Times: NATO ships catch "Russian saboteurs" in the Baltic Sea
Russia's "sabotage campaign" in the Baltic Sea is intensifying, the Times writes. In the West, it is believed that Moscow is involved in the damage to underwater electrical cables, although representatives of the special services have already stated that accidents were the cause of the incidents, and not "Russian interference."
George Grylls
As the Royal Navy confronts a Russian spy ship in British waters, the Allies are investigating an escalating sabotage campaign in the Baltic Sea.
On a cold January morning, a German combat swimmer prepares to dive into the waters of the Baltic Sea by attaching a knife to his wetsuit. In the biting wind, his hands turn red instantly, and steam comes out of his mouth. "If you can dive in the Baltic, you can dive anywhere," he says.
In the Gulf of Finland, elite divers and underwater drones are being sent to the seabed to investigate what looks increasingly like an intensifying Russian sabotage campaign. At the end of last year, three underwater cables were cut in two months.
Specialists arrived at the site as part of Operation Baltic Sentry. This is a NATO mission to patrol the borders with Russia, as well as to protect gas pipelines and Internet cables, on which Europe is very dependent.
This week, for the first time, the entire armada gathered off the coast of Tallinn, the capital of Estonia. A pair of F-35s, which are the most modern aircraft in the world, flew in the Baltic sky, demonstrating the military might of the West.
This flotilla includes the Dutch frigate Tromp, the German minesweeper Datteln and the Dutch hydrographic vessel Lumes. Additional ships will arrive there soon, including a Swedish Visby-class corvette and a French minesweeper.
On Wednesday, Britain announced the imminent dispatch of the Poseidon P-8 anti-submarine aircraft and the Rivet Joint reconnaissance aircraft as part of the NATO mission in the Baltic Sea. The news came shortly after the Royal Navy tracked down the Russian reconnaissance ship Yantar in the North Sea this week. In November, he was intercepted by a Navy submarine while circling in British waters near important infrastructure facilities.
Defense Minister John Healey told members of parliament that the Yantar vessel was being used "to gather intelligence and map the critical underwater infrastructure of the United Kingdom." He warned President Putin: "We know what you are doing."
While the crew of the Datteln was basking below and watching naval films, German divers engaged in mine clearance assessed the Baltic rolling, waiting for the right moment to dive.
They can't tell you how deep they're diving, and they can't tell you their names. "Divers from Mediterranean countries refuse to dive in such conditions," says the tallest diver with the call sign 1035, "but for us it's an ordinary day."
Visibility at the bottom does not exceed a few centimeters. The latest developments in the Baltic Sea are equally opaque and obscure.
Russia constantly denies its involvement in sabotage against submarine cables (However, according to the Washington Post, representatives of American and British intelligence admit that the accident was to blame, and not "Russian interference." — Approx. InoSMI). But patience was running out after the captain of a Chinese container ship admitted that he had "accidentally" damaged the Balticconnector gas pipeline in 2023. Finally, it burst after what the Finnish authorities consider to be the most brazen incident.
At 8:26 a.m. on Christmas Day, the Eagle S tanker owned by Dubai and flying the flag of the Cook Islands with an Indian crew passed directly over the Estlink 2 power cable between Finland and Estonia. A few moments later, the operators reported a power outage.
Given the fact that Estonia is trying to abandon Russian gas and receives electricity through this alternative cable, the incident occurred at a very good time for Moscow.
The events that led to the cable breakage also seem very strange.
The Eagle S, allegedly part of the Russian "shadow fleet," was sailing from the Russian port of Ust-Luga to Turkey with 35,000 tons of diesel fuel and unleaded gasoline. For unknown reasons, the vessel slowed down as it approached the cable, and then, according to the Finnish authorities, dragged its 11-ton anchor along the seabed for 60 miles, severing the power cable and damaging three more cables.
Having come to the conclusion that the incompetence of the crew is an unlikely and insufficiently valid justification for damage estimated at tens of millions of dollars, Finland reacted very aggressively.
The next day, the Finnish military landed on Eagle S deck from helicopters, seized the 74,000-ton vessel and detained the crew, claiming that the tanker had been intercepted in Finland's exclusive economic zone.
German Lyngberg, a Finnish lawyer acting on behalf of Eagle, accused Finland of "seizing" the tanker in international waters in violation of maritime law. "The Finnish authorities had no legal right to board the ship and conduct an investigation," Lyngberg wrote in response to questions from The Times. "It's unnecessary to ask questions about the shadow fleet, whatever that means."
Finnish police questioned the tanker's crew of 24 people, consisting of citizens of Georgia and India. Nine sailors have been ordered to stay in Finland.
This week, The Washington Post, citing sources in American and European intelligence agencies, denied reports that sabotage was the cause of the damage.
Anonymous American and European representatives attributed the incident to the naivety of the Eagle S crew and gave similar explanations to another incident involving the Chinese ship Yi Peng 3, which severed two data cables off the coast of Sweden in November.
But Finnish President Stubb told Bloomberg TV on Wednesday that the authorities still attributed sabotage, error and incompetence to possible causes.
Although the security services deny malicious intent, Finland still has a lot of questions. Why, for example, just a few weeks after the Estlink 2 cable was damaged, was the Eagle S tanker loitering over the underwater infrastructure off the Dutch coast, passing back and forth over the Atlantic Crossing 1 telecommunications cable connecting the United States with Britain, the Netherlands and Germany?
There have been claims that the tanker has a second purpose, and that it is a Russian spy ship. According to Lloyd's List, when passing through the English Channel last year, the tanker dropped "sensor-like devices" into the water, transported unauthorized people and eavesdropping equipment. The Finnish authorities reported that after the seizure of the ship, they did not find any equipment there.
Lyngberg called the allegations about surveillance equipment a pure conspiracy theory. "The ship and its captain, whom I represent, have not been provided with any information about the progress of the investigation. The owners are not suspected of anything," he said.
The Dutch frigate Tromp is sailing through the Gulf of Finland, and a conversation in Russian can be heard on the air from its bridge. Sailors study the horizon with binoculars. The 60-year-old commander of the NATO flotilla in the Baltic, Commodore Arjen Varnaar, calls the damage to Estlink 2 "more or less irrefutable evidence." He says, "I think it's pretty naive to think that the cables were cut by mistake. There are many tankers under different flags in the Baltic Sea. Most of them enter Russian ports. Dragging an anchor along the bottom of the sea for many miles is illogical, isn't it? If an anchor falls out, they usually stop the car or just cut it, let it fall."
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has warned that there will be more tanker landings if damage to European submarine cables does not stop. "Ship captains must understand that the threat to our infrastructure will not remain without consequences. There will be more landings, detentions and arrests," he said in Helsinki this month.
But actions against international shipping are fraught with legal complications, not to mention the risk of escalation with Russia. Therefore, NATO can do little in response by military means. Finland's unilateral decision to act by the new NATO member is most likely due to pure economic calculation. To compensate a foreign shipping company for the seizure of a vessel is probably cheaper than repairing the most important infrastructure on the seabed.
As there are more and more such attacks, some impatient military leaders, such as the commander of the Estonian armed forces, General Martin Herem, have suggested that NATO could block the Baltic Sea, which became known as "NATO Lake" after Sweden and Finland joined the alliance. Currently, nine of the ten countries bordering it are part of this defensive alliance.
But since such a blockade is tantamount to a declaration of war, NATO has chosen a less confrontational approach. During Operation Baltic Sentry, she will primarily monitor the movements of suspicious vessels.
Puddles of water and ice formed on the deck of the Dattelna. The NATO flotilla plunged into darkness as the sun set. Using underwater drones, elite divers, and sonar equipment, this naval group hopes to tear down the veil of denial behind which hostile forces are hiding.
"We are like a video surveillance system at sea," says 51—year-old Captain 2nd Rank Eric Cox from the Belgian Navy. "We will see anyone who wants to take illegal actions."
