> German podcast

There was a Planet Money episode touching on Maritime law:

https://www.npr.org/2025/10/17/nx-s1-5577076/shadow-fleet-ru...

It was about Russian tankers breaking the sanctions, but with a well put explanation of why we can't just stop these ships even with extreme confidence in their fraudulency.

▲

JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> why we can't just stop these ships

To be clear, why we don’t want to. Freedom of navigation makes all of us tremendously richer, even if it permits such fuckery.

Every great power has, at this point, rejected the notion in limited contexts. And if you’re not concerned about trashing trade, there is no incoherence to ignoring these rules.

▲

nradov 2 hours ago | parent [-]

In a hypothetical future where sailing under flags of convenience becomes untenable, all the legitimate merchant vessel owners would rush to register in the US or China. Those vessels would still be able to sail anywhere unmolested. Outside of a few pirate gangs, no one would be stupid enough to screw with them and risk kinetic retaliation. This might increase shipping costs by a few percent.

Russia can bluster and threaten but their navy is weak and shrinking. Most of their commissioned warships never venture far from port. Outside of their territorial waters they have minimal capability to protect their own merchant vessels or interdict anyone else's sea lines of communication.

▲

MangoToupe 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> all the legitimate merchant vessel owners would rush to register in the US or China

The US can't afford to field the navy necessary to back this ams hasn't been able to for many decades

▲

JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> US can't afford to field the navy necessary to back this ams hasn't been able to for many decades

This is nonsense. The U.S. Navy de facto guarantees freedom of navigation today. Globally.

If we switched to a national system, our Navy wouldn’t literally escort U.S.-flagged ships. Its military would just need to enforce the threat that you get bombed if you fuck with America.

We’d save money switching to a big-stick model. (I think we’d be poorer for it in the long run. But if you’re playing chess and your opponent machete, you’re not going to find any winning moves on the board.)

	▲	an hour ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

oooyay an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I am formerly a Marine. This a rather silly notion and I think you should back your claim up with some evidence. Even with as much damage as Donald Trump has done to the US's military preparedness and hegemony around the globe no other fleet operates like the Marine Expeditionary Units. No other fleet can respond to any critical location in less than 24 hours. Add the Coast Guard for near-CONUS and partnered patrols and the US still maintains dominance both at home and abroad.

Nations, like China, are catching up but largely because of two outsized factors:

- The US for some time has not been able to produce ships at home, at scale, and at cost. This is more of a slow burn because the fleet has been kept up to date for the most part. Eventually, new ships need to be built at home.

- Donald Trump has done damn near everything he can to install lackey's within the military, which reduces the military's top decision making acumen down to yes-men to a 79 year old geriatric patient.

Russia's fleet, on the other hand, is an aging joke. It is where we will be if we continue electing fascists that install Martians like Hegseth.

	▲	s5300 43 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		[dead]

▲

m0llusk 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

As we are seeing, "can't" is a really strong word.

	▲	makeitdouble 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yes. I meant it more as "can't _just_", we can do it but need to account for serious ramifications in doing so at scale.