French and British fishermen clash in scallop war skirmish
Updated 29 August 2018
AFP
CAEN, France: Stone-throwing, insults and dangerous maneuvers on the high seas: French and British fishermen clashed in the English Channel over a hoard of scallops Tuesday, the latest flare-up in a years-long war over the prized shellfish.
The British were heavily outnumbered at five boats to around 35 French vessels, according to maritime official Ingrid Parot, and were eventually chased from the scallop-rich waters of the Baie de Seine area of Normandy.
The skirmish took place more than 12 nautical miles out to sea where the British are legally allowed to fish all year round.
But their French counterparts, restricted to fishing for scallops between October 1 and May 15, have accused the British of depleting stocks and want them to face the same rules.
“The French went to contact the British to stop them working and they clashed with each other. Apparently there was stone-throwing, but no injuries,” said Normandy fishing chief Dimitri Rogoff.
Rogoff said “around 40” French boats had gathered overnight in protest at British “pillaging” of the scallop supply.
Some of the boats rammed others — leaving holes in three vessels, footage from local channel France 3 Normandie showed — as the angry French fishermen threw smoke-bombs and hurled insults at British rivals.
“We are advising all parties to be calm as from the video clips some vessels are manoeuvring very dangerously,” Barrie Deas, chief executive of Britain’s National Federation of Fishermen’s Organizations, told AFP.
“We have raised the matter with the British government and asked for protection for our vessels which are fishing legitimately,” he added.
“The deeper issues behind the clashes should be settled by talking around the table, not on the high seas where people could be hurt.”
Tensions have been high between British and French fishermen for some 15 years over the issue, leading to angry disputes that have been dubbed “Scallop Wars.”
The two sides have reached annual agreements over the past five years but the French blocked a deal this year, according to Rogoff, who said they had had enough.
“For the Brits, it’s an open bar — they fish when they want, where they want, and as much as they want,” he complained.
The problem has grown worse over the past 15 years as English, Scottish and Irish boats have upped their catches considerably, he added.
“We don’t want to stop them from fishing, but they could at least wait until October 1 so that we can share,” he said.
Norman fishermen also complain that the British use much bigger trawlers — 30 meters (98 feet) or more — around double the size of their own, which use more artisan techniques.
The biggest British vessels can freeze the scallops directly on board.
“Scallops are a flagship product for Normandy, a primary resource and a highly sensitive issue,” said Rogoff.
If Britain crashes out of the European Union next year without a deal, this would solve the problem for the Normans, he added.
“After March 29, 2019 they would be treated as a third party and would no longer have access to these areas,” he said.
The pro-Brexit organization Fishing for Leave has however denounced the “hypocrisy” of French fishermen, charging that they have caught 60 percent of the fish in British waters over the past 40 years.
US House of Representatives passes war powers resolution backing Trump’s attacks on Iran
Updated 8 sec ago
AP
WASHINGTON: The House narrowly rejected a war powers resolution Thursday to halt President Donald Trump’s attacks on Iran, an early sign of unease in Congress over the rapidly widening conflict that is reordering US priorities at home and abroad. It’s the second vote in as many days, after the Senate defeated a similar measure. Lawmakers are confronting the sudden reality of representing wary Americans in wartime and all that entails — with lives lost, dollars spent and alliances tested by a president’s unilateral decision to go to war with Iran. While the tally in the House, 212-219, was expected to be tight, the outcome provided a clarifying snapshot of political support for, and opposition to, the US-Israel military operation and Trump’s rationale for bypassing Congress, which alone has the power to declare war. At the Capitol, the conflict has quickly carried echoes of the long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and many Sept. 11-era veterans now serve in Congress. “Donald Trump is not a king, and if he believes the war with Iran is in our national interest, then he must come to Congress and make the case,” said Rep. Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. House Speaker Mike Johnson warned that it would be “dangerous” to limit the president’s authority while the US military is already in conflict. “We are not at war,” said Johnson, R-Louisiana, a close ally of Trump, contradicting others. He said the operation is limited in scope and duration, and the “mission is nearly accomplished.” Republicans largely back Trump, and most Democrats oppose the war Trump’s Republican Party, which narrowly controls the House and Senate, largely sees the conflict with Iran not as the start of a new war, but the end of a government that has long menaced the West. The operation has killed Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which some view as an opportunity for regime change, though others warn of a chaotic power vacuum. Republican Rep. Brian Mast of Florida, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, publicly thanked Trump for taking action against Iran, saying the president is using his own constitutional authority to defend the US against the “imminent threat” the country posed. Mast, an Army veteran who worked as a bomb disposal expert in Afghanistan, said the war powers resolution was effectively asking “that the president do nothing.” For Democrats, Trump’s attack on Iran, influenced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is a war of choice that is testing the balance of powers in the Constitution. “The framers weren’t fooling around,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., arguing that the Constitution is clear that only Congress can decide matters of war. “It’s up to us.” Crossover coalitions emerged among those in Congress. Two Republicans joined most Democrats in voting for the war powers resolution, while four Democrats joined Republicans to reject it. The war powers resolution, if signed into law, would have immediately halted Trump’s ability to conduct the war unless Congress approved the military action. The president would likely veto it. Trump officials provide shifting rationale for war Trump has scrambled to win support for the nearly week-old conflict as Americans of all political persuasions take stock. Administration officials spent hours behind closed doors on Capitol Hill this week trying to reassure lawmakers that they have the situation under control. Six US military members were killed over the weekend in a drone strike in Kuwait, and Trump has said more Americans could die. Thousands of Americans abroad have scrambled for flights, many lighting up phone lines at congressional offices as they sought help trying to flee the Middle East. Trump said Thursday he must be involved in choosing Iran’s new leader. Yet Johnson, R-Louisiana, said this week that America has enough problems at home and is not about to be in the “nation-building business.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said that the war could extend eight weeks, twice as long as the president first estimated. Trump has left open the possibility of sending US troops into what has largely been a bombing campaign. More than 1,230 people in Iran have died. The administration said the goal is to destroy Iran’s ballistic missiles that it believes are shielding its nuclear program. It has also said Israel was ready to act, and American bases would face retaliation if the US did not strike Iran first. The US said Wednesday it torpedoed an Iranian warship near Sri Lanka. “This administration can’t even give us a straight answer of as to why we launched this preemptive war,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, the Republican from Kentucky, an outlier in his party. Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who had teamed up to force the release the Jeffrey Epstein files, also pushed the war powers resolution to the floor, past objections from Johnson’s GOP leadership. Republican Rep. Warren Davidson of Ohio, a former Army Ranger, also voted for it. Democratic Reps. Henry Cuellar of Texas, Jared Golden of Maine, Greg Landsman of Ohio and Juan Vargas of California voted against. “Congress must stand with the president to finally close, once and for all, this dark chapter of history,” said Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas. Rep. Yassamin Ansari, D-Arizona, said that as the daughter of Iranian immigrants who fled their homeland, she opposes the regime but is concerned that a democratic transition for the people of Iran never seems to a priority for Trump or the officials who briefed Congress. “War carries profound and deadly consequences for our troops, for the American people and for the entire world,” she said. “It’s the most serious decision that a nation can make.” Other Democrats have proposed an alternative resolution that would allow the president to continue the war for 30 days before he must seek congressional approval. The House also approved a separate measure affirming that Iran is the largest state sponsor of terrorism. Senators sit in their desks for solemn vote In the Senate, Republican leaders have successfully, though narrowly, defeated a series of war powers resolutions pertaining to several other conflicts during Trump’s second term. This one, however, was different. Underscoring the gravity Wednesday, Democratic senators sat at their desks as the voting got underway. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said that every senator will pick a side. “Do you stand with the American people who are exhausted with forever wars in the Middle East?” he asked. Or with Trump and Hegseth “as they bumble us headfirst into another war?” Sen. John Barrasso, second in Senate Republican leadership, said, “Democrats would rather obstruct Donald Trump than obliterate Iran’s national nuclear program.” The legislation failed on a 47-53 tally mostly along party lines, with Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, in favor and Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pennsylvania, against.
