[edited for typos - i’m sure i’ve still left some]
There has been numerous comments in the media about #Australia ‘s role in the sinking of an #Iranian frigate in the Indain Ocean by the #SSN #USS-Minnesota. While there is no denying that three #ADF members were aboard, there is no evidence that they acted in any way other than in accordance with their ‘Rules of Engagement’ (or Orders). This article wishes to cast doubt on this with the following argument:
”The Australians may not have been engaged in any ‘offensive conduct’ as part of the Minnesota attack, but no precise details have been given as to what role they played. While legally they clearly were not in command and operationally could have been insulated from the attack, it is difficult to envisage how given the confines of a submarine where every crew member has an assigned role ensuring the operational efficiently of the vessel that they could have been mere observers.“ (Quote: Donald Rothwell, ‘Australia is walking a legal tightrope in the Iran War’ of 12Mar26 in https://thepoint.com.au/opinions/260312-australia-is-walking-a-legal-tightrope-in-the-iran-war )
What the author missed is that while all personnel aboard a submarine are critical in the running of the boat, there are three ‘watches’ on board and had ADF personnel been ‘on watch’ prior to engagment with the Iranian vessel, they could well have been relieved by US personnel from another watch prior to the dreadful (and potentially illegal) sinking of the ship and subsequent total disregard for the Conventions of War at Sea resulting in over 40 dead sailors of the allegedly unarmed vessel.
Just sayin’. Armchair generals ought not to be so specific in their arguments if these do not hold water (pardon the pun).
راديو وياك | RadioWayak
Loughborough University UCU
RaymondPierreL3
Ken Everett (Ken's Blogspot)
News Beep
K U L T ™
