Second, Standard Chartered has a US baking operation. The US is completely entitled to decide that even if all the offences took place outside the US it does not want a branch of a bank not willing to comply with its law operating in its territory.
This also applies to Mastercard and Visa refusing to handle Wikileaks payments because they might lose their US licenses. To Lloyds refusing to bank for Interpal because they might lose their US banking license.
It also applies to Standard Chartered and handling Iranian payments.
Just make sure that you don\’t try and pick and choose between the cases: they\’re all the same. Is the US allowed to decide who gets a US banking or money license? Sure. So don\’t whine if they decide to threaten the withdrawal over something you support. Their gaff, their rules….
I would also point out that Swiss banking has the same right: Swiss gaff, Swiss rules, but that would be becoming controversial, wouldn\’t it?