Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Saturday December 17 2016, @06:19PM   Printer-friendly
from the molon-labe dept.

A Chinese ship has reportedly seized an underwater survey drone in full sight of a US Navy contracted research vessel.

The drone was taken on Dec. 15, the first seizure of its kind in recent memory, about 50 nautical miles northwest of Subic Bay off the Philippines just as the USNS Bowditch was about to retrieve the unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV), officials said.

"The UUV was lawfully conducting a military survey in the waters of the South China Sea," one official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"It's a sovereign immune vessel, clearly marked in English not to be removed from the water - that it was U.S. property," the official said.

From the CNN report:

The US got no answer from the Chinese on the radio when it said the drone was American property, the official said.

[...] US oceanographic research vessels are often followed in the water under the assumption they are spying. In this case, however, the drone was simply measuring ocean conditions, the official said.

Some background on why the South China Sea is such a tense place.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 17 2016, @10:50PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 17 2016, @10:50PM (#442537)

    How can a boat assert sovereignity when it is unoccupied?

    I'm not a naval lawyer, but I think the US is skating on thin ice and they may have made a mistake by using that specific word.

  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday December 17 2016, @11:52PM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday December 17 2016, @11:52PM (#442552) Journal

    That thought crossed my mind. The Chinese could assert a salvage claim, since there were no crew aboard the vessel. It would be interesting to see that go to court. Lloyd's of London would want to get in on that case! Maritime law may be up to date enough to deal with all the issues here - but I doubt it.

    • (Score: 2) by KiloByte on Sunday December 18 2016, @12:17AM

      by KiloByte (375) on Sunday December 18 2016, @12:17AM (#442561)

      The mother ship was in sight. There's a difference between a stray dog and one that's running unleashed but attended.

      --
      Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 18 2016, @01:50AM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 18 2016, @01:50AM (#442578) Journal

        plausible deniability - "oh, well, there's been some mistake - apparently we have some incompetent lookouts posted aboard our ships, because none of them reported seeing your ship in the vicinity - either that, or your stealth technology is really good - but you see, we've returned your drone and we all get a warm fuzzy feeling from cooperating "

        So, again, there is no piracy here. The Chinese can play it any number of ways, and never admit to any wrongdoing. Unless we back them into a corner, where they might lose face.