Russia has "counterclaims" against Netherlands

The dutchies have two faces. Google 'Zwart Pieten' and you will see Santa's little helper, a white person blacked up for the role. Most dutchies say "it's traditional".

Zwarte Pieten discussion on B92???? Oh please.
95% of all black people in NL have no problem with it and also celebrate the children festivity. Even in the former colonies and the territory overseas people celebrate it. Some black children even put black paint on their faces so they can be Zwarte Piet too! But some black people in NL with pressure from others in the US want to put an end to it because of slavery history. Never mind that this is a tradition that is centuries old and even predates christianity. The Zwarte Pieten were there even before NL got into the dirty slave trade business.
But we can make them all white and make this it an all white party. But of course that would be racism too...

"Lukashevich noted that Russia will not take part in the arbitrage proceedings, held at the German-based International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea."

Interesting... By reading these forums, I thought that Russia was a principled defender of international law. But the statement above means that Russia will become the first country ever to default appearing before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea!

It's a point about dutch exceptionalism. If the shoe was on the other foot, guess who would be screeching? Certain states publicly put themselves on a higher motal plane than others and them argue when caught with their pants down or something dodgy that they are special.

The Dutch are quite traditional and religious. Anyone who has been outside of Amsterdam will know, but like fellow mega liberal states (i.e. Sweden), the have their dark sides that have been kept hidden from their international PR image. There's plenty of fascism, racism to go around.

In short, the Netherlands doth protest too much, vis-a-vis illegal Greenpeace actions on Russia's periphery.

In short, the Netherlands doth protest too much, vis-a-vis illegal Greenpeace actions on Russia's periphery.
(Beyond The Image, 11 November 2013 12:13)

Well, dear, the illegality under international law remains still to be proved at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

I guess by "periphery" you meant Russia's territorial waters. But remember, that the incident did not happen in Russia's territorial waters (even Russia admits that) so what Russia's Domestic Law says in regards to hooliganism is irrelevant.

It is the International Law of the Sea that governs what happens outside territorial waters. Hooliganism is not one of the reasons for which international law allows the boarding of a ship. So what Russia did (seizure of a ship and its crew at gunpoint in international waters) is akin to piracy. It's very interesting an action by a country which, we are told, is a principled defender of international law!

Spiegel Online, 7 November:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/european-high-court-rules-persecuted-gays-must-be-offered-asylum-a-932423.html

"An EU court ruled Thursday that gays and lesbians persecuted in other countries have the right to asylum in Europe, as long as they fulfill certain conditions. The decision came in a case involving three African men seeking safe haven in the Netherlands."

Get ready for it...

"The court overturned the Dutch decision."

and...

"The Dutch Immigration and Naturalization Service had argued one could expect foreigners to exercise greater restraint in public about their homosexuality in their country of origin."

. So what Russia did (seizure of a ship and its crew at gunpoint in international waters) is akin to piracy. It's very interesting an action by a country which, we are told, is a principled defender of international law!
(icj1, 11 November 2013 22:03)
============================
Not so long ago Japan did the same thing and it was not considered piracy. I think Russia will be right.

B92:

For crying out loud, will you PLEASE stop using the word "arbitrage" when you mean "arbitration"???


arbitration:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arbitration?show=0&t=1384200094

arbitrage:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arbitrage

'periphery' = 'territorial waters'?

Laughed out of court.

icj, a jack of all trades, a master of none (apart from fiction)!

1: The drilling rig belongs to Russia.

2: It was in Russia's EEZ.

3: 2 were climbing the rig which is under restricted russian jurisdiction and dinghies within the rig's 500m safety zone.

RCMP Concerned About 'Radicalized Environmentalist' Groups Such As Greenpeace: Report

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/07/29/radical-environmentalism-rcmp-canada-greenpeace_n_1715336.html

Greenpeace vs. Shell: Alaska Judge Restricts Activists From Boarding Offshore Drilling Vessels

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/30/alaska-greenpeace-activists-banned-shell-oil_n_1556039.html

"ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — A federal judge has made it more difficult for representatives of Greenpeace USA to board Shell Oil's drilling vessels.

In March, Judge Sharon Gleason in Anchorage ordered the group to stay a kilometer away from Shell Oil's drilling ships destined for Arctic waters off Alaska's northern coast. The restrictions applied to U.S. territorial waters up to 12 miles from shore.

On Tuesday, Gleason extended the restrictions to 200 miles offshore. Shell intends to drill 18 miles off the Beaufort Sea coast this summer, and 70 miles off the Chukchi coast."

'periphery' = 'territorial waters'? Laughed out of court.
icj, a jack of all trades, a master of none (apart from fiction)!
(Rainbow Warrior, 12 November 2013 00:39)

Well, I was trying to help you. Because you could only be correct if we define 'periphery' = 'territorial waters'. If you did not mean 'periphery' = 'territorial waters' then what you said was wrong, by definition.
----------

1: The drilling rig belongs to Russia.
(Rainbow Warrior, 12 November 2013 00:39)

OK, nobody is disputing that
----------

2: It was in Russia's EEZ.
(Rainbow Warrior, 12 November 2013 00:39)

great, we agree that it was not in territorial waters but in EEZ waters
----------

3: 2 were climbing the rig which is under restricted russian jurisdiction and dinghies within the rig's 500m safety zone.
(Rainbow Warrior, 12 November 2013 00:39)

"restricted russian jurisdiction" and "rig's safety zone" means nothing under UNCLOS. UNCLOS defines the EEZ and territorial waters. EEZ is regulated by UNCLOS, whereas territorial waters are regulated by the Russian Law. Great that we agree that Russia's law is irrelevant since you agree, as well, that all happened in the EEZ, not Russia's territorial waters. And the Court agreed with us, as well.

The dutchies have two faces. Google 'Zwart Pieten' and you will see Santa's little helper, a white person blacked up for the role. Most dutchies say "it's traditional".

"Lukashevich noted that Russia will not take part in the arbitrage proceedings, held at the German-based International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea."

Interesting... By reading these forums, I thought that Russia was a principled defender of international law. But the statement above means that Russia will become the first country ever to default appearing before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea!

In short, the Netherlands doth protest too much, vis-a-vis illegal Greenpeace actions on Russia's periphery.
(Beyond The Image, 11 November 2013 12:13)

Well, dear, the illegality under international law remains still to be proved at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

I guess by "periphery" you meant Russia's territorial waters. But remember, that the incident did not happen in Russia's territorial waters (even Russia admits that) so what Russia's Domestic Law says in regards to hooliganism is irrelevant.

It is the International Law of the Sea that governs what happens outside territorial waters. Hooliganism is not one of the reasons for which international law allows the boarding of a ship. So what Russia did (seizure of a ship and its crew at gunpoint in international waters) is akin to piracy. It's very interesting an action by a country which, we are told, is a principled defender of international law!

Zwarte Pieten discussion on B92???? Oh please.
95% of all black people in NL have no problem with it and also celebrate the children festivity. Even in the former colonies and the territory overseas people celebrate it. Some black children even put black paint on their faces so they can be Zwarte Piet too! But some black people in NL with pressure from others in the US want to put an end to it because of slavery history. Never mind that this is a tradition that is centuries old and even predates christianity. The Zwarte Pieten were there even before NL got into the dirty slave trade business.
But we can make them all white and make this it an all white party. But of course that would be racism too...

It's a point about dutch exceptionalism. If the shoe was on the other foot, guess who would be screeching? Certain states publicly put themselves on a higher motal plane than others and them argue when caught with their pants down or something dodgy that they are special.

The Dutch are quite traditional and religious. Anyone who has been outside of Amsterdam will know, but like fellow mega liberal states (i.e. Sweden), the have their dark sides that have been kept hidden from their international PR image. There's plenty of fascism, racism to go around.

In short, the Netherlands doth protest too much, vis-a-vis illegal Greenpeace actions on Russia's periphery.

Spiegel Online, 7 November:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/european-high-court-rules-persecuted-gays-must-be-offered-asylum-a-932423.html

"An EU court ruled Thursday that gays and lesbians persecuted in other countries have the right to asylum in Europe, as long as they fulfill certain conditions. The decision came in a case involving three African men seeking safe haven in the Netherlands."

Get ready for it...

"The court overturned the Dutch decision."

and...

"The Dutch Immigration and Naturalization Service had argued one could expect foreigners to exercise greater restraint in public about their homosexuality in their country of origin."

B92:

For crying out loud, will you PLEASE stop using the word "arbitrage" when you mean "arbitration"???


arbitration:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arbitration?show=0&t=1384200094

arbitrage:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arbitrage

. So what Russia did (seizure of a ship and its crew at gunpoint in international waters) is akin to piracy. It's very interesting an action by a country which, we are told, is a principled defender of international law!
(icj1, 11 November 2013 22:03)
============================
Not so long ago Japan did the same thing and it was not considered piracy. I think Russia will be right.

'periphery' = 'territorial waters'?

Laughed out of court.

icj, a jack of all trades, a master of none (apart from fiction)!

1: The drilling rig belongs to Russia.

2: It was in Russia's EEZ.

3: 2 were climbing the rig which is under restricted russian jurisdiction and dinghies within the rig's 500m safety zone.

RCMP Concerned About 'Radicalized Environmentalist' Groups Such As Greenpeace: Report

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/07/29/radical-environmentalism-rcmp-canada-greenpeace_n_1715336.html

Greenpeace vs. Shell: Alaska Judge Restricts Activists From Boarding Offshore Drilling Vessels

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/30/alaska-greenpeace-activists-banned-shell-oil_n_1556039.html

"ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — A federal judge has made it more difficult for representatives of Greenpeace USA to board Shell Oil's drilling vessels.

In March, Judge Sharon Gleason in Anchorage ordered the group to stay a kilometer away from Shell Oil's drilling ships destined for Arctic waters off Alaska's northern coast. The restrictions applied to U.S. territorial waters up to 12 miles from shore.

On Tuesday, Gleason extended the restrictions to 200 miles offshore. Shell intends to drill 18 miles off the Beaufort Sea coast this summer, and 70 miles off the Chukchi coast."

'periphery' = 'territorial waters'? Laughed out of court.
icj, a jack of all trades, a master of none (apart from fiction)!
(Rainbow Warrior, 12 November 2013 00:39)

Well, I was trying to help you. Because you could only be correct if we define 'periphery' = 'territorial waters'. If you did not mean 'periphery' = 'territorial waters' then what you said was wrong, by definition.
----------

1: The drilling rig belongs to Russia.
(Rainbow Warrior, 12 November 2013 00:39)

OK, nobody is disputing that
----------

2: It was in Russia's EEZ.
(Rainbow Warrior, 12 November 2013 00:39)

great, we agree that it was not in territorial waters but in EEZ waters
----------

3: 2 were climbing the rig which is under restricted russian jurisdiction and dinghies within the rig's 500m safety zone.
(Rainbow Warrior, 12 November 2013 00:39)

"restricted russian jurisdiction" and "rig's safety zone" means nothing under UNCLOS. UNCLOS defines the EEZ and territorial waters. EEZ is regulated by UNCLOS, whereas territorial waters are regulated by the Russian Law. Great that we agree that Russia's law is irrelevant since you agree, as well, that all happened in the EEZ, not Russia's territorial waters. And the Court agreed with us, as well.