Iranian products destined for Syria. Munitions it confiscated exploded in 2011, causing the island's worst peacetime disaster.

 

(Reporting by Michelle Nichols at the United Nations and Michele Kambas in Athens; Additional reporting by George Georgiopoulos and Dubai newsroom; Editing by John Stonestreet, Alison Williams and Peter Cooney)

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-08-21

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[petermik]

This is going to be interesting.........

[meand]

It is amazing how many times the US statements describe their OWN behaviors almost exactly... "We want to deny them the resources to continue their horrific terror campaign". 

 

I encourage everyone to read about the effect sanctions have on countries. It is essentially terrorism. People die. Pregnant women die. Kids die. But it all happens slower than a bomb, so we think it is ok? 

[Longcut]

16 minutes ago, meand said:

It is amazing how many times the US statements describe their OWN behaviors almost exactly... "We want to deny them the resources to continue their horrific terror campaign". 

 

I encourage everyone to read about the effect sanctions have on countries. It is essentially terrorism. People die. Pregnant women die. Kids die. But it all happens slower than a bomb, so we think it is ok? 

Do you know of some law that says the United States is compelled to do business with those it doesn't care to? 

[Scott]

Inflammatory conspiracy post removed.   Continue and face a suspension.  

 

[Morch]

1 hour ago, meand said:

It is amazing how many times the US statements describe their OWN behaviors almost exactly... "We want to deny them the resources to continue their horrific terror campaign". 

 

I encourage everyone to read about the effect sanctions have on countries. It is essentially terrorism. People die. Pregnant women die. Kids die. But it all happens slower than a bomb, so we think it is ok? 

 

Hyperbole.

[Basil B]

As Greece is part of the EU could this end with tit for tat sanctions against the US? Donny seems to be making more enemies every day...

[jany123]

4 hours ago, Longcut said:

Do you know of some law that says the United States is compelled to do business with those it doesn't care to? 

It’s not about the United States decision to do (or not do ) business.... it’s about the United States unilaterally dictating who other countries can do business with.

 

economic terrorism and the rise of an empire of evil under darft trump.... maga

[Roadman]

4 hours ago, Longcut said:

Do you know of some law that says the United States is compelled to do business with those it doesn't care to? 

Yeap it’s called the f..k you USA moral law from most of the western countries as they withdraw support for American policy. And your “do business with” is done by threats? Geez George. Easily understandable to why the US is sliding downhill quicker than a runny one down the dunny. Even their most amorous bend over and take it country the Aussies seem to be telling the US where to go as well. If it wasn’t bad enough with the stupidity of American warmongers with the “you’re either with us or against us” slogan to justify the US invasion of Iraq, it is going down hill further with the clown currently in office methods as you say of doing business . I work for an American Corporate, and think American business practices are some if not the best in the world. But in all world sectors that I work with including our US personnel there is not a single person who has a warm word to say about American politics and the idiots currently setting and threatening American policy. 

[tonbridgebrit]

3 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Hyperbole.

What ?????
Look, people do actually die because of sanctions. In Iraq, prior to the invasion of 2003, lots of civilians did die because of the sanctions.

Sanctions hurt, they hurt the most vulnerable people. The people who suffer the most, they're the very people who we don't want to go through with the pain. Surely, you know that ?

[Matzzon]

And what lawful right does US Government have, that stands above all other countries, to prevent an Iranian oil tanker to deliver to Syria? 

[ThaiBunny]

3 minutes ago, Matzzon said:

And what lawful right does US Government have, that stands above all other countries, to prevent an Iranian oil tanker to deliver to Syria? 

Might is right

[Matzzon]

2 minutes ago, ThaiBunny said:

Might is right

Yes, and hubris is living in deluted countries.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Basil B said:

As Greece is part of the EU could this end with tit for tat sanctions against the US? Donny seems to be making more enemies every day...

 

Very doubtful. For one thing, it would be unlikely that the Greek government got much of an interest to spearhead resistance to USA sanctions, with all that it implies. Banking on the EU taking timely, effective and coordinated action is a laugh.

 

Had the tanker been still registered in Panama, things would have been easier to handle. Now that it flies an Iranian flag, not sure which USA sanctions may apply and how, with regard to use of port facilities and such.

 

When it comes to the cargo - Greece (or Greek companies) buying it would be weighed against the negative consequences related to sanctions. Can't see much of an economic or political upside to purchasing it.

 

If the tanker's final destination is Syria - then EU sanctions would apply as well, and Greek will likely comply. I think that in this stage, if the destination issue isn't made clear, the tanker could be detained regardless - the list of possible destinations gets shorter as it sails eastward.

[Morch]

32 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

What ?????
Look, people do actually die because of sanctions. In Iraq, prior to the invasion of 2003, lots of civilians did die because of the sanctions.

Sanctions hurt, they hurt the most vulnerable people. The people who suffer the most, they're the very people who we don't want to go through with the pain. Surely, you know that ?

 

Well, add faux moral outrage and grandstanding to that.

 

Sanctions are meant to bite. Otherwise, they'd be pointless. I get is that for some posters, especially those with obvious agendas and leanings, any form of power projection is rejected, when applied by countries or governments they oppose.

 

The Iraq reference, other than being off topic, is I think relying on headlines and stories which were found out to be somewhat hyperbolic themselves. This was covered on past topics as well.

[Morch]

21 minutes ago, Matzzon said:

And what lawful right does US Government have, that stands above all other countries, to prevent an Iranian oil tanker to deliver to Syria? 

 

There are standing EU sanctions to a similar effect.

[Longcut]

1 hour ago, Roadman said:

Yeap it’s called the f..k you USA moral law from most of the western countries as they withdraw support for American policy. And your “do business with” is done by threats? Geez George. Easily understandable to why the US is sliding downhill quicker than a runny one down the dunny. Even their most amorous bend over and take it country the Aussies seem to be telling the US where to go as well. If it wasn’t bad enough with the stupidity of American warmongers with the “you’re either with us or against us” slogan to justify the US invasion of Iraq, it is going down hill further with the clown currently in office methods as you say of doing business . I work for an American Corporate, and think American business practices are some if not the best in the world. But in all world sectors that I work with including our US personnel there is not a single person who has a warm word to say about American politics and the idiots currently setting and threatening American policy. 

So, I guess your answer is no. There is no law preventing them from doing business with whomever they choose. Just like any other country can choose not to do business with the United States. But, they always do.

  I wonder why?

[Srikcir]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

U.S. will act if Iranian tanker tries to deliver oil to Syria

There may be a curious Catch-22 with such a statement if "act" means interdiction.

There has been no hard evidence that the tanker will dock in Syria.

If Iran doesn't announce in advance of intent to enter Syrian territorial waters to dock in Syria, it follows that the U.S. would have to detain the tanker in international waters based on an assumption of its destination. But such seizure will violate international freedom of navigation, the very premise the U.S. and other nations use to sail uninterrupted through the South China Sea in defiance of Chinese alleged naval control. 

The potential conundrum is if the tanker were to enter Lebanon territorial waters, then proceed south to a neighboring Syrian port through Syrian territorial waters, never traveling into international waters.

Will then the U.S. decide it has a superior self-right to invade either nation's sovereign seas to interdict the tanker? Even for Trump/Bolton that might be too extreme. Perhaps Trump would go back to his favorite weapon, economic sanctions against Lebanon (in the hypothetical scenario).

[sammieuk1]

Its always been bound for Syria but its never likely to get there limiting the number of places it can but the black sea and Russia is most likely or treacherous Turkey ????

[Almer]

America always jumps when the word OIL is used, in contrast talk about  death and starvation  and it falls on deaf  ears

[Morch]

5 hours ago, Srikcir said:

There may be a curious Catch-22 with such a statement if "act" means interdiction.

There has been no hard evidence that the tanker will dock in Syria.

If Iran doesn't announce in advance of intent to enter Syrian territorial waters to dock in Syria, it follows that the U.S. would have to detain the tanker in international waters based on an assumption of its destination. But such seizure will violate international freedom of navigation, the very premise the U.S. and other nations use to sail uninterrupted through the South China Sea in defiance of Chinese alleged naval control. 

The potential conundrum is if the tanker were to enter Lebanon territorial waters, then proceed south to a neighboring Syrian port through Syrian territorial waters, never traveling into international waters.

Will then the U.S. decide it has a superior self-right to invade either nation's sovereign seas to interdict the tanker? Even for Trump/Bolton that might be too extreme. Perhaps Trump would go back to his favorite weapon, economic sanctions against Lebanon (in the hypothetical scenario).

 

If the tanker makes a beeline to Syria, I think that there could be legal grounds to board and inspect it even in international waters. At least, when the course evidently leads nowhere else. Such a move would certainly be controversial, but not out of sync with the Trump administration actions to date. Same goes for the Freedom of Navigation part - inconsistency and contradictions are pretty much a standard when it comes to Trump & Co.

 

Heading for Lebanese waters and then north to Syria is an option. This will put Lebanon between a rock and a hard place, as there is bound to be pressure applied from multiple parties with vested interests. And there are already economic sanctions on various elements in Lebanon.