>The ship is estimated to contain about 1.14 million barrels of oil valued at up to US$80 million, which became a point of contention in negotiations between the Houthi rebels and Yemeni government, both of which asserted claims to the cargo and vessel.
Now, I'm no expert but let me venture a guess that the environmental costs of the spill and any subsequent cleanup will be significantly higher than $160M. Can we just pay both sides their $80M to let someone competent tow it out and safely dispose of the oil?
If no government is sufficiently smart to do that someone just start a kickstarter, I'll give you $20k.
Giving $80M to each side in a war is no lock on a smart solution. Such a move could easily worsen the war, destroy the tanker anyway, and anger from millions towards whoever's give that 'gift'. There is potential direct loss of life from such payments in addition to additional environmental impact.
But then youre giving terrorists $80 million, which admittedly the US is already doing with the Saudi air force. I don't think that means we have to make it worse though.
The Houthi are not currently considered a terrorist organization by the U.S. or, as far as I can tell[1], any other nation. (They were for about a month, but the decision was reversed by Biden.)
Not taking a position (as I know very little about them), but this would seem to contradict your argument. Unless you're using "terrorist" to indicate your opinion of the Houthi, as opposed to any official designation.
[1] I rigorously conducted my own research. It consisted of Wikipedia, and only Wikipedia. Your mileage may vary.
This time, but it invites a next time. If we are going to do something it should be send our military (the world's - at least China, Russia, US, UK) take the ship: either from both, or from which ever side we agree to support. Otherwise we should let them fight it out and refuse to send any more oil to either Yemeni or the rebels if any oil escapes.
No thanks. I don't want US blood spilled over something that's not our concern. Let the countries closer to the tanker figure out a solution.
And any military action carries some risk of damaging the tanker, which could cause a leak or fire. Thus precipitating the disaster it was intended to avoid.
Navies have the technology to make this a non issue. U.S. navy could stymie the minefield and tow it to where it can be decommissioned trivially. I wonder what geopolitics at play are preventing this sort of intervention?
"Ansar-Allah (colloquially known as the Houthis), a political and armed movement in control of North Yemen, currently has access to the Safer. As of writing, negotiations between the United Nations and the Houthis to inspect and repair the Safer have stalled indefinitely, and no long-term solutions, such as offloading the oil, have been publicly proposed."
Let's just call this what it is:
The Houthis are holding this ship hostage to get stuff/concessions/whatever from the international community. Period. There are horrific atrocities on both sides of the Yemeni Civil War and from other Gulf states, but this is unforgivable on the part of the Houthis.
Why haven't we rained hellfire upon them by now? They only have a bargaining chip because we have tied our own hands. This situation could be resolved in a day.
The Saudis have been raining hellfire (using US weapons) on the Houthis for years. It hasn't worked. Any attempts to seize the tanker by force might result in the Houthis scuttling it.
Seems pretty smart on their part to me. I mean unless we are all going to fight with the same resources why wouldn’t they do anything in their power? I know we have some rules of war but I highly doubt these guys agreed to such rules and why should they it would seriously put them at a disadvantage. I know nothing of these conflicts or those involved but war is ugly we should expect to see as much.
With my limited understanding of storing volatile liquids...
One approach is to fill the tanks with inert gas... But another approach is to 99% seal up any vents and rely on the fact the fuel vapor concentration in the tanks is above the flammability threshold.
Thats the way the fuel tank in your car doesn't explode for example.
Obviously it would be good to test this regularly with sensors... but even untested it's still more than likely not going to explode.
The New Yorker article goes into much more detail but in short it’s now a resulting hulk, and all these systems have now failed, because the owners are broke. This is all due to the war in which it’s also being used as a bargaining chip.
I think that's why it hasn't exploded yet. If you read the New Yorker article it's clear that it's only a matter of time until either
A) the ship's hull rusts through - letting oxygen in and oil out
B) a gunshot or explosions opens a whole - as it's in a war zone
The obvious political solution would be for a powerful nation, such as the USA, to publicly announce "An agreement must be found between rebels and government forces to eliminate environmental impacts of this ship within 7 days, with work completed within 6 months, or the USA will come in with military force, make it safe, and take the oil as payment".
This seems like the very definition of "World police".
See the New Yorker article. It's an environmental sea mine surrounded by literal sea mines. You can't simply "rush in by force" lest end up spilling the whole thing
OK, so they invade, which is what Saudi Arabia has wanted for years, kill a bunch of people, tow the tanker away, and then .. leave? Mission accomplished?
Yes, mission accomplished, because the red sea will continue to harbor marine life in this scenario. If we don't, everyone in yemen will starve. The port used for international food aid will be blocked with oil. The impovershed fishermen will have nothing to catch.
Readit News
(Not often do you get to italicize a ship name and a publication in the same sentence.)
>The ship is estimated to contain about 1.14 million barrels of oil valued at up to US$80 million, which became a point of contention in negotiations between the Houthi rebels and Yemeni government, both of which asserted claims to the cargo and vessel.
Now, I'm no expert but let me venture a guess that the environmental costs of the spill and any subsequent cleanup will be significantly higher than $160M. Can we just pay both sides their $80M to let someone competent tow it out and safely dispose of the oil?
If no government is sufficiently smart to do that someone just start a kickstarter, I'll give you $20k.
Not taking a position (as I know very little about them), but this would seem to contradict your argument. Unless you're using "terrorist" to indicate your opinion of the Houthi, as opposed to any official designation.
[1] I rigorously conducted my own research. It consisted of Wikipedia, and only Wikipedia. Your mileage may vary.
And any military action carries some risk of damaging the tanker, which could cause a leak or fire. Thus precipitating the disaster it was intended to avoid.
WTF? That's tens of millions of dollars worth of oil. Why hasn't someone salvaged her?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Safer+Oil+Tanker/@15.12456...
Let's just call this what it is:
The Houthis are holding this ship hostage to get stuff/concessions/whatever from the international community. Period. There are horrific atrocities on both sides of the Yemeni Civil War and from other Gulf states, but this is unforgivable on the part of the Houthis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabian-led_intervention...
Seriously, reading about it is like living in the world of this Onion video: https://youtu.be/yjfrJzdx7DA
"This disaster will have been preventable. All of the warning signs are here, yet no one will have done anything about it." Indeed.
Will be happy to be proven wrong.
I assume this means another mess for the Suez Canal.
One approach is to fill the tanks with inert gas... But another approach is to 99% seal up any vents and rely on the fact the fuel vapor concentration in the tanks is above the flammability threshold.
Thats the way the fuel tank in your car doesn't explode for example.
Obviously it would be good to test this regularly with sensors... but even untested it's still more than likely not going to explode.
This seems like the very definition of "World police".
This amount is peanuts, despite the potential environmental impact.