美国海军海豹突击队 执行登船 被扣押的油轮 当地时间1月7日，美国军方在北大西洋公海水域扣押一艘悬挂俄罗斯国旗的油轮"水手"号（原名"贝拉1"号），英国国防部证实其军事力量为此次行动提供 了直接支援。俄罗斯政府强烈谴责此举为"国家海盗行为"，严重违反《联合国海洋法公约》。中国外交部同日指出，美方行为是对国际法的严重践踏。此次 事件发生在美国军事介入委内瑞拉局势，以及特朗普总统提议将美国军费大幅提升至1.5万亿美元的背景下，加剧了国际海域航行自由与单边制裁合法性的 激烈争议，恐令大国关系与全球能源贸易秩序面临新的冲击。 此次扣押事件与美国近期对委内瑞拉的强硬姿态紧密相连。此前，美国采取军事行动控制委内瑞拉总统马杜罗，并宣布将"管理"委内瑞拉事务，鼓励美国石 油企业进入。尽管委内瑞拉已产生新的临时政府，但美国持续施加压力，维持在该区域的海上兵力部署。 白宫新闻秘书莱维特在记者会上为扣押行动辩护，称"水手"号油轮"违反了美国的制裁措施"。她表示，船上船员可能因违反美国国内法律而受到起诉，并可 能被带往美国受审。这一表态将美国国内法的域外适用性延伸至公海，引发了国际法学界的广泛担忧。分析指出，美方试图以此案例确立一个 ...

俄联邦委员会宪法委员会主席克利沙斯7日表示，美国在公海上公然从事海盗行径，违反国际法准则。 俄交通部说，根据《联合国海洋法公约》，航行自由适用于公海水域，任何国家均无权对在其他国家管 辖范围内的船舶使用武力。俄外交部表示，俄方正密切关注事件进展，要求美方确保油轮上的俄公民受 到人道对待。 央视网消息（新闻联播）：美国军方7日宣称扣押一艘悬挂俄罗斯国旗的油轮，俄方对此予以谴责。 美国欧洲司令部7日称，美方在北大西洋扣押一艘俄罗斯油轮。英国国防部称，英军当天为美国扣押行 动提供了包括基地保障在内的支援。据外媒报道，这艘油轮原计划在委内瑞拉装载石油，但由于美国封 锁未能靠岸，处于空载状态。 ...

俄罗斯谴责美国扣押油轮 俄罗斯交通部7日谴责美国扣押油轮，称任何国家均无权对在其他国家管辖范围内的船舶使用武力。 俄交通部当天在社交媒体发文说，2025年12月24日，根据俄法律和国际法，"水手"号获得了悬挂俄罗斯联邦国旗航行的临时许可。莫斯科时间2026 年1月7日15时左右，美国海军在公海登上该船，随后俄方与该船失去联系。 俄交通部还说，根据1982年《联合国海洋法公约》，航行自由适用于公海水域，任何国家均无权对在其他国家管辖范围内的船舶使用武力。 番外 美国宣称连扣两艘油轮，其中一艘悬挂俄罗斯国旗 美国东部时间7日8时43分，美国欧洲司令部在社交媒体上发布消息称，在北大西洋扣押一艘油轮，据称这艘船悬挂了俄罗斯国旗。约半小时后，美 国南方司令部在社交媒体上发布消息称，在国际水域扣押一艘无国籍油轮。两船均与委内瑞拉有关。 美国欧洲司令部当天在社交媒体上说："美国司法部和国土安全部在与战争部的协调下，当天宣布扣押了'贝拉1'号油轮，理由是其违反美国制裁。 该船被美国海岸警卫队'芒罗'号追踪后，在北大西洋海域被扣押，依据是联邦法院签发的逮捕令。" 美国欧洲司令部1月7日发布在社交媒体上的照片显示，一名美国海岸警 ...

自本月10日以来，美国已三次在委内瑞拉附近海域对涉委油轮实施拦截行动，并声称没收船上所载原 油。美国总统特朗普16日下令对所有进出委内瑞拉的受美国制裁油轮实施"全面彻底封锁"。美媒援引石 油运输监测机构"油轮追踪"网站数据报道，目前有数十艘被列入美国制裁名单的油轮停留在委内瑞拉附 近海域。 新华社加拉加斯12月23日电（记者缪培源 田睿）委内瑞拉全国代表大会23日一致通过《保护航行和贸 易自由免受海盗行为、封锁和其他国际非法行为侵害法》。该法律规定，煽动、唆使、支持、资助或参 与以上非法行为者，最高可判处20年监禁。 责编：卢思宇、李萌 委全国代表大会主席罗德里格斯当天宣布该法正式生效，并表示该法将为维护国家航行自由、贸易往来 及主权利益提供法律保障。据外媒解读，该法的出台，主要是为应对美国近期在加勒比海域针对涉委油 轮采取的扣押、拦截行动。 石油出口是委内瑞拉重要经济支柱。委政府多次指责美国试图在委实行政权更迭、在拉美进行军事扩 张，谴责美拦截油轮的行为是"海盗行径"。 ...

Core Viewpoint - The concept of "freedom of navigation" as claimed by the United States is criticized as a double standard and a guise for hegemonic actions rather than a genuine commitment to international law and peace [1][2]. Group 1: Freedom of Navigation - The U.S. interpretation of "freedom of navigation" does not align with the international legal definition of freedom of the high seas, which requires peaceful purposes [1]. - U.S. military actions in regions like the South China Sea are frequent and occur within other countries' exclusive economic zones, raising concerns about regional stability [1][2]. Group 2: Double Standards - The U.S. exhibits a clear double standard in its military activities, ignoring protests from countries like China while notifying some South American nations of similar actions in their exclusive economic zones [2]. - The inconsistency in U.S. legal justifications for military actions against different countries highlights its hegemonic intentions disguised as a commitment to peace [2].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the impact of the U.S. "freedom of navigation" operations on international maritime order, highlighting that these actions have not changed the status quo but have instead increased regional tensions and disrupted maritime stability [1][3]. Group 1: U.S. Actions and Their Implications - The U.S. conducts military provocations under the guise of "freedom of navigation," which has not led to significant changes in maritime laws of other nations, revealing a gap between the U.S. objectives and actual outcomes [1][3]. - The U.S. challenges not only China but also other countries surrounding the South China Sea, aiming to project an image of fairness and justice [1][3]. Group 2: China's Position and International Law - China is actively promoting the concept of a maritime community and aims to transform the South China Sea into a peaceful and cooperative area, emphasizing the importance of understanding the essence of freedom of navigation [3]. - China's stance reflects a commitment to uphold the contemporary international maritime legal system centered around the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, showcasing its responsible attitude as a major power [3]. Group 3: Future U.S. Policy Uncertainties - There may be uncertainties in future U.S. policies regarding "freedom of navigation," especially with the potential return of former President Trump, who previously increased the frequency of such operations significantly compared to his successors [4].

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the articles highlights a significant increase in military activity by the Chinese military, with 74 aircraft detected in the Taiwan Strait over a 27-hour period, marking a recent high in such operations [1][2] - The Taiwanese defense ministry reported that 46 aircraft crossed the so-called "median line" of the Taiwan Strait, indicating a coordinated military maneuver by the Chinese forces [1] - The presence of Japanese and British naval vessels in the Taiwan Strait is speculated to be a contributing factor to the increased military activity by the Chinese military, as these actions may be perceived as provocations [2] Group 2 - The Chinese military's response to foreign naval activities, particularly the passage of British and Japanese ships through the Taiwan Strait, has been characterized by heightened vigilance and readiness to counter perceived threats [2] - The Chinese Foreign Ministry emphasized that the Taiwan issue is a matter of national sovereignty and territorial integrity, asserting opposition to any foreign provocations under the guise of freedom of navigation [3]

Group 1 - The video released by the US Embassy in Singapore drew criticism for comparing China's claims in the South China Sea to Singapore's public housing disputes [1] - Singapore's Ministry of Foreign Affairs rejected foreign embassies inciting domestic reactions to international issues involving third countries [1] - The video depicted Singapore's public housing and suggested that China's actions in the South China Sea were akin to neighbors occupying shared spaces, which sparked backlash from netizens [1] Group 2 - The US and China engaged in a heated debate at the UN Security Council regarding maritime security, with the US accusing China of threatening stability in the South China Sea [2] - China's representative firmly opposed the US claims, stating that the US is the biggest threat to security and stability in the region due to its military presence and provocations [2]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses China's response to the United States' criticisms regarding the South China Sea during a United Nations Security Council debate, emphasizing China's stance on maritime security and regional stability [1]. Group 1: China's Position on South China Sea - China asserts that the UN Security Council is not the appropriate forum for discussing the South China Sea issue, rejecting the U.S. representative's comments [1]. - The Chinese representative accuses the U.S. of being the greatest threat to security and stability in the South China Sea by frequently sending military vessels and aircraft under the guise of freedom of navigation [1]. - China emphasizes its commitment to resolving maritime disputes through dialogue and negotiation based on historical facts and international law, declaring the South China Sea arbitration ruling as illegal and invalid [1]. Group 2: Regional Stability and Cooperation - The article highlights that, with the joint efforts of China and ASEAN countries, the overall situation in the South China Sea remains stable [1]. - China expresses its determination and capability to transform the South China Sea into a sea of peace, friendship, and cooperation [1]. - The Chinese representative calls on the U.S. to adhere to its commitments regarding the One China principle [1].

Core Viewpoint - The Russian Foreign Ministry emphasizes the importance of freedom of navigation in the Baltic Sea [1] Group 1 - The statement reflects Russia's stance on maritime rights and the significance of maintaining open sea routes in the Baltic region [1]