Russia is ready to defend its interests by any means. The shadow of tension between Moscow and London once again weighs over the waters of the English Channel.
An incident that unfolded at sea developed into a resounding diplomatic blow for British Prime Minister Keir Starmer.
British media outlets did not hesitate to speak of “mockery” of Starmer by Putin, following the spectacular and unhindered passage of Russian tankers through the English Channel under the escort of the frigate “Admiral Grigorovich”.
The event takes on particular significance, as only a few weeks earlier London had warned in a strict tone that it would proceed with interventions against ships of the so called “shadow fleet” of Russia.
Despite the threats, the reality at sea proved different.
According to analysts, hundreds of Russian ships crossed the English Channel after the warnings of the British government, without any substantial reaction.
London appears exposed, while Moscow seems determined to impose its own terms.
Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper had stated that the country’s armed forces possess the necessary authorization to act.
However, the absence of practical implementation of this policy raises reasonable questions about the credibility of British threats.
Clear and sharp messages
At the same time, from the Russian side, the messages were clear and pointed.
Ambassador Andrei Kelin had warned that Russia is ready to respond with “asymmetric measures” in order to ensure freedom of navigation.
And as it appears, this response did not take long to manifest.
Military analysts in Moscow speak of a pre planned display of power.
Boris Usvyatsov, a retired Captain First Rank, argues that the order for hard patrols came from the highest level of command.
According to him, Russia will not allow interventions against ships that carry its flag, stressing that any attempt at inspection or seizure will be met forcefully.
The presence of the ship “Admiral Grigorovich” was not accidental.
It is a heavily armed warship, equipped with advanced missile systems capable of acting as a deterrent against any naval challenge.
Its appearance in the English Channel functioned as a clear message to the West: Russia is ready to defend its interests by any means.
On the other hand, military analyst Alexander Bartosh points out that the escort of tankers by warships may be a costly option, however it is considered necessary for a power that does not wish to appear vulnerable to pressure or “pirate” actions, as he describes them.
The question that now dominates is how far this confrontation can go.
The presence of military forces in one of the busiest maritime corridors in the world increases the risk of an accident or even a broader conflict.
For now, the English Channel is turning into a silent but dangerous theater of power, where every move counts and every mistake can have unpredictable consequences.
The only certainty is that this incident does not constitute the end, but most likely the beginning of a new, more intense phase in the confrontation between East and West.
The British had been warned
The truth is that Russia had openly warned Britain that it was preparing a “naval surprise” in case London attempted to seize tankers transporting Russian energy resources.
The Russian ambassador to the United Kingdom, Andrei Kelin, in a statement that had caused a chill, made it clear that Moscow would not remain idle.
Speaking to the Daily Express, he denounced British intentions to seize Russian ships as “piracy” that blatantly violates the International Law of the Sea, implying that the retaliation would not be merely diplomatic.
“The cost for Britain will be extremely high,” he warned, emphasizing that the measures Russia is preparing will constitute an unpleasant, and possibly dangerous, surprise for London.
It is recalled that in March, the government of the United Kingdom granted the military the right to board ships subject to sanctions within British territorial waters.
A few days later, the office of Prime Minister Keir Starmer warned that shipowners, managers, and crews could face criminal prosecution.
The message was clear: London is ready to proceed with aggressive moves.
However, the price of such a choice may be heavy.
Retired officer of the British Navy, James Fennell, warned that the seizure of Russian ships could bring Britain “one step closer to war with Russia.”
The “shadow fleet” and the seizures
At the center lies the so called “shadow fleet”, a term which, according to Moscow, is fabricated by the West in order to justify aggressive actions at sea.
Nikolai Patrushev directly accused the European Union of inventing the term to cover “maritime robberies”, while he supported the military escort of Russian ships, a proposal that sharply raises the temperature.
On the same wavelength, Maria Zakharova argued that Brussels is attempting to impose its sanctions through blackmail and artificial narratives.
And while statements are being exchanged, the events at sea are revealing:
1) Sweden seized the tanker Flora 1, before releasing it a few hours later.
2) The French Navy captured the Deyna in the Mediterranean, with British support.
3) The Grinch was seized off the coast of Spain and taken to Marseille.
4) The ships Caffa and Sea Owl I remain under detention in Swedish ports.
At the same time, at least 25 tankers that are under sanctions crossed British waters in just one week, a number that shows that the tension does not discourage movements.
Toward a dangerous confrontation?
The picture that is taking shape is explosive. With France, Britain, and Sweden proceeding with targeted seizures and Russia responding with threats of military escort and “surprises”, the maritime front is turning into a new high risk zone.
So far, the incidents remain isolated.
However, the pattern is clear, and if it continues, the next step may not simply be a seizure, but an open confrontation.
Moscow has already warned.
The question is whether London will ignore the message, or whether the “surprise” that has been announced will dramatically change the rules of the game at sea.
www.bankingnews.gr
Readers’ Comments