The Standard Club does not have to insure ships with the potential of being the focus of a retaliative attack. The government of Great Britain does not necessarily want munitions floating past its sovereign borders. I know Russia and China would not accept such activity near its borders. As a matter of fact, Russia was very upset about a satellite near their border. So, the argument seems academic. If Great Britain has sanctions against Syria, it does not have to tolerate activity in its shipping lanes that support that activity, including the insurance companies that operate within their borders.
Russia's Foreign Minister is incorrect regarding this topic. Human rights seems to be left out of his dialogue as well.
...The U.K.-based insurer (click here) Standard Club said it removed insurance coverage for the ship owner when it became aware it was carrying munitions, a clear breach of its rules. The move forced the ship, the MV Alaed, to turn back toward Russia.
"This is a very slipperly slope," Lavrov said in a separate interview with Russia Today television. "This means that anyone — any country or any company — who is not violating any international rules, who is not violating any U.N. Security Council resolutions, might be subject to extra-territorial application of somebody else's unilateral sanctions."...
Russia, along with China, has twice shielded Syria from proposed international sanctions over Assad's crackdown on protests. It also has continued to provide Damascus, its last remaining Mideast ally, with weapons....
