471
Iran Demands Bitcoin For Ships Passing Hormuz During Ceasefire (slashdot.org)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
98 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

He said that the tariff is $1 per barrel of oil, adding that empty tankers can pass freely. "Once the email arrives and Iran completes its assessment, vessels are given a few seconds to pay in Bitcoin, ensuring they can't be traced or confiscated due to sanctions," Hosseini added.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 7 months ago (8 children)

No it's not it's an international trade route they're just being Pricks because anything to piss off maga

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago* (5 children)

    Those iran's waters. These ships are literally passing through their country, I think you're confused with "territorial waters" as defined in UNCLOS as well but neither Iran nor the US nor pissrael ratified that treaty. Here is a good opinion on why the UNCLOS doesn't really apply

    https://www.simplelaw.blog/p/the-strait-of-hormuz-a-3-minute-international

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [+] 0 points 7 months ago (4 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago* (3 children)

    yes

    Iran is right about which rules are universal (innocent passage, not transit passage). ... The U.S. is also not a party to UNCLOS.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago*

    ** Iran is right about which rules are universal **

    I don't know how much clearer it gets??? Who's gonna argue that UNCLOS is universal anyway? The US or pissrael? Neither of which are party to the UNCLOS and who very much assert authority outside their territorial waters?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    International law has no meaning if nations don't participate.

    For example, the United States has laws and policies designed to prevent the arrest of U.S. personnel and its allies by the International Criminal Court (ICC). The 2002 American Service-Members' Protection Act (ASPA) authorizes the US President to use "all means necessary and appropriate" to release U.S. or allied personnel detained by the ICC, often termed the "Hague Invasion Act".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent