Again, I'm looking for a reality check on some scenario ideas...

 

Here's what I imagine. What if a nation decided, for some reason, to engage in full scale poaching? It sends a fishing convoy--fishing boats and patrol boats or even warships as escorts--into the EEZ of some other country (presumably one the aggressor believes it can treat this way) and proceeds to do a serious amount of fishing. This might be a disputed territory or it might simply be an act of aggression by a nation that thinks it can get away with it. (And, because of food shortages, collapsing fish populations due to overfishing, etc., it may believe it has to get away with it.)

 

I suppose the logic here is that it is a calculated risk. Yes, the aggressor nation knows it is effectively committing an act of war--it is stealing from another country. But if it believes the other country cannot stop it and that no one else will try to stop it, it takes the risk.

 

Is this plausible? Does it make sense? Would a country be likely to risk international sanctions over something like this? (And what if the country had a friend on the UN Security Council who might allow "condemnation" but would vote against actual sanctions? Or if the territory was disputed and other countries were divided over whether a crime/act of war had actually been committed?)

 

Thoughts? Observations? Suggestions?

 

As for scenarios, here's what might develop...

 

Naturally, the country whose EEZ has been violated will be upset! It either goes after the fishing convoy itself or it gets help from its more powerful allies and they all go after the convoy. A battle ensues.

 

As an example...Colombia sends a fishing convoy into Panama's EEZ. It's pretty obvious what's going on and there is an uproar but Colombia keeps doing it. I'm not sure what would happen next...a Brazilian-led coalition of Latin American states sends a task force to force Colombia out of Panamanian waters?

 

What do you think? Does this all make sense? Is it a plausible scenario?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Mark

Mark,

 

Again, I'm looking for a reality check on some scenario ideas...

 

Here's what I imagine. What if a nation decided, for some reason, to engage in full scale poaching? It sends a fishing convoy--fishing boats and patrol boats or even warships as escorts--into the EEZ of some other country (presumably one the aggressor believes it can treat this way) and proceeds to do a serious amount of fishing. This might be a disputed territory or it might simply be an act of aggression by a nation that thinks it can get away with it. (And, because of food shortages, collapsing fish populations due to overfishing, etc., it may believe it has to get away with it.)

 

I suppose the logic here is that it is a calculated risk. Yes, the aggressor nation knows it is effectively committing an act of war--it is stealing from another country. But if it believes the other country cannot stop it and that no one else will try to stop it, it takes the risk.

 

Is this plausible? Does it make sense? Would a country be likely to risk international sanctions over something like this? (And what if the country had a friend on the UN Security Council who might allow "condemnation" but would vote against actual sanctions? Or if the territory was disputed and other countries were divided over whether a crime/act of war had actually been committed?)

 

Thoughts? Observations? Suggestions?

 

As for scenarios, here's what might develop...

 

Naturally, the country whose EEZ has been violated will be upset! It either goes after the fishing convoy itself or it gets help from its more powerful allies and they all go after the convoy. A battle ensues.

 

As an example...Colombia sends a fishing convoy into Panama's EEZ. It's pretty obvious what's going on and there is an uproar but Colombia keeps doing it. I'm not sure what would happen next...a Brazilian-led coalition of Latin American states sends a task force to force Colombia out of Panamanian waters?

 

What do you think? Does this all make sense? Is it a plausible scenario?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

 

Mark

 

While fish shortage may become a problem, I doubt that it will lead to wars in the next years,. It´s not as critical as water supply. A country can live without fish, but not without water.