Please elaborate. What's the reason for Russia? What does it gain from damaging undersea cables? Instead, think about what NATO/U.S./UK does actually gain from it (naval blockade of Russian and Chinese shipping lines).
That narrow passage is becoming a war zone. Look at a map. It's one of Russia's few outlets to the sea.
Look at the history of Russia vs. Finland and Russia vs. Estonia. This is one of the world's most hostile choke points.
With 10 undersea cables damaged in the Baltic 2023-2025, it’s obvious a different part of the government needs to become involved. Acting for your national security doesn’t need to (shouldn’t) mean there is no trial.
Every single ship in/out of St Petersburg goes via the Gulf of Finland. All those ships will be "Russian" (have stopped in Russia). It doesn't mean they're "Russian". Owner, charterer, flag, crew can all have very different nationalities.
Which part or combination makes them "Russian", in the sense of "the Russian state asked asked the ship to harm Finnish infrastructure, and they actually did it"?
You can lazily speculate about the aggressive, warmaking nation (that illegally annexed Crimea, is currently at war with Ukraine, is regularly sending submarines, ships, drones, jets into the territories of its neighbours) all you like... but if you want to be able to prosecute them, you need to be able to show evidence of the Russian state ordering this action, and that the cable damage was actually caused by that ship. Where is your evidence?
The crew on these ships are usually all Russians, the ship is often registered in Cayman, Panama or somewhere else. These ships often sail under a third nationality, but when the ships are seized, only complaints are filed from Russian lawyers. Take from that what you will.
Why should Russia do this? What are they gaining from it? Answer: Nothing.
Why should NATO/U.S./UK do this? Because then they have a reason for a sea blockade of Russian and Chinese shipping (just like the U.S. already does in the Caribbean). That's the goal.
Yeah sure, we keep cutting our own telecoms cables multiple times per year, using Russian-operated ships as a front.
The Eagle S (I think it was?) case was brought to court here in Finland and they even admitted to dragging heir anchor but steadfastly maintained that it was due to their own incompetence (which the judge unfortunately believed.)
> Arelion states in an email to TT that two of their submarine cables – one between Sweden and Estonia and one between Estonia and Finland – have been damaged. The first cable was damaged on December 30th and the second on December 31st.
Arelion is AS1299/formerly known as Telia Carrier. The name change is because it's now owned by a Swedish government-managed infrastructure-focused pension fund.
The court threw out the previous case since there was no proof of sabotage. I understood the court ruled that they have no jurisdiction over accident cases under international law.
As far as I understand, it is totally different case if they find any proof of intent.
Sinking the ships and then denying knowing anything about it would probably be the best course of action. That's what Russians would do, if the roles were reversed.
Unfortunately too many Western leaders still think that it's possible to negotiate in good faith with Russians. In reality they respect only force, and see European rules based order and "fair play" as weakness. If Baltic states didn't belong to NATO and Finland didn't have such a big army, Russians would be already doing a lot worse things than cutting cables.
Over here in Finland, even during the "good" years between collapse of the Soviet Union and invasion of Crimea, Russian businessmen kept buying property that made absolutely no economic sense, but was located next to critical infrastructure. Better relations between West and Russia were largely an illusion, especially since Putin took over.
"Sinking the ships and then denying knowing anything about it would probably be the best course of action. That's what Russians would do, if the roles were reversed."
You mean like NATO did off the coast of Spain a year ago?
I didn't remember that case, very interesting. But yes, silently torpedoing a Russian ship transporting military technology to another hostile rogue state is exactly what NATO should be doing.
It honestly starts to sound like they just botched the design and placement of these cables - placing them in shallow and exposed passages, with no proper defense against dragged anchors.
Real shades of "that cable shouldn't have been dressed like that, in a dark and narrow channel, clearly marked on navigation charts(to mitigate exactly this scenario, from good captains at least)" energy.
It's pretty obvious what's happening here.
The response needs to be forceful: seize and auction off the ships. There needs to be sufficient deterrent to actually stop this from happening.
> It's pretty obvious what's happening here.
Please elaborate. What's the reason for Russia? What does it gain from damaging undersea cables? Instead, think about what NATO/U.S./UK does actually gain from it (naval blockade of Russian and Chinese shipping lines).
Wow nobody even blamed Russia yet and you're jumping to their defense already. That is some top notch customer service.
That narrow passage is becoming a war zone. Look at a map. It's one of Russia's few outlets to the sea. Look at the history of Russia vs. Finland and Russia vs. Estonia. This is one of the world's most hostile choke points.
That or the Suwalki gap. They're both flashpoints.
With 10 undersea cables damaged in the Baltic 2023-2025, it’s obvious a different part of the government needs to become involved. Acting for your national security doesn’t need to (shouldn’t) mean there is no trial.
Don't even need to click to know it's the Russians.
Every single ship in/out of St Petersburg goes via the Gulf of Finland. All those ships will be "Russian" (have stopped in Russia). It doesn't mean they're "Russian". Owner, charterer, flag, crew can all have very different nationalities.
Which part or combination makes them "Russian", in the sense of "the Russian state asked asked the ship to harm Finnish infrastructure, and they actually did it"?
You can lazily speculate about the aggressive, warmaking nation (that illegally annexed Crimea, is currently at war with Ukraine, is regularly sending submarines, ships, drones, jets into the territories of its neighbours) all you like... but if you want to be able to prosecute them, you need to be able to show evidence of the Russian state ordering this action, and that the cable damage was actually caused by that ship. Where is your evidence?
The crew on these ships are usually all Russians, the ship is often registered in Cayman, Panama or somewhere else. These ships often sail under a third nationality, but when the ships are seized, only complaints are filed from Russian lawyers. Take from that what you will.
This is the court of public opinion, not a court or law. For better or worse, evidentiary standards are much lower.
Why should Russia do this? What are they gaining from it? Answer: Nothing.
Why should NATO/U.S./UK do this? Because then they have a reason for a sea blockade of Russian and Chinese shipping (just like the U.S. already does in the Caribbean). That's the goal.
Yeah sure, we keep cutting our own telecoms cables multiple times per year, using Russian-operated ships as a front.
The Eagle S (I think it was?) case was brought to court here in Finland and they even admitted to dragging heir anchor but steadfastly maintained that it was due to their own incompetence (which the judge unfortunately believed.)
I suppose that was also a NATO ploy?
Two other cable cuts/"damages" happened around the same dates. Two separate Arelion-owned cables between Sweden/Estonia and Finland/Estonia.
https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/JOow58/kabelbrott-mella... (Swedish)
> Arelion states in an email to TT that two of their submarine cables – one between Sweden and Estonia and one between Estonia and Finland – have been damaged. The first cable was damaged on December 30th and the second on December 31st.
Arelion is AS1299/formerly known as Telia Carrier. The name change is because it's now owned by a Swedish government-managed infrastructure-focused pension fund.
It sounds like the court will just throw it out again as not having jurisdiction over the case.
The court threw out the previous case since there was no proof of sabotage. I understood the court ruled that they have no jurisdiction over accident cases under international law.
As far as I understand, it is totally different case if they find any proof of intent.
Then countries should be able to bomb these ships and go unpunished as well.
That would pass the right message if courts keep refusing to make things right.
Sinking the ships and then denying knowing anything about it would probably be the best course of action. That's what Russians would do, if the roles were reversed.
Unfortunately too many Western leaders still think that it's possible to negotiate in good faith with Russians. In reality they respect only force, and see European rules based order and "fair play" as weakness. If Baltic states didn't belong to NATO and Finland didn't have such a big army, Russians would be already doing a lot worse things than cutting cables.
Over here in Finland, even during the "good" years between collapse of the Soviet Union and invasion of Crimea, Russian businessmen kept buying property that made absolutely no economic sense, but was located next to critical infrastructure. Better relations between West and Russia were largely an illusion, especially since Putin took over.
"Sinking the ships and then denying knowing anything about it would probably be the best course of action. That's what Russians would do, if the roles were reversed."
You mean like NATO did off the coast of Spain a year ago?
I didn't remember that case, very interesting. But yes, silently torpedoing a Russian ship transporting military technology to another hostile rogue state is exactly what NATO should be doing.
They can. They don't want to yet. Europe always assumes too much good faith on the part of other countries.
The countries that the ships are registered in are not going to do anything if they are seized and scrapped.
There needs to be a blockade for these rogue ships. That's the only thing they'll understand, short of being sunk.
Just seize the ships and auction them off. Damaging one cable isn't gonna be worth losing a whole ship, generally speaking.
Given the state some of these ships are starting to be in they might just be worth scrap..
It honestly starts to sound like they just botched the design and placement of these cables - placing them in shallow and exposed passages, with no proper defense against dragged anchors.
Real shades of "that cable shouldn't have been dressed like that, in a dark and narrow channel, clearly marked on navigation charts(to mitigate exactly this scenario, from good captains at least)" energy.
Unfortunately the Baltic is pretty shallow and fairly featureless - the gulf of Finland - between Finland, Estonia, and Russia averages 38 metres deep
If only they had had you in the design team back then when the cables were put in place.
I'm sorry I have no snark-free way to respond to this.
Yeah, why don't they lower the floor of the entire Baltic Sea??