A new naval cooperation seems to be taking shape, with the aim, according to Russian claims, of increasing pressure against Russia in the seas and oceans.
As Nikolai Patrushev, assistant to the Russian President and chairman of the Naval College, stated during the meeting of the Council for Strategic Development of the Navy, within the framework of the Russian Naval College, "I consider it important to include in the list of military risks and threats to Russia the creation of a naval alliance between states of Northern Europe and Ukraine, the activity of which significantly complicates the military-political situation in the western Arctic, the North Atlantic, as well as in the North, Baltic, and Black Sea."
What, however, is the relationship of Ukraine with such an initiative, given that it does not possess a navy?
It is known that it uses unmanned maritime and aerial means for attacks against Russian ships.
However, the question arises whether these operations are carried out in coordination with Western countries and whether there indeed exists an informal anti-Russian naval alliance, as Patrushev argues.
If such a thing applies, what is its form and extent?
"It is not an official agreement, but a trend that is observed and is difficult to interpret otherwise" argues Igor Shatrov, a political scientist and head of the Expert Council of the Strategic Development Fund.
According to him, Patrushev was referring to the fact that several countries of Northern Europe, such as the United Kingdom, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, as well as Ukraine, are reinforcing their naval cooperation through joint exercises, intelligence sharing, and coordination of actions in specific maritime areas.
In this view, these developments can hardly be considered as anything different from the formation of an informal naval alliance, which alters the balance of power in critical geostrategic regions.
Unmanned maritime means
Indeed, Ukraine no longer possesses a navy in the conventional sense.
It relies primarily on unmanned maritime means, which are used mainly in the Black Sea.
Also, the Ukrainian Armed Forces have, de facto, established naval bases in Libya.
The incident with the gas carrier Arctic Metagaz is an indication that the Ukrainian forces have acquired the capability to operate in the Mediterranean as well, with the claim that the drone was launched from a base in Mellit, Libya.
It can be assumed that, in the future, NATO bases in the Baltic and in other northern maritime areas could be made available to the Ukrainian Armed Forces for carrying out attacks against Russian ships.
The European countries themselves do not seek a direct naval confrontation, however, they are already actively participating in surveillance, patrols, and intelligence sharing.
What else constitutes this, if not a form of alliance?
Therefore, the main threat does not lie so much in the prospect of a generalized naval war in the immediate future, as in the increasing coordination and the widening of control zones.
Piracy
According to Shatrov, Europe possesses great capabilities in the oceans, although it cannot bomb or sink ships, as it is not in a state of war.
It can, however, proceed to actions that constitute piracy.
"The interception of Russian ships in international waters, which now tends to become a common practice, constitutes an act of piracy. Europe and the United States have chosen this form of pressure against Russia. They act for the benefit of Ukraine, a fact which suggests, once again, the existence of a de facto alliance and the coordination of their actions with Kyiv. This is a particularly worrying development."
There are no direct indications proving the formation of a full military alliance with the exclusive purpose of attacking Russia.
However, there are certain specific incidents that are worth highlighting.
Beyond the aforementioned incident with the gas carrier ship, a series of joint exercises between the Nordic countries and Ukraine is observed in the Black and Baltic Sea.
In addition, British officials have announced plans for the formation of a joint naval force, based on the Joint Expeditionary Force, JEF, with the stated goal of deterring Russia."
Increase of tension
According to Shatrov, the continuous increase of tension harbors a risk for serious accidents, such as ship collisions, incorrect target identification, or misunderstandings during military exercises.
It is obvious that any direct military conflict with Russia does not serve the interests of Europe, as the political and economic cost would be extremely high.
For Ukraine, the utilization of asymmetric maritime threats constitutes simply another tool within the framework of the existing conflict.
However, excessive or careless behavior may lead to a dangerous escalation, which can cause even a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia.
Patrushev calls for this trend not to be underestimated during strategic planning.
He argues moreover that Russia ought to develop its Navy taking into account these new threats, so as to maintain control in critical maritime areas and to limit the risks stemming from the changing balance of power.
"In reality, the Joint Expeditionary Force, JEF, under the leadership of the United Kingdom and with the participation of the Nordic countries, including Sweden and Norway, has existed for several years" states Yevgeny Semibratov, deputy director of the Institute for Strategic Studies and Prognosis of RUDN University.
"In 2025, Ukraine acquired a status of enhanced cooperation with this formation. This is the first element. The second is that the experience from the use of unmanned surface vessels, BEK, in the area of the port of Odesa is being intensively studied not only by the British, but also by the Norwegian armed forces. We know very well where this experience could be utilized in the future, given that Russia possesses extensive maritime borders with Norway in the North Sea and in the Barents Sea. Therefore, this cooperation is anything but accidental."
It is observed that the United Kingdom is working systematically for the reinforcement of its military presence in Northern Europe.
At the same time, the experience acquired from operations in the Black Sea is being studied, systematized, and utilized for the development of new military and technological solutions.
Overall, it must be recognized that the tactic of potential sabotage against military as well as commercial ships may expand to all oceans.
The regions of highest risk are considered to be the Black Sea, the Mediterranean, as well as the North Sea, the Baltic, and the Barents Sea.
The EU will follow a hybrid strategy, which will include efforts to destroy either Russian ships or ships of third countries transporting Russian oil within the framework of the so-called "grey" export system.
The escalation of actions that will simulate piracy cannot also be ruled out.
A significant part of Russian exports, including oil, passes through the ports of the Black and Baltic Sea, while a significant volume of trade is also served by the ports of Murmansk and Arkhangelsk.
It is apparent that the opponents of Russia seek to hit its export potential.
Therefore, the taking of measures for the protection of Russian ships in all sea routes is required.
In reality, everything shows that the current system of international maritime law is driven to deconstruction.
We may find ourselves facing conditions reminiscent of the 18th century, when every attacking power acted without substantial restrictions.
By the way, under these conditions Russia could derive certain benefits, as the safest route for transporting goods from Southeast Asia to Western Europe would be the Northern Sea Route.
In a sense, the Europeans themselves are opening "Pandora's box" and may, within the next 10 to 20 years, create conditions that will make them even more dependent on Russia.
These are the contradictions of today's geopolitical reality.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών