• intelshill@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      And a rapidly destabilizing situation in the SCS.

      And contention over the Essequibo.

      Edit: by terrorism, you must mean the unilateral military action taken on by the US and UK without UNSC authorization, right?

      • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        I guess they got taken off the official terrorist designation in 2021, but they’re trying to redesignate them, so idk, semantics.

      • cbarrick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        unilateral […] US and UK

        How is it unilateral if two countries are coordinated?

        (Yes, I’m being pedantic. My apologies.)

        Also, it’s not the job of the UNSC to “authorize” military action of individual nations. UNSC authorization of force (Article 42) refers to sending UN peacekeeping forces, like in the Korean war. This hasn’t happened many times.

        Article 51 allows member states to use force to defend themselves. US and UK military ships were being attacked.

        • intelshill@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          International law also allows a country to protect its own territorial waters and enforce sanctions through them. Sovereignty supercedes the right to self-defence: if a US warship sails into Chinese territorial waters and gets beat down, international law sides with China.

          • cbarrick@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            What was the location of the US and UK ships? What are the treaties governing access to the Red Sea?

            Are you sure that counts as territorial waters for Yemen?