Connect with us

News

Oil tanker boss says UN maritime body ‘sleeping’ over dark fleet threat

Published

on

Oil tanker boss says UN maritime body ‘sleeping’ over dark fleet threat

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

The boss of the world’s largest publicly listed oil tanker operator has accused the UN maritime rule-setting body of “sleeping behind the wheel” over the growing dark fleet of unregulated vessels, saying it is “only a question of time” before a significant disaster takes place.

Lars Barstad, chief executive of Frontline, also criticised European governments for failing to enforce rules meant to curtail trading in Russian oil, saying they were worried about forcing up energy prices.

The number of dark fleet vessels has grown to about a fifth of the world fleet after Russian-linked owners bought up hundreds of ageing ships to circumvent western countries’ curbs on the country’s oil trade.

Advertisement

The potential for disaster was illustrated in July when the Hafnia Nile, a tanker operated by Singapore-based Hafnia, collided with the Ceres I, a dark fleet vessel carrying Iranian oil, in waters off Malaysia.

According to a subsequent US Treasury sanctions notice against the Ceres I’s owners, at the time of the collision the vessel’s radar system was broadcasting an inaccurate location — a common tactic for dark fleet ships trying to conceal their activities.

Dark fleet vessels, which carry oil from Iran and Venezuela as well as Russia, are generally the property of offshore companies whose ownership is unclear and often lack adequate insurance. They are frequently registered under the flags of countries that do little to enforce rules about regular safety inspections.

Lars Barstad said he was ‘very, very concerned’ about the growth of the dark fleet © Mats Finnerud

Barstad said he was “very, very concerned” about the growth of the dark fleet, which he said had incentivised a number of “lawbreaking operators” to make an “insane amount of money”.

He added that the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the UN body, was doing too little to ensure enforcement of its safety and environmental rules.

Advertisement

“All these vessels . . . are trading outside the IMO framework,” Barstad said. “They have been sleeping behind the wheel now for quite some time in respect of tankers.”

There had been reports of other, unconfirmed incidents besides the Ceres I collision, Barstad added. “I’m very surprised we’ve not had more incidents like this,” he said. “I think it’s only a question of time until we get a big one.”

A vessel such as the Ceres I — which was carrying 2mn barrels of crude oil — could be split in two in a future incident, he said.

“That would be in the environment a bigger problem,” Barstad said. “It can happen any day — and then the biggest problem is that, if that happens, nobody will know who actually owns the ship or the cargo.”

Shipowners that complied with the regulations, such as Frontline, were facing disadvantages because so many others were operating with lower costs in unregulated dark fleets, Barstad added. He said that reflected politicians’ lack of willingness to enforce the sanctions.

Advertisement

“Politicians have decided not to take the political risks,” Barstad said, adding that he thought many feared higher energy prices if oil from Russia, Iran and Venezuela were truly excluded from international markets.

There have been persistent suggestions that countries such as Denmark — which controls the entrance to the Baltic — and countries by the English Channel should inspect and take into custody tankers sailing past their coasts without proper insurance.

Barstad declined to single out particular states but said: “It seems extremely halfhearted the way enforcement has been done. A tough position should be taken if one is serious about this.”

The IMO said in response to Barstad’s criticism that its general assembly passed a resolution in late 2023 calling on member states to take tougher action over fraudulent registration of ships and to step up inspections of vessels in port.

It also said member states had the responsibility to ensure that vessels flying their flag followed the required rules and to ensure ships visiting their ports did so.

Advertisement

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

Published

on

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.

“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.

“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.

In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.

“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.

Advertisement

Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.

This story has been updated.

Continue Reading

Trending