Except the Houthis aren't just attacking ships docking in Israel. They have been attacking any ship to the point that shipping companies have stopped using the canal.

And a blockade is an act of war. People subject to blockades have the international right to fight back.

[–] zephyreks@lemmy.ml 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There was news coming out today from Bloomberg that some oil tankers stopped using the Suez only following the US-UK airstrikes on Yemen.

Look at an AIS map like vesselfinder. The Sentosa 66 (Suez -> Pakistan) and the Scarlet Robin (Suez -> China) will both be passing the Bab-el-Mandeb heading towards Asia. The Buffalo (Singapore -> Suez) and the Fighter Two (India -> Suez) both passed the Bab-el-Mandeb heading towards the Suez.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Except that the issue wasn't with oil tankers, but with container ships. Before the US-UK attacks, most container shipping companies stopped using the Suez Canal.

It isn't just oil that goes through that canal.

[–] zephyreks@lemmy.ml 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

The Flying Fish 1 container ship from Malaysia to unknown (but just passed Bab-el-Mandeb). The COSCO Shengshi vehicle carrier from the Suez to Malaysia. The Zhong Gu Nan Hai container ship from the Suez to India.

Again, I'd recommend you look at a free AIS map if you'd like to learn more. There was another recent story that come out showing that some ships are declaring "CHINESE VESSEL AND CREW" on AIS to stay safe. In contrast, this is what turning off AIS means:

Deliberately turning off the AIS transmitter signal without legitimate reason represents a breach of SOLAS and puts the ship in breach of flag state regulations. It may also cause suspicion about why the ship’s movements are being concealed. One may assume deceptive shipping practices such as the involvement in illegal fishing activities (as far as fishing vessels are concerned) or trade in contravention to international sanctions. Trading the ship in breach of sanctions, concealing the ships location by “going dark” may also be a reason to deny insurance cover.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club -3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I haven't that all ships have stopped using it, but a significant about have far beyond the affect of trading with Israel.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/container-rates-soar-concerns-prolonged-red-sea-disruption-2024-01-12/

Many shipping companies have shifted operations and the cost of shipping from China to Europe has increased in China. The presence of ships without an analysis of shipping over time from before the attacks doesn't mean shipping lanes are open to everyone but Israel.

[–] zephyreks@lemmy.ml 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Except the Houthis aren't just attacking ships docking in Israel. They have been attacking any ship to the point that shipping companies have stopped using the canal.

That was the claim you made. It's absolutely true that shipping companies with ties to Israel have ceased to transit the Bab-el-Mandeb, but, for example, COSCO recently sent a ship through and was not attacked because they have ceased all shipments to Israel.

Edit: A number of ships were turning off AIS before transiting the Bab-el-Mandeb early in the conflict. See my comment above to learn more about why that's usually not the best idea.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Maersk is Danish.

[–] zephyreks@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 months ago

A lot of companies have ties to Israel. Comes with globalization.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

People subject to blockades have the international right to fight back

let me guess... unless they're Palestinians, right?

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2 points 10 months ago

No, this includes Palestine.