Russia’s Shadow Fleet Exposes Gaps in International Law

A ship that had been dragging its anchor – Fitburg – damaged a cable running along the seabed of the Gulf of Finland yesterday. The Finnish Border Guard acted with its customary efficiency, documented the dangling anchor with photographs, and took the vessel into custody.

The case will next proceed to a more detailed investigation and, in due course, undoubtedly to court. This in itself sounds good, but I would like to draw your attention, dear readers, to what happened last October.

At that time, the Helsinki District Court announced that it would not examine the charges – in a similar case – against the vessel Eagle S, which belongs to Russia’s so-called shadow fleet, nor the compensation claims based on those charges. The court held that Finland’s Criminal Code could not be applied to the case.

The matter was commented on at the time by Member of Parliament Jarno Limnéll (National Coalition Party), who stated that “clearer legislation and international agreements are needed that give states the ability to deal with acts of this kind also in exclusive economic zones and international waters.” However, no such measures have emerged during the past couple of months.

For this reason, it seems clear to me that the Fitburg incident – quite evidently a cable sabotage operation ordered by Russia – is, logically speaking, a consequence of the Helsinki District Court’s decision and the shortcomings of international legislation. It is obvious that if breaking cables carries no consequences, Putin’s administration can continue sabotaging them without concern.

It is therefore easy to predict that cables running along the seabed of the Gulf of Finland and the Baltic Sea will continue to be damaged – so to speak, “by accident” – in the future. And this will likely continue until the necessary provisions are enacted in international law, despite the expected opposition from Russia and its proxies.

* * *

If one wishes to see something positive in the Fitburg case, it is undoubtedly the efficiency of the actions taken by the Finnish authorities. The cable damage was investigated quickly, and the perpetrator was also stopped.

Because of the legislative problem mentioned above, the only sanction available against the ship’s owner and/or crew will likely be to look for deficiencies in the vessel’s condition, thereby delaying its departure. In this way, the crew would at least be forced to loiter for a while off the coast of Kirkkonummi.

It would be interesting to know whether the shipowner and/or its crew have made an agreement with Vladimir Putin’s administration regarding compensation for those days in rubles or in some stronger currency. The exchange rate of the ruble has recently been in a decline reminiscent of that famous cow’s tail, so the value of days compensated in Russian currency decreases over time.

In any case, any deficiencies found on the vessel must be investigated before it is allowed to leave Finnish territorial waters. And, of course, even the smallest faults discovered on the ship should be required to be carefully repaired before departure clearance is granted – to the vessel and its crew alike.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Is Cable Cutting a Crime Without Punishment?
Sabotage in the Baltic Sea Sparks Calls for New Maritime Borders
Finland Detains Russia-Linked Ship Suspected of Cable Damage

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Kansainvälinen lainsäädäntö kannusti Fitburgin kaapelisabotaasiin

Is Cable Cutting a Crime Without Punishment?

Finland detained a vessel named Eagle S, which had dragged its anchor across the seabed and damaged submarine cables in the Baltic Sea. The investigation took some time, after which the evidence was submitted to a Finnish district court, i.e., the lowest judicial instance.

Instead of assessing the criminal liability of the act and delivering a verdict to those found guilty, the district court ruled that it had no jurisdiction to decide in such a criminal case. Therefore, the matter should be dealt with either in the courts of the crew’s home countries or in the courts of the flag state of the Eagle S. In other words, the case would fall under the jurisdiction of the Cook Islands, Georgia, or India.

However, Professor Ulla Tapaninen, a maritime transport expert at Tallinn University of Technology, has noted that “district courts often prefer to move complex cases up to higher judicial levels.” For this reason, she argues it is reasonable that the Eagle S case would be escalated from the district court to the court of appeal, which is one step higher in the judicial hierarchy.

In other words, the Finnish professor at the Estonian university assumes that the legal proceedings will continue in Finland. This raises the question: if that happens, will the court of appeal consider itself competent—contrary to the district court’s conclusion—to convict the crew of the Eagle S?

And if that is the case, who will bear the costs? The Finnish taxpayer, who has already been burdened with bills amounting to hundreds of thousands of euros?

And what would happen after such a farce? Would the case then be transferred to the courts of the Cook Islands, Georgia, or India—or would the legal consequences of the damage caused by the Eagle S to the submarine cables ultimately remain unaddressed?

And furthermore, if that is the case, does it mean that in the future the submarine cables running along the seabed of the Baltic Sea and other seas may be cut at will and without consequences?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Did Russia Realize the Risk Was Too Great?
Sabotage in the Baltic Sea Sparks Calls for New Maritime Borders
Finland Detains Russia-Linked Ship Suspected of Cable Damage

Did Russia Realize the Risk Was Too Great?

A decision point has been reached regarding Russia's "shadow fleet" operating in the Baltic Sea. Estonia recently failed to stop one of the vessels after Russia offered it support from its air force. At the same time, two Portuguese F-16 fighter jets took to the skies from the nearby Ämari Air Base to support the Estonians—and in Finland, at least one F-18 fighter flew faster than the speed of sound for some reason, according to my own observation, although this has not been publicly acknowledged.

Fortunately, the incident did not escalate into an aerial battle, but it still shows that the risk of escalation over the Baltic Sea is very real. Thus, it is only a matter of time before some sort of confrontation occurs between Russia and NATO.

However, Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk has now announced: "A Russian ship from the 'shadow fleet' that is under sanctions carried out suspicious maneuvers near the power cable connecting Poland with Sweden. After a successful intervention by our military, the ship sailed off to one of the Russian ports. The ORP 'Heweliusz' is en route to the site of the incident."

It remains to be seen whether the successful interception of the vessel is a sign that even the Russians may have realized that protecting shadow fleet vessels with air support poses an enormous risk. And therefore, for now at least, they may have decided to refrain from such actions. At least, one can hope so.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Did a Finnish Fighter Jet Rush to Intercept a Russian Sukhoi Yesterday?
Be Ready: Russia May Launch Another "Special Operation"
Sabotage in the Baltic Sea Sparks Calls for New Maritime Borders

Finland Detains Russia-Linked Ship Suspected of Cable Damage

Finnish authorities have detained a ship Eagle S registered in the Cook Islands, suspected of damaging the cable between Finland and Estonia. The vessel was found to be carrying approximately 35,000 tons of unleaded gasoline imported from Russia, suggesting an attempt to bypass sanctions imposed on Russia.

Finland has seized the oil, ensuring it will not reach the global market or contribute to funding Putin's war in Ukraine. This is, of course, an excellent outcome.

Finnish authorities have also gathered evidence indicating that the vessel was responsible for the cable damage. One piece of evidence is visible even from outside the ship: one of its anchors is missing, a clear sign that it was lost during the incident.

The police have already identified several members of the crew as suspects in the criminal acts. These include citizens of Georgia and India, who are being investigated for aggravated property destruction and serious violations of sanctions. Furthermore, additional evidence linking the ship to the cable damage has been uncovered, and more is likely to emerge.

The case is undoubtedly a major embarrassment for Vladimir Putin and his administration. For this reason, it was amusing to note Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov's claim that the actions of Finnish authorities have no connection to Russia. His response is reminiscent of a child caught with their hand in the cookie jar—his frustration is, to say the least, palpable.

It remains to be seen how the issue will ultimately be resolved. However, it is already clear that international law and regulations need updating to rein in rogue states like Russia on the high seas. Unfortunately, the interests of a few other countries, in addition to Russia, are likely to block such progress, making meaningful change highly improbable.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Downing of the Azerbaijani Plane Is a War Crime That Must Be Condemned
Western Nations Should Act Decisively On Two Fronts Against Russia
Western Countries Must Stay United Against the Russian Threat