On 25 March, the Prime Minister was forthright; Britain was now “going after” Russia’s so-called shadow fleet of merchant vessels, which transport illicit oil and goods around the world. He said this would starve “Putin’s war machine of the dirty profits that fund his barbaric campaign in Ukraine”. He claimed military and law enforcement specialists were ready to act.
Since Sir Keir Starmer’s announcement, the UK has yet to board a single Russian-linked vessel. The i Paper has reported that, on average, four sanctioned tankers have sailed through the UK’s Exclusive Economic Zone every day for the past month. Although European navies have seized or diverted five vessels since the beginning of the year, this barely scratches the surface of the problem.
Britain has had the legal basis, strategic motivation, military muscle and opportunity to act for months. It remains to be seen whether it will actually do so. It may actually be finding new reasons not to.
The West itself is partly responsible for the Kremlin’s use of the shadow fleet by allowing Russian criminality to thrive and go undeterred for four years.
Russia uses various methods to get its sanctioned oil to market. These include opaque vessel ownership arrangements, illegally “flag hopping” to obscure the ship’s Russian origins, electronically falsifying ship identities en route, transferring cargoes at sea and registering ships in countries with lax enforcement.
These measures work. One maritime analytical firm estimated this week that the shadow fleet has ballooned from perhaps 400 vessels in 2022 to more than 2,000 vessels now. These vessels help Russia get 75 per cent of its crude oil to market generating much needed revenue for its battered economy. The International Energy Agency said last week that Russian oil export revenue doubled in March due to the Iran-war driven price hike and the US lifting sanctions against Russian oil at sea.
John Healey, the Defence Secretary, told MPs in January that, in the wake of the successful US boarding of MV Marinera, London had found the legal basis for the use of military force against the shadow fleet.
The strategic benefits are obvious: upholding sanctions; targeting Russia’s economy; diverting proceeds to Ukraine; protecting the environment; safeguarding critical underwater infrastructure from potential interference; and reducing danger to commercial shipping.
Britain retains a very credible sovereign boarding capability to act against stateless or irregularly flagged sanctioned tankers. Based in Poole on Britain’s south coast, the Special Boat Service is the Royal Navy’s elite maritime special forces unit. It is supported by Royal Navy and Royal Air Force ships, aircraft and helicopters. I have witnessed first-hand at close range how they execute rapid, high-risk boarding operations of merchant ships at sea.
There are several reasons why Britain is not acting. First, the UK may fear Russian retaliation, potentially against the UK’s critical underwater infrastructure or an escalation of its campaign of “hybrid” attacks. There is also a risk of a direct military clash since Russia began to escort some of its tankers through the Channel using its warships. Russia may also put armed guards on the ships.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has been warned his war machine will be starved by Britain – but there is little sign of that so far (Photo: Sergey Bulkin/Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP)Second, the Government is reportedly concerned about breaching international maritime law and the unwelcome precedent that would be set by boarding shadow fleet vessels. The bar for boarding ships has been set so high that few cases will meet it. In any event, Russia has steadily closed its vulnerability to boarding by reflagging ships to the Russian state ship register – removing the “stateless” justification previously used for boarding and seizing these vessels.
Third, and more prosaically, The i Paper has led reporting that a key factor in not boarding is the cost of berthing and maintaining vessels in UK ports after the ship has been detained. The Government only owns naval ports; the use of commercial ports will be prohibitively expensive. Ireland is currently paying around €110,000 a week for a detained drug smuggling vessel. There is also the issue of what to do with the crew and the risk of being sued.
France, by contrast, has not been deterred by the financial cost and has boarded three ships suspected of transporting Russian oil since September.
However, a handful of European military interdictions alone will not break the shadow fleet model, which has proven resilient and adaptable. This will require coordinated expansion of US, EU and British economic measures targeting the fleet and its purchasers.
India has taken advantage of discounted Russian oil to increase its imports and become a major exporter of refined petroleum products. US pressure on India and other Russian customers to reduce imports by replacing them with US or Venezuelan oil has been considerable and was showing sign of denting Russian exports before the Iran war.
Hungary’s new Prime Minister has signalled he will lift his predecessor’s veto on the 20th package of EU sanctions on Russia. This includes a blanket ban on shipping, insurance, crewing and any other operations related to any ship transporting Russian crude and refined oil resources. Twenty per cent of Russian oil exports are carried by tankers owned or insured by EU entities. This EU approach could also be extended to the export of Russian fertilisers, another massive export earner.
In the meantime, Ukraine is taking matters into its own hands by targeting Russian Baltic oil export infrastructure. While Ukrainian strikes “have led to a noticeable decline in the physical volume of Russian oil exports”, according to analysis from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the rise in prices has more than made up for it. But further attacks could force Russia to reduce oil production and stem exports. On Tuesday, Reuters reported that Russia was forced to cut oil production in April by a possible 300,000-400,000 barrels a day following Ukrainian drone attacks.
Healey said that “deterring, disrupting and degrading” the so-called Russian shadow fleet was a Government priority. But the risks and costs of acting militarily may steadily be making action less likely. On defence, as on much else, the Government still specialises in rousing words but undelivered promises.
Hence then, the article about britain s special forces could shut down gloating putin but they won t was published today ( ) and is available on inews ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Britain’s special forces could shut down gloating Putin. But they won’t )
Also on site :