Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
February 12, 2022

U.S. Sends Nuclear Submarine To Harass Russia Near Japan

Since October 30 2021 the U.S. is warning of a Russian military buildup and a potential invasion of the Ukraine.

Over the last days the screaming over Russian exercises on Russian grounds has again increased. The U.S. Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense have both called their Russian counterparts. President Biden will later today call President Putin.

But if the situation is really as dire as the U.S. claims why is it doing this (machine translation)?

An American submarine entered Russian territorial waters in the Kuriles region, and special means were used against it, the Ministry of Defense said.

"On February 12, 2022, at 10:40 Moscow time, a U.S. Navy submarine of the Virginia type was discovered in the area of ​​the planned exercise of the Pacific Fleet forces in the territorial waters of the Russian Federation near Urup Island of the Kuril Ridge," the agency said.

The crew of the submarine was given a message in Russian and English via underwater communication: "You are in the territorial waters of Russia. Surface immediately!"

The foreign warship ignored the demand.

"In accordance with the guidelines for the protection of the state border of the Russian Federation in the underwater environment, the crew of the Pacific Fleet frigate Marshal Shaposhnikov used appropriate means," the message says.

The American submarine used a self-propelled simulator to double the target on radar and acoustic control means and left Russian territorial waters at maximum speed.

A detachment of ships of the Pacific Fleet continues exercises and controls the underwater environment to prevent violation of the state border.

In connection with the incident, the Defense Ministry called the military attache at the US Embassy in Moscow.

The Kuril islands are north east of Japan and part of Russia.


bigger

During the Yalta conference on February 11 1945 U.S. President Roosevelt had conceded the Kuril islands, then completely under Japanese control, to the Soviet Union in exchange for the Soviet Union joining the war against Japan.


bigger

In its typical non-agreement-capable manner the U.S. has since disputed the agreement and supports Japanese claims, repeated recently, on the southern islands on its side of the 1855 border. The dispute has prevented the signing of a peace treaty between Russia and Japan.

Rahm Emanuel, the very new U.S. ambassador to Japan, used the issue to piss off his Russian colleague:


bigger

The Russian ambassador responded by doubting Emanuel's knowledge of the issue.

The U.S. will probably claim that the submarine was in Japanese waters when the Russian navy repelled it.

Russia believes that the new Japanese push on the Kuril islandw issue has been instigated by the U.S. as a part of its current general harassment of Russia. Today's submarine incident will be taken as proof of that thesis.

During the call between Biden and Putin the Russian side will certainly mention the submarine incident.

I do not expect any public results from the call. But there are without doubt some background negotiations about the demands Russia has made and which the U.S. so far has rejected.

The submarine incident could have developed way more badly. The current U.S. behavior is extremely dangerous but being dangerous may well be its intent.

Michael Tracey @mtracey - 19:14 UTC · Feb 11, 2022

Like clockwork, a new round of warnings from US media and government officials is having the effect of exacerbating rather than allaying tensions. Jake Sullivan just declared that any Americans should flee Ukraine. Everything they're doing suggests an intent to trigger war.

Posted by b on February 12, 2022 at 17:20 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page

TASS report: US submarine detected by anti-sub aircraft, Pacific fleet submarine - source

Apparently the Russian side is not happy with the US denials, details are thus leaked.


BTW, b. Urup island is not part of the territories claimed by Japan.

Posted by: phiw13 | Feb 13 2022 11:52 utc | 201

Posted by: Ma Laoshi | Feb 12 2022 19:49 utc | 36

You and a few other bar flies are constantly nagging Russia to start the last war in history. That’s not harsh , that’s plain just stupid.

Posted by: Jörgen Hassler | Feb 13 2022 11:55 utc | 202

More on this:

“ Considering the fact that the incident took place near Urup and not near any of the Kuril Islands that Japan claims as its own, the US can't plausibly claim that it was "operating safely in international waters" since Russia's writ over Urup is universally uncontested even by Tokyo. It's curious to note that this happened the day after the US unveiled its latest Indo-Pacific strategy, suggesting that America was attempting to flex its muscles in Russia's part of this bi-oceanic space but was humiliatingly caught doing so and subsequently chased away in shame.”

https://www.sott.net/article/464381-US-sub-violating-Russias-waters-occurred-amidst-unveiling-of-latest-US-Indo-Pacific-strategy


Posted by: Moses22 | Feb 13 2022 12:17 utc | 203

More on this:

“ Considering the fact that the incident took place near Urup and not near any of the Kuril Islands that Japan claims as its own, the US can't plausibly claim that it was "operating safely in international waters" since Russia's writ over Urup is universally uncontested even by Tokyo. It's curious to note that this happened the day after the US unveiled its latest Indo-Pacific strategy, suggesting that America was attempting to flex its muscles in Russia's part of this bi-oceanic space but was humiliatingly caught doing so and subsequently chased away in shame.”

https://www.sott.net/article/464381-US-sub-violating-Russias-waters-occurred-amidst-unveiling-of-latest-US-Indo-Pacific-strategy


Posted by: Moses22 | Feb 13 2022 12:17 utc | 204

@Peter AU1 | Feb 13 2022 11:40 utc | 200

Norwegian Do you really want a reply?

Peter the first of Australia, when I ask a serious question I expect a serious reply, but nevermind.

Posted by: Norwegian | Feb 13 2022 12:56 utc | 205

Just came across this by accident: there's a German air rescue plane en route to Ukraine. Hope this is not for pulling a Navalny on Zelensky or some sh*t like that.

Posted by: Scotch Bingeington | Feb 13 2022 13:01 utc | 206

as James said, a bunch of jackasses are running the USA. into the ground eventually, but i hope there isn't too much "excitement" along the way. the stupidity and insane risk taking are just mind boggling.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Feb 13 2022 13:19 utc | 207

@Useless meat beater | Feb 12 2022 19:33 utc | 31

Not all war is fought on the military front. Why else do you think the empire is so desperate for a war in the ukraine, if It is not because it is under severe pressure from inflation deflected from China?

Posted by: cindy6 | Feb 13 2022 13:34 utc | 208

@Peter AU1 | Feb 13 2022 11:27 utc | 197 and 199

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/02/europe-should-leave-nato-behind-and-integrate-with-russia.html?cid=6a00d8341c640e53ef0282e142f4cf200b#comment-6a00d8341c640e53ef0282e142f4cf200b

and

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/02/europe-should-leave-nato-behind-and-integrate-with-russia.html?cid=6a00d8341c640e53ef0282e14332a0200b#comment-6a00d8341c640e53ef0282e14332a0200b


"faux"
I sometimes get mistaken for Chinese on the phone with one, if I only say a very few words (which admittedly is difficult for me LOL). I have Chinese family and family in China, which isn't always the same thing. I don't look in the least Chinese myself. Let's face it, "old China hand" really means that you've slept with one--which I'll leave to your own conclusions. Why should we just be one single thing, instead of learning from our experiences?

I'm still not sure what it is that I need your permission for apparently, but I hope that these disclosures secure it. Can we all move on now?

Posted by: Ma Laoshi | Feb 13 2022 14:09 utc | 209

@Jörgen Hassler | Feb 13 2022 11:55 utc | 202

Posted by: Ma Laoshi | Feb 13 2022 14:12 utc | 210

@Jörgen Hassler | Feb 13 2022 11:55 utc | 202

[Oops wrong button.]

"start the last war in history"
I think Russia faces a relentless enemy, too strong to be defeated, and even in its weakened state (because of that) very dangerous. The only options I see are capitulation and deterrence. I'm worried that the USSR, or even Hezbollah, did/do the latter better than modern Russia.

I make that point using poetic license. Sometimes, this prods people who actually know, say, the sub cat-and-mouse game to explain that what you could legally do, and what both sides have traditionally always done, are different, and that the latter surely is wiser. This is exactly what I'm here for.

Just the other day on that Lauria/Ritter/Mercouris discussion, we were reminded of the 2008 "Nyet means nyet" cable from Ambassador Burns, re: NATO expansion beyond red lines. Moscow has been so awful in communicating this, that they are still not being believed on this point. One way or another, this is something we have to come to terms with.

Posted by: Ma Laoshi | Feb 13 2022 14:31 utc | 211

If there is an actual international intent to knock the US clique down from 24/7 berserking, pissing on every curtain and at least into """normal""" levels of imperialist shenanigans, the RF must carefully choose its battles.

Why? Because the RF has to stick around for the whole process as a not fully engaged reserve of hard power, to maintain a balance in which things could still get very much worse for the hopefully dwindling US clique.

The moment the RF has to go "all in" is the moment when any plans for some sort of "controlled demolition of the rules-based order*" didn't survive contact with the enemy; and everything is up for grabs again.

Other players in the long list of present and past enjoyers of US' clique's care and ministrations cannot play that part as effectively and seem to be much less inclined to do so.

*: I make the rules and you follow them, or else.

Posted by: Misotheist | Feb 13 2022 14:54 utc | 212

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 13 2022 6:50 utc | 176

The violation of another states borders by an armed naval vessel is an act of war.
The infringed state has full right in international law to do as it pleases as it enjoys a recognized right of self-defence.

But an act of war originating any subsequent kinetic conflict is the responsibility of the foreign state's conduct not the defending state.

I think you must be an American as the common US position is to invade as they wish and any response to US military action violating accepted precepts of international law is deemed "unfair," "unacceptable," and "horrific," by Americans.

On 9/11 there was a loss of 4,000 souls. The Hegemon conveniently overlooked the fact that 9/11 was blow-back for its repeated transgressions in foreign states and the repeated harm caused to foreign peoples.

You do bad things to people and they will eventually return the favour. It may take them years, and they may not respond in the way you desire, but the blow-back is the result of your conduct.

I agree with Posted by: Moses22 | Feb 13 2022 6:49 utc | 175 that RF acted in an appropriate and skilful manner. But agreed international law grants the infringed state the full right of self defence which includes the right to destroy the infringing armed vessel.

To borrow the language of Victoria Nuland: К черту Америку!

Posted by: Sushi | Feb 13 2022 14:58 utc | 213

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 13 2022 6:50 utc | 176


If you were not at war before you did it, you most certainly are afterwards

You instigated the war at the moment your armed vessel entered foreign territory.

Posted by: Sushi | Feb 13 2022 15:03 utc | 214

Let's all take a deepbreath and relax....

Posted by: morongobill | Feb 13 2022 15:03 utc | 215

@jared(124):
Maybe Bosporus is open for subs(on the surface) only.
https://twitter.com/MihajlovicMike/status/1492877275821449220

Posted by: Wolle | Feb 13 2022 15:28 utc | 216

@Norwegian #184
Was it? It seems pretty clear that an accident occurred. The rumors of a failed testing of an experimental weapon are slightly credible, but it is public knowledge that the Kursk used torpedos that utilized very dangerous fuel.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 13 2022 15:59 utc | 217

some people here might have a drinking habit... you might want to factor that possibility into the conversation..

Posted by: james | Feb 13 2022 16:05 utc | 218

@ Norwegian | Feb 13 2022 8:37 utc | 184.

The sinking of the Kursk submarine was kind of mysterious.


Not really. If the Americans/Nato wanted the Kursk sunk by one of thier vessels they were would have quietly followed it out, alone, into deep ocean, far from land and Russian bases, and sunk it there, not attacked it while it was in the middle of a fleet of 30 Warships, all on high alert because they were conducting excercises. Nor would they want it sunk, in shallow water, close to Russia's main Naval base, where it could be raised, and forensically examined.

Sabotage by Nato is extremely unlikely on the grounds that if Nato had developed the ability to sabotage a Russian Naval vessel or its weapons, it was likely to be a one shot deal. The Russians would have been alerted and any further attempts would have been, likely, blocked or prevented, so you keep that capability in reserve for use when you need it, Wartime. Not squander it to no purpose during peace.

The Torpedo that blew up in the launch tube and triggered everything else was one the Kursk crew was unfamiliar with, were not trained for, and needed a particular sequence of events to be done, in the right order and in full, for safe launch handling.

Furthermore, the electrical connectors between the torpedo and the arm/launch controls were known to be unreliable on that class of boat.

That torpedoes onboard fuel (HTP) is very dangerous and unstable if mishandled, and has caused the sinking of Subs before, which is why it's use had been discontinued in western fleets.

The Kursk crew were unfamiliar, and untrained in procedures of handling torpedoes using this type of fuel.

A lot of brave men died to no good purpose.

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 13 2022 16:09 utc | 219

@ Jörgen Hassler | Feb 13 2022 11:55 utc | 202

I agree

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 13 2022 16:26 utc | 220

Don Bacon| 152
Count the handful of big rigs in the video on Taibbi's article. There are only a couple of hundred in the whole country, out of tens of thousands of Canadian truckers.
This is organized by various rightist operatives.
https://pressprogress.ca/meet-the-extremists-and-social-media-influencers-at-the-centre-of-the-far-right-siege-of-ottawa/
Most people are annoyed with Trudeau for not cracking down, although the conservatives are demanding that he appease the insurrectionists.
The Maidan is an obvious analogy, although I have not seen any MSM making this comparison.

Posted by: Keith McClary | Feb 13 2022 16:41 utc | 221

Patroklos | Feb 12 2022 22:24 utc

"...your predicted scenario may also be the right one. Oh but how badly I want the Empire to lose a death star..."

Thanks for both agreeing with me and illustrating my point. The truth isn't something barfleas will hear unless it concurs with their pre-existing bias. You are a fly barfly. Congrats!

cindy6 | Feb 13 2022 19:33 utc

Why else do you think the empire is so desperate for a war in the Ukraine, if It is not because it is under severe pressure from inflation deflected from China?

Agreed on your point regarding asymetrical or technical war and also that Biden and the Dumbocrats seriously need a diversion for the midterms. However, the mere threat (or "bluff" as I termed it) of war has already driven up petroleum prices which doesn't benefit China nor the US (except for the fossil fuel sector). A real war will further exacerbate these supply chain issues and send inflation rates further upward which will hurt all three power blocs...so no one wins in the real war scenario.

Arguably, Russia gains more from the present state of the bluff because their economy gains relatively more from higher oil prices than the US does (because larger percentage of Russian economy is petro based). I think you mean the US wants a war to bring halt to German pipeline project and that is a fair point with which I agree. Hence, the bluff without a real war helps Russia more than the US or China while a real war hurts all sides of the globalized economy.

Barfleas tend to ignore that China and Russia are all in with globalization for their economies as much as the US and EU.

Knowledgeable barflies such as yourself understand the symmetrical nature of globalized economies and both how war and the serious threat of war ("bluffing" included) throw this balance into asymmetry.

The Dumbocrats are quite capable of forgetting (Biden) or ignoring (MIC and Oil Patch) this fact, although I'm quite sure Russia is basing their "military-technical" strategy to confront NATO on it. My guess is Russia will largely succeed in making its point without a real war although everyone will call victory at some point when the crisis abates and oil prices retreat.

Posted by: Useless meat beater | Feb 13 2022 16:49 utc | 222

@ Sushi | Feb 13 2022 14:58 utc | 213

Sushi, you are incorrect.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, (which Russia has signed but America has not) does not allow a nation to attack and sink any warship of any other nation it finds in it's territorial seas.

Any nation may send it's warships through the territorial waters of any other, provided it is on "Innocent Passage."

Defining "Innocent Passage" is of course, open to dispute.

My point still stands, there is a set of procedures/conventions known and understood by all Navies that have Submarines about how to handle the discovery of an intruder sub in your territory. You may terrify it's crew, you may humiliate the Country and Navy that sent it. But you don't sink it unless you are already at war or have decided to start one.

These procedures/conventions are informal, they don't have the rule of law. But everyone involved in submarine warfare knows them.

It's common sense.

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 13 2022 17:22 utc | 223

DaveGood | 223
So, if it was "Innocent Passage" they could say it was not "operations". But that does not deny that an incident occurred.

Posted by: Keith McClary | Feb 13 2022 17:48 utc | 224


In "innocent passage", are you supposed to inform the passee of your presence?

Posted by: Bemildred | Feb 13 2022 18:01 utc | 225

@DaveGood | Feb 13 2022 16:09 utc | 219

Reasonable arguments. I am open to several explanations.

Posted by: Norwegian | Feb 13 2022 18:12 utc | 226

TASS report: US submarine detected by anti-sub aircraft, Pacific fleet submarine - source

Apparently the Russian side is not happy with the US denials, details are thus leaked.

That article states that the sub was detected by an Il38 May. Most likely means of detection were random chance patrol picking it up on MAD (magnetic anomaly detector) or an active pinging sonobuoy. Then they vectored in the Russian sub to localize with passive sonar and most likely a helicopter from the Udaloy prosecuted with depth charge or dummy torpedo.

Posted by: Cold War Kid | Feb 13 2022 18:51 utc | 227

@ : Keith McClary | Feb 13 2022 17:48 utc | 224

Yes.

Personally I have no doubt Russia caught A Virginia class US sub, in it's waters, spying on the Russian Fleet excercises taking place there. It's what those Subs are for.

@ Bemildred | Feb 13 2022 18:01 utc | 225

Hello, good question, I don't know but I doubt it. I just skimmed through highlights of The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. ( Copies of which are available online.)

Interestingly, the phrase "Innocent Passage" permits the Nation whose Seas warships pass through to block them to warships engaged in hostilities with a third party elsewhere. You are not on "Innocent passage" if you are on your way to war with someone else.

That's why Turkey is legally permitted to block the passage of all warships through the Bosphorus in time of war, even if it's not at war itself. The same is true for Iran and the Straits of Hormuz.

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 13 2022 18:54 utc | 228

Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS):
An innocent passage must done with:
"Prior Notification" and in
"Normal Mode"

"Military vessels must transit in Normal Mode, which means they must not undertake:
Underwater or submerged transit (submarines)
Activities necessary for the security of surface warships (such as formation-steaming and other force-protection measures)."

Posted by: Wolle | Feb 13 2022 19:20 utc | 229

@ Vintage Red | Feb 13 2022 5:03 utc | 164

What is a true revolution depends on one's definition of revolution and revolutionary. Of course, you are right that a part of the ruling class is not going to carry through a revolution like the French or Russian Revolutions, nor even like the Mexican Revolution. But they may start the ball rolling, and then other, more radical movements may emerge, or not. In the latter case, you may have an aborted or partially-aborted revolution. The classical example is described by Ronald Syme in his book The Roman Revolution, speaking of the period 133-30 BC, which led to the overthrow of the oligarchical republic and the subordination of the descendants of the former ruling class under a centralized, quasi-hereditary military dictatorship, the Roman Empire. In this period, the revolutionary party of the populares finally succeeded in overthrowing the optimates under the leadership of Julius Caesar, a blue-blooded patrician. The Caesarian party, however, consisted largely of riffraff from the optimates' point of view, and the regime of Caesar Augustus, at first, was even more so in this regard. Of course, one can say this was only a "bourgeois" revolution where the so-called riffraff were actually amibtious, nascent classes whom the old elite refused to share power with. And the initial post-revolutionary governments of the French (Mirabeau), Russian (Kerensky), Mexican (Madero), and Iranian (Abu Hasan Bani Sadr) Revolutions could also all be called bourgeois, but they were still revolutions, even if they had more radical phases to come.

In our case, the consideration is what will it take to end the oppression at home and abroad, particularly the frequent wars of aggression. It is true that in the case of the Russian Revolution, the Kerensky regime continued the war against Germany and Austria-Hungary on the side of the Allies, much to the general dismay, and it took the Bolsheviks to end that, but it would seem to me that in our case the collapse of the dollar is a more likely motivator. And I agree that there is an extreme danger of the ruling class becoming more unhinged than they already are. Because they appear to me to have no ethical principles at all, and only a desire to stay in power, they might even opt to blow up the planet rather than be removed. I think this explains the cautious approach of Putin and Xi sufficiently and also justifies them. Anyway, some kind of dramatic changes are coming.

Posted by: Cabe | Feb 13 2022 19:49 utc | 230

Posted by: Ma Laoshi | Feb 13 2022 14:31 utc | 211

Poetic? You? Being a published poet I here by exercise revoked your license. The reason is you use it to call for very real war that will kill very real people. Remember "There was no action to drive home to the Georgians "We can bomb you once a year; you sure you want that?"" That's not poetry, that's just stupid. And dangerous. Have you heard of atomic bombs? Do you know the US have them? Has any one ever told you about the concequenses of their use? Google it!

I'm glad the Russians and the Chinese seem to be a tad bit smarter than their fan club of barking dogs of war at MoA. Look closely Ma Laoshi, they are trying to avoid direct military confrontation. Ever wonder why? Think it is because they don't have the balls you do?

Posted by: Jörgen Hassler | Feb 13 2022 19:54 utc | 231

...here by exercise my right to revoke...

Posted by: Jörgen Hassler | Feb 13 2022 19:55 utc | 232

@ Wolle | Feb 13 2022 19:20 utc | 229


Thank you Wolle.

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 13 2022 20:00 utc | 233

Posted by: Sushi | Feb 13 2022 15:03 utc | 214

Oh, thank you. When the mushroom clouds appear every body will go: "Yes, I know we all will die, but that's not my main concerne right now. What I want to know is WHO THE HELL STARTED THIS?"

Posted by: Jörgen Hassler | Feb 13 2022 20:01 utc | 234

"Military vessels must transit in Normal Mode, which means they must not undertake:
Underwater or submerged transit (submarines)
Activities necessary for the security of surface warships (such as formation-steaming and other force-protection measures)."

Posted by: Wolle | Feb 13 2022 19:20 utc | 229

Thank you, much appreciated.

Posted by: Bemildred | Feb 13 2022 20:18 utc | 235

Jörgen Hassler @234--

Depends on which round you're talking about. The ongoing Class War of Creditors versus Debtors has raged for over 4,000 years, and what's happening now is another of its escalations. Its roots go back to the last quarter of the 19th Century in England with the Rentier Reaction versus those wanting to eliminate their Free Lunch and further promote Industrial Capitalism that would hence usher in Socialism. Do read Hudson's 3rd edition of Super Imperialism for the specifics along with his other works, especially Killing the Host.

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 13 2022 20:24 utc | 236

@Peter AU1 | Feb 13 2022 10:37 utc | 193

He babbled about US subs being so mighty and powerful that one could sink the whole Russian fleet, and that they were so much better than Russian ones.

Just a troll, forget about.

Posted by: aquadraht | Feb 13 2022 20:54 utc | 237

Bhadrakumar:

Biden dials back belligerence toward Russia

Posted by: Bemildred | Feb 13 2022 21:03 utc | 238

To everybody who's afraid of a nuclear war breaking out: you must have been asleep at the time, or you would have noticed that just prior to tensions rising over Ukraine, the big 5 of China, France, Russia, the UK and the USA together gave the world a big, big heads-up. There just isn't going to be one (a nuclear war, that is)!

Posted by: Scotch Bingeington | Feb 13 2022 21:05 utc | 239

Comment:

Reading the tea leaves today I get the impression the Democratic Party is beginning to focus on their upcoming ass-kicking in November and are starting to make "gestures of concern".

Posted by: Bemildred | Feb 13 2022 21:09 utc | 240

Scotch Bingeington @239--

I noted and linked to the article announcing it, but I very much doubt anything the Outlaw US Empire says about anything, including not waging nuclear war.

I recall an admonishment from my mother when trying to exonerate my behavior with But they started it. She said I was just as much to blame since I allowed myself to get lured into the fight when I could easily have walked away. And that was years before my Karate Sensei said essentially the same thing.

The credibility of the Outlaw US Empire is already at scum-of-the-earth level. Imagine how much lower it will go when no war materializes after the raging hysteria in response to Russia's revelation that the Empire and NATO have broken the three key OSCE Security Treaties.

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 13 2022 21:20 utc | 241

@223 "Defining "Innocent Passage" is of course, open to dispute."

No, not really, because that term is defined in the UNCLOS.

And one of the things in that definition is that a submarine must be on the surface and must be flying its flag as it is carrying out its "innocent passage" through those territorial waters.

Or, put another way: if it is submerged then that isn't "innocent passage", and nothing in the UNCLOS offers that submarine immunity.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Feb 13 2022 21:25 utc | 242

Bemildred | Feb 13 2022 21:09 utc | 240

I guess if US is agreement capable then that would be correct. But from what I have seen, US is not even capable of holding to written and signed agreements.

Here's one I think already broken with the AUKUS pact "We remain committed to our Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) obligations,"

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 13 2022 21:32 utc | 243

I guess if US is agreement capable then that would be correct. But from what I have seen, US is not even capable of holding to written and signed agreements.

Here's one I think already broken with the AUKUS pact "We remain committed to our Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) obligations,"

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 13 2022 21:32 utc | 243

I'm not suggesting they actually mean well, or are actually competent to write good laws, just that they will try to look like they are doing something that looks good to the public. That probably means reduced focus on warmongering. Internationally they will have to be forced to it, that is an uncertain work in progress. But as others have said, there are signs of objection to the warmongering internationally, and Durham's case is a real grenade.

But as I said tea leaves, more to be seen before getting too set on the idea.

I'm anglo as can be too, and I'm not leaving either. Would not miss it. My best regards to you.

Posted by: Bemildred | Feb 13 2022 21:46 utc | 244

The TASS item linked @201 says:

"A Virginia-class submarine belonging to the US Navy was spotted in Russia’s territorial waters near the Kurils by Il-38 anti-submarine aircraft and one of the Pacific Fleet submarines during a planned exercise on locating a submarine of a hypothetical enemy, a source close to the naval sphere told TASS." [My Emphasis]

It's entirely possible that the enemy sub only detected the Russian sub which caused it to use its diversionary tactic. I doubt it was aware of the Il-38's detection, although it was likely aware of the nearby Russian surface flotilla it was there to spy on. The report fails to mention which Russian asset detected the enemy sub first; that detail would be very important for the enemy. Also of importance would be the distance the sub was tracked after contact. I'd wager the enemy sub will try to infiltrate again as its command would want to know Russian location capabilities.

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 13 2022 21:46 utc | 245

@Scotch Bingeington | Feb 13 2022 21:05 utc | 239

In the words of Goethe: I hear the message well, but I have little faith.

Posted by: aquadraht | Feb 13 2022 21:54 utc | 246

@ aquadraht | Feb 13 2022 20:54 utc | 237

Modern nuclear, fast attack subs like America's Virginia Class or the Russian Yasen are feared by every surface ship in all navies.

Faster then almost all surface vessels they carry a mix of weapons, which, in Yasen's case can destroy an entire American Carrier Battle group from a distance of 37 yards to 370 miles away in a few minutes, and have enough stores left over to switch oceans, hunt down, and destroy a second one. They would not even break the surface doing it.

Submarines fear aircraft.

If caught in coastal waters by a fleet they are in a lot of trouble. But if forced to fight it out they can launch heavy weight, homing torpedoes, from depth, in salvos, ten at a time.

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 13 2022 22:01 utc | 247

@ Yeah, Right | Feb 13 2022 21:25 utc | 242

You are correct, I hadn't read through to where UNCLOS defines "Innocent Passage" and I should have done

I note that America while refusing to sign, and abide, by it, will happily berate other nations with accusations that they breaking it.

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 13 2022 22:11 utc | 248

@Cabe | Feb 13 2022 19:49 utc | 230

Thank you for that reminder, I was not casting my net back as far as the Roman Revolution (though I was wondering if you were thinking of Kerensky's Provisional Government). I see what you mean by a ruling faction getting the ball rolling and agree, that's an indirect path. If the US is compared to a modern Rome, I do hope we can do better than a modern JC. The main immediate goal is defanging the US threat to life on Earth, though I still feel some form of socialism here, a cooperative actor in a multipolar world, will be necessary to deal with the climate crisis.

"Because they [the US ruling class] appear to me to have no ethical principles at all, and only a desire to stay in power, they might even opt to blow up the planet rather than be removed. I think this explains the cautious approach of Putin and Xi sufficiently and also justifies them."

As the Romans used to say, *rem acu tetigisti*—"you touch it with a needle".

Posted by: Vintage Red | Feb 13 2022 22:36 utc | 249

aquadraht 237
I was just having a laugh at it. I often put comments in another language into a translator. User names often have meaning so I looked that up also. It had something to do with deceiver.
Ma Laoshi has been pumping for war so I looked up the meaning of that user name also.

I get a bit short tempered too often.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 13 2022 23:01 utc | 250

I don’t see China and Russia sailing in/near US waters. Why they play these games is beyond me. They’re gambling with the lives of US servicemen at this point because eventually they will push too far. Just foolish

Posted by: Danny | Feb 13 2022 23:48 utc | 251

@DaveGood (248)
"I note that America while refusing to sign, and abide, by it, will happily berate other nations with accusations that they breaking it."

On the one hand US claimed "innocent passage" on the other they didn't sign UNCLOS.
Ok,everyone on this planet knows any signed treaty by the US has no value.
https://www.history.com/news/native-american-broken-treaties
What a surprise!

PS: English isn't my native language!

Posted by: Wolle | Feb 14 2022 0:10 utc | 252

I believe US has signed but not ratified UNCLOS. Ratifying means UN law become US law.
UNCLOS is voluntary but few outside places like this realize US is not bound by it according to international law and apart from one tiny landlocked nation, is the only country that has not ratified this agreement.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 14 2022 0:18 utc | 253

@ Peter 253
re: UNCLOS
The US wants to impose UNCLOS on others but not on itself.. . . the US Senate would not sign anything that might jeopardize US sovereignty. Senators Portman and Ayotte: “We simply are not persuaded that decisions by the International Seabed Authority and international tribunals empowered by this treaty will be more favorable to U.S. interests than bilateral negotiations, voluntary arbitration, and other traditional means of resolving maritime issues. No international organization owns the seas, and we are confident that our country will continue to protect its navigational freedom, valid territorial claims, and other maritime rights.”. . .That is exactly China's position, with its position that disputes should have been settled locally.
Of course this is not the only treaty in that category . . . a list here

Posted by: Don Bacon | Feb 14 2022 0:38 utc | 254

re: innocent passage, from UNCLOS
. ."Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State." . . and of course the host country gets to decide that.
The US doesn't use innocent passage any longer. The incursions were definitely for propaganda purposes, for one thing. The US Navy claims they are sailing in international waters because the island affected is contested ownership, even though (in the case of the Paracels, for example) China has has a military base on an island grabbed from Vietnam decades ago. . .The US has grabbed a few islands in its day, of course.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Feb 14 2022 0:47 utc | 255

@ Peter 243
Why the AUKUS Submarine Deal Is Bad for Nonproliferation
by James Acton

In my assessment, the nonproliferation implications of the AUKUS submarine deal are both negative and serious. For Australia to operate nuclear-powered submarines, it will have to become the first non-nuclear-weapon state to exercise a loophole that allows it to remove nuclear material from the inspection system of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | Feb 14 2022 0:55 utc | 256

Here is a more detailed account, in English, from a Russian site:

https://chernayakobra.ru/details-of-the-invasion-of-the-us-navy-submarine-into-our-waters-virginia-could-be-sunk-by-our-defense-but-sorry-for-the-crew/

Interesting connection: the otherwise uninhabited island of Urup is the site of a major gold mining operation ultimately controlled by an ex-Soviet investor, Alexander Bronstein, who now lives in Estonia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Solway_Group&oldid=1062902731

https://solwaygroup.com/our-business/kurilgeo-project-russia/

Posted by: Pacific Observer | Feb 14 2022 1:36 utc | 257

A few links without context.

"'Invisible' Hybrid Earthquake Caused Massive Tsunami in 2021, Scientists Say" from Sputniknews (again!) :)

The world is still big: "pole of inaccessibility" (Wikipedia link) and similar regions.

"How much energy does an earthquake release?" claims 8 magnitude comparatively represents roughly 15 megatons of energy. The actual details are very complicated and would become much more complicated if reversed in the case that it's not actually an earthquake being heard (I would guess things such as the distance to the seabed would matter a lot).

Posted by: Sunny Runny Burger | Feb 14 2022 1:38 utc | 258

I assume the destination of the submarine was the Sea of Okhotsk. There are tree ways(between Kurile Islands) wide enough(> 24 sea miles) to go in submerged.
1. between Chirpoy and Simushir (Bussole Strait)
2. between Raikoke and Shiashkotan (Krusenstern Strait)
3. between Onekotan and Paramushir (Fourth Kuril Strait)
There was no reason to enter Russian territorial waters.
Tow other ways are possible through Japanese territorial waters, but both with shallow waters.

If there any information where incident happens exactly? Btw. the sea is big. ;-)

Posted by: Wolle | Feb 14 2022 1:41 utc | 259

@ Sunny Runny Burger | Feb 14 2022 1:38 utc | 257

Hmm... Petrol, weight for weight, is ten times more powerful then TNT. I learn something new every day.

Thanks for that.

@ Wolle, English may not be your native language, but you use it better then many.

Congratulations.

PS.. I know no more then you about exactly where the Sub incident took place. It was near one of the Kuriles, but that doesn't mean the Sub was simply transiting through one of the Straits at the time.

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 14 2022 2:01 utc | 260

If there any information where incident happens exactly? Btw. the sea is big. ;-)

Posted by: Wolle | Feb 14 2022 1:41 utc | 258

Near an island named Urup is all I have seen, that's from the Russians.

Posted by: Bemildred | Feb 14 2022 2:10 utc | 261

DaveGood
Many elements are extremely reactive to oxygen. A fuel that uses atmospheric oxygen always gives better power to weight and energy density than something that must carry its own oxygen. In saying that, there are a few rocket motors that do not rely on the oxidization of another element.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 14 2022 2:11 utc | 262


... and looking at my old Times Atlas I see it is the 3rd large island north of Hokkaido, and there is a deeper pass just north of that, about 152 dg. East and 45 degrees North.

Posted by: Bemildred | Feb 14 2022 2:19 utc | 263

@262

Amend that to 47 degrees north.

Posted by: Bemildred | Feb 14 2022 2:24 utc | 264

@Ma Laoshi | Feb 12 2022 20:09 utc | 42

"What else is the war machine than the total sum of people for whom "it's just a job"? All this very much includes Tulsi Gabbard by the way."

I think you truly have some misunderstanding towards Tulsi Garbbard. Yes, she was, and probably still is, an officer of Army National Guard (a Major, I think), and she served in both Iraq and Afghanistan. However, she was related to the medical side of the Army, and never played a combat role.

She appeared in several Carlson shows, but that doesn't necessarily mean she is a anti-Russia and anti-China conservative politician. As a Democratic lawmaker, she is not with the mainstrean Democratic Party core group. As one of the seven (?) presidential candidates of the Democrates, she stood out with her independent stands. She is anti-war, she advocates normal relationship with other nuclear powers (clearly referring to Russia and China), and her visit to Syria and meeting with Syrian President says it all: she is an open-minded, responsible political figure whom the States needs for real reforms and real changes.

Posted by: Chen Laoshi | Feb 14 2022 2:51 utc | 265

@ : Peter AU1 | Feb 14 2022 2:11 utc | 261

From what I remember of the Kursk tragedy at the time, the Torpedo used high test peroxide as the oxidiser.

The theory was that somehow the torpedoes motor was started while it was still in the torpedo tube.

The motor, without water to push against, spun up, over revved and over heated, drawing the htp through brass fuel lines which also overheated causing an explosive reaction with the htp inside them.

That happened to a british sub too many years earlier causing an explosion in the torpedo room.

Fortunately the Sub was alongside a dock in a port at the time, so it was a simple matter to evacuate the crew then exam the torpedo room to find the cause.

The British never used htp again.

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 14 2022 2:59 utc | 266

Bemildred #238

Bhadrakumar: Biden dials back belligerence toward Russia

So in a day or two after zero invasion we will have Jake Sullivan parading his skills through headlines like "Russia backs down" or "Pussy Putin all growl and no punch" or Biden saves Ukraine from Putin death ray".

It is all a complete USA style BS parade of lies, tough guy, maniacal wailing. Straight out of the Jerusalem playbook.

Given that the German Government refused to be belittled, ordered, coerced, craven to the US dictator/occupier and the USA being incompetent to its shoelaces, peace is about in the land. If they ever had any dirt on Scholz such as Ghislane Maxwell's stash of videos, the US would have used it. Instead they have waged idiot panic war throughout the worlds media.

Perhaps the German Scholz has requested a event free visit to Russia and was able to get the US embassy in Berlin to convey the message to whatever passes for 'leadership' in the State Department.

Here's a tip Scholzy - don't fly over Ukraine as the Ukranian army has BUK missiles, vodka, and idiots who have a track record in their use.

The USA is the busted flush and Biden just dealt the last card.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 14 2022 3:16 utc | 267

Ma Laoshi 187

So China should translate this already, and flood the Chinese-language internet with it. Maybe at the next occasion, I'll tell them to muwahahah.

This is a gem...

China must be provoked into initiating any escalation of the conflict, so that it will always appear the aggressor,” writes defence journalist Aris Roussinos, summarising the Colby strategy.

People will die
But won’t there be Taiwanese casualties? Yes. China “must be permitted to strike as indiscriminately as possible,” in this scenario. “Colby further urges the US not to provide potential civilian targets with air defences, reasoning that collateral damage will whip up the public anger against China necessary to winning a war,” Roussinos adds.

In other words, deaths of Taiwan citizens (the “collateral damage” he mentions) would be a public relations coup for the US side.

“Forcing China to escalate could be in our [US] interests,” Roussinos points out. (One wonders if this scenario has received attention from the walking elements of “collateral damage” in Taiwan.)

No secret there, we all know this is standard MO of the anglo saxon humanitarian bombers.
Fighting China to the last TW, Tibetans, Uighurs.....
If only those delusional TW separatists had read this.
Ditto the Dalai clique, East Turkistan jihadists, HK democrats, the Georgians, UKrs, Chechen 'freedom fighters.'

All those
walking collateral damages
hehehehe

Posted by: denk | Feb 14 2022 3:21 utc | 268

ooops apologies all, I should have dropped that in the open thread. Remain calm and enjoy the seabed.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 14 2022 3:27 utc | 269

@Danny | Feb 13 2022 23:48 utc | 251

"Why they play these games is beyond me."
Can't be understood without factoring in narrative dominance. You push and provoke, and then when you got the reaction you want, you splatter that all over the media minus its reactive nature. One way or another, since the fall of the Berlin Wall the US has acquired hegemony over all of Europe, with Moscow sputtering that it's just not fair; no wonder that Washington is wedded to its toolset, even as they face real questions whether the party can last.

What you discuss isn't even the most colorful example of recent US antics. In the Trump-years incident in the Persian Gulf, the US sent a drone into Iranian airspace, and then some 30km next to it a crewed spy plane in intnl air space (correct me as needed). Yes they wanted to observe what the Iranians would do about the drone, but if Iran had whacked the latter plane or both, then in US thinking you've scored a home run. That's what you sign up for when you agree to "serve".

Posted by: Ma Laoshi | Feb 14 2022 3:32 utc | 270

@ denk 267
Forcing China to escalate could be in our [US] interests
China can't be forced to do anything. In fact "doing something" is at the bottom of their list.
. . .Sun Tzu: The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Feb 14 2022 3:43 utc | 271

Don Bacon 270

They cant force, but you couldnt fault them for baiting .

Posted by: denk | Feb 14 2022 3:51 utc | 272

Danny 251
"Why they play these games is beyond me."

FUKUS has been sending gunboats up the Yangtze since the days of Opium wars...
to show who's the boss around here.

BUt there'r more sinister motive as well
From a letter to jp time
[dead link]

Thursday, Aug. 5, 2010

READERS IN COUNCIL
U.S. abusing sea navigation right


By MARK VALENCIA
Kaneohe, Hawaii
Regarding Michael Richardson's July 31 article, "Beijing's Asia power play": Richardson is playing trumpet on the media's bandwagon demonizing China, but he is missing the high notes.

China is not challenging freedom of navigation per se. It is objecting to what it considers U.S. abuse of this right. This probably includes active "tickling" of China's coastal defenses in order to assess the response, interfering with its shore to ship and submarine communications, preparing the battlefield and tracking — as a prelude to targeting — China's new nuclear submarines emanating from its base on Hainan.

Few countries would tolerate these intrusive actions without responding in some way.

Posted by: denk | Feb 14 2022 4:11 utc | 273

@Chen Laoshi | Feb 14 2022 2:51 utc | 264

I already acknowledged that she considerably moved the Overton Window on Syria and others; but so did Donald Trump with a much bigger reach, at least when he was still a primary candidate who was mostly self-funded as far as I know. I have no dog in the US partisan fight; wouldn't blame her for being on Carlson, it all depends on what someone says on his show. I judge her by what she did when it could really make a difference, which was doing her part to get Joe Biden into the White House--still a soldier. We're all contradictory, flawed individuals; others will make different judgements.

"However, she was related to the medical side of the Army, and never played a combat role."
Doesn't "Army" sorta stand out there? It's not like you're helping Iraqis with the Red Cross: you're wearing the uniform of the aggressor, you're part of the invasion. The vast majority of personnel involved had a non-combat role; they don't call it a war machine for nothing. The aggression against other people's countries is already the war crime, whether it was your finger on the trigger or not. The excuses I see "Well but without committing war crimes just a little bit, how was she ever to get ahead in US politics?" do much to explain how we got to this point.

Posted by: Ma Laoshi | Feb 14 2022 4:12 utc | 274

Andre Vltchek on FUS repug/dem duopoly..

https://www.countercurrents.org/vltchek080216.htm

somebody should do an autopsy on vltchek

Posted by: denk | Feb 14 2022 4:22 utc | 275

@Chen Laoshi | Feb 14 2022 2:51 utc | 264

What is the essence of all those great things dear Tulsi is still saying? "I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, that the president I helped install is who he's always been, who he said he was going to be." The difference between Gabbard and any other pol is much smaller than it's made out to be--much smaller than I too had hoped not so long ago. Just the other day that Indian ambassador went viral saying (though with much better words): "Much worse than an enemy, is a friend who betrays you."

These days, the Dems' trouble runs a little deeper, because Biden literally spouts the same phrases as 40 years ago in a world that has moved on, for it is all he still remembers.

Posted by: Ma Laoshi | Feb 14 2022 4:31 utc | 276

ooops apologies all, I should have dropped that in the open thread. Remain calm and enjoy the seabed.
Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 14 2022 3:27 utc | 268

Sorry uncle tungsten I had to laugh at that one. I have watched too much English comedy/satire when I was younger. I often go beyond the pale. I suspect you have a couple of years on me but perhaps this will raise a laugh. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlmkKxRQJuI I had nearly forgotten about him but I suspect he had as much talent to take the mickey out of the powers that be and mind thoughts of the day as John Cleese.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 14 2022 4:49 utc | 277

So in a day or two after zero invasion we will have Jake Sullivan parading his skills through headlines like "Russia backs down" or "Pussy Putin all growl and no punch" or Biden saves Ukraine from Putin death ray".

---

The USA is the busted flush and Biden just dealt the last card.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 14 2022 3:16 utc | 266

Thanks for your comment.

Something like that, yes. Always the obvious endgame is the chumps refuse to be stampeded.

I think Jake S. may be in trouble in the Durham investigation, neck deep in Russiagate. Russians are doing a good job of aggravating the contradictions. I need to crash, have other demands to deal with. will consider further in the morning when I am coherent.

Posted by: Bemildred | Feb 14 2022 6:14 utc | 278

#5

"Were I Russia"

You are not Russia. Fortunately.

Posted by: Olivier | Feb 14 2022 11:22 utc | 279

DaveGood | Feb 13 2022 18:54 utc

Turkey has those rights under the Montreux Convention, not UNCLOS, and only warships at war with Turkey who are not Black Sea warships. Get your facts right!

How I hate nouveau lawyers! If you don't know what you are talking about, don't comment!

Posted by: Cossack | Feb 14 2022 13:27 utc | 280

Thank you Don Bacon (Feb 14 2022 0:38 utc | 254) for the quote and the list.

Senators Portman and Ayotte: “We simply are not persuaded that decisions by the International Seabed Authority and international tribunals empowered by this treaty will be more favorable to U.S. interests than bilateral negotiations, voluntary arbitration, and other traditional means of resolving maritime issues. No international organization owns the seas, and we are confident that our country will continue to protect its navigational freedom, valid territorial claims, and other maritime rights.”

Note that they speak of the treaty soley in terms of how favorable it is to U.S. interests -- no mention of what it would mean in terms of a stable and peaceful world under the United Nations Charter, which the U.S. imposed on the world in 1945 as the sole basis of all international law.

Surrendering of a bit of sovereignty by ratifying and respecting a treaty has for centuries been considered the price a state pays for acquiring the advantages that the treaty offers. Since the U.S. has up until recently been able to impose its will by threat/use of its fire power, it has no use for any such international regulations, except -- as often noted here -- in so far as such regulations are useful for vilifying and coercing other nation states.

No international organization owns the seas, true, but the treaty does not claim ownership for any international organization. Its purpose is to regulate use of the seas in keeping with that international law.

As for China, the entire February 4 Putin/Xi declaration is all about a multilateral international order based on international law. Since China considers Taiwan an integral part of China, logically the Taiwan situation for China is a domestic matter.

Regarding the U.S. and treaties, it is much more complicated (worse) than it appears at first.

For the U.S., signing a treaty is merely a public declaration that the U.S. is in agreement with the provisions and principles of the treaty. The document officially enters into force only when the Senate has ratified it. But ratification can be accompanied by the issuing of reservations, to wit declarations regarding provisions that the ratifying party refuses. Many treaties provide for the possibility of reservations, but many do not, for example the United-Nations-brokered human rights treaties.

Among these latter, the U.S. has ratified the International Convenent on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) attaching -- de facto and de jure illegally -- so many draconian reservations that the United Nations legal counsel declared that the U.S. should withdraw its ratification because the reservations make a mockery of the treaty, effectively rendering it null and void.

But it doesn't stop with ratification for the U.S. then requires enabling legislation to make the treaty "operable".

Under the United Nations Charter, international law (to which states subscribe voluntarily moreover) takes precedence over national law. Where there is any contradiction, it is up to the ratifying state to bring national legislation in line with the commitments that the state has undertaken by ratifying the treaty. U.S. enabling legislation is notorious for ignoring this. And it is almost impossible to bring to bear the U.S.'s commitments under international law in any court case, civil or criminal -- it is simply dismissed as being without merit (irrelevant).

Posted by: RJPJR | Feb 14 2022 13:40 utc | 281

@ Cossack | Feb 14 2022 13:27 utc | 279

Turkey has those rights under the Montreux Convention, not UNCLOS, and only warships at war with Turkey who are not Black Sea warships. Get your facts right!

Fair point Cossack.

I got that one wrong.

My understanding, based on the articles of someone else, (whose name I no longer recall but claimed to be a Lawyer specialising in International Maritime Law) was that a warship transiting a nations territorial waters on the way to a war with a third party was not on "Innocent Passage." and could be stopped.

That could just be his interpretation though and open to dispute.

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 14 2022 14:09 utc | 282

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.