Finland charges Russian captain and crew member of ship suspected of damaging undersea cables — prosecutors claim ship had eight more targets before it was stopped by coast guard
7h 26m ago by lemmy.today/u/sanitation in technology from www.tomshardware.com
There's a precedent and it isn't helping the chances for a conviction:
This is the second undersea cable-related investigation to reach prosecution, as another Russian-linked ship, the Eagle S oil tanker, was involved in another suspected sabotage on Christmas Day 2024. Three officers of the “shadow fleet” tanker were charged with the same criminal cases that the Fitburg crew are facing, although Finland failed to secure a conviction, as the court said that it did not have jurisdiction over the case because the incident happened outside of Finnish territorial waters. The ruling is currently under appeal, though, with prosecutors arguing that “the effects of the crime materialized here in Finland.”
Honestly though, the Russians do it this way specifically because it’s a deniable operation, and even if they’re caught, the criminal prosecution can be a nightmare.
So, idk; maybe if they’re caught sabotaging critical infrastructure of sovereign nations that happen to be in international waters, and intentionally setting things up so that it’s infeasible or impossible to successfully prosecute… don’t bother with the prosecution, go a bit old-school, and let the crew and the vessel plead their case with Davey Jones. Yes, it’s admittedly an extremely harsh approach… but, you know, fuck around and find out. If normal channels are intentionally made impossible to pursue, abnormal channels become the only real recourse.
Civilized societies need to understand that there are people and nations that will intentionally exploit the ambiguities that exist on the fringes of said civilizations, and sometimes, violent response is the optimal solution. And it doesn’t have to be “from here on out” - it just has to be done a few times in particularly egregious situations that are going to become a legal quagmire. It’s analogous to a bully who beats you up constantly, and then one day you snap and bring a monkey wrench in your backpack and break his kneecaps. He’s not gonna beat you up anymore after that.
Edit: and, compared to the idiotic bullshit we’re doing in the Caribbean right now, I’d feel a lot less bad if we sent a couple sabotage-oriented Russian shadow fleet vessels to the ocean floor instead.
So better make sure there are no survivors.
Message understood.
Playing fair in a rigged game is a sure way to lose.
More or less, yeah.
And the same takeaway can be applied to American (and, I presume, a lot of other countries) politics.
So if we sink one of those panama flag flying ships, it's ok if it's in international waters...
No, as there's customary international law protecting vessels in international waters.
Cables in international waters have only weak legal protection from an elderly treaty (and most countries are not party to that treaty).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Submarine_Telegraph_Cables
The Convention for the Protection of Submarine Telegraph Cables is a multilateral treaty that was signed in 1884 in order to protect submarine communications cables that had begun to be laid in the 19th century.
Parties: 36 (as of 2013)
Pipelines in international waters don't even have that.
Countries kind of started building out submarine infrastructure without a legal basis for protecting it.
Now, in practice, if someone decides to openly sail a ship through the Baltic Sea, North Sea, English Channel, and Mediterranean Sea while dragging a cable cutter, I'd say that it's pretty good odds that it's gonna be stopped on some pretext and that various countries involved are going to have ways of making their displeasure known. But from a legal standpoint, not a lot of levers.
My thought exacty.
If you can't get convicted by a national court because of international waters, sink the next ship that gets caught doing shenenaigans and see how no conviction is possible. They can't have it both ways.
This seems like a "shoot first ask questions later" scenario to me
If you damage someone else’s property, like say a ship, in international waters, what jurisdiction does that fall under? The flag of the damaged ship? Or say like a buoy or a crab pot. Can I just go stealing crab pots in international waters without repercussions?
Maybe Crab Pirate will be my new business venture.
Who owns the damaged lines? If it can be proven that they intentionally damaged those lines, then whoever the owner is, is entitled to compensation from the perpetrator(s) responsible. The amount of restitution needs to also include lost income, in addition to however much it will take to repair or replace the damaged lines.
The owner of said equipment should allowed to use physical force to prevent it from happening again.
Up to, and including the sinking of any vessels, and the execution of any crew onboard, engaged in such acts of piratical sabotage if that is what it takes to end the problem.
And if we see the governments of those responsible start defending those pirates? That tells even more of a story, doesn't it.
Regardless of who is backing them they need to be stopped. Physically if necessary.
Being part of an "official" government force should not give anyone the right to destroy the property of any other person or group of people.
And as for how to enforce that restitution?
Well, there's a word for it. Indenture. Make enough "not soldiers" work off their destructive tendencies for the "enemy" then maybe they and their governments will learn to stop acting like fucking children and breaking everyone else's toys out of jealousy.