- cross-posted to:
- europe@feddit.de
- cross-posted to:
- europe@feddit.de
Foreign minister warns of environmental catastrophe in Baltic Sea as he accuses Moscow of using unseaworthy vessels
Russia appears prepared to create “environmental havoc” by sailing unseaworthy oil tankers through the Baltic Sea in breach of all maritime rules, the Swedish foreign minister has said.
Speaking to the Guardian during his first visit to London since Sweden became a Nato member, Tobias Billström called for new rules and enforcement mechanisms to prevent the ageing and uninsured Russian shadow fleet causing an environmental catastrophe. About half of all Russian oil transported by sea passes through the Baltic Sea and Danish waters, often operating under opaque ownership, and using international waters to try to avoid scrutiny.
The fleet generates a huge amount of revenue for Russia’s war machine, bypassing western sanctions that try to block access to insurance if Russia sells the oil above $60 a barrel. In practice as little as 20% of Russian oil is sold below the price cap.
You must log in or register to comment.
Then those ships need to be confiscated & impounded. Russia is in a hybrid war with the West & it’s time the West started acting like it.
At the risk of starting a larger conflict. But agreed Russia will just keep doing whatever they want unless someone actually trys to stop them.
At some point we neet to act even if we start a larger conflict, otherwise Russia will always win because we are too afraid to fight back. Also we need to show other asshole countries that they can’t hide behind their weapons and do atrocties when ever they want.
I appreciate that you’re saying what you think is right, and if we didn’t live in the nuclear age, you might be. But Russia could mass murder a significant proportion of the world with the nuclear arsenal they alone have. Even considering old and failing bombs, they still have more than enough. 2 sub megaton bombs was all it took to kill almost 200 thousand people between Hiroshima and Nagasaki. What can be done with the arsenal that exists is considerably larger than that.
Or are you saying that you trust Russia not to use their nuclear arsenal? Do you trust America not to use its nuclear arsenal?
Do we need to do a community re-watch of threads? Why is it that you are seemingly unconcerned about a broader conflict between 2 nations with vast nuclear reserves, both of which are in constant political turmoil and one of which is actively a dictatorship?
World War is not what this planet needs right now, and any considerations for how to approach this conflict must continue with a shared goal of no nuclear Armageddon and no global warfare.
It’s already a hybrid world war and Russia will salami slice until Putin has a new palace in Washington.
Denmark can just confiscate the vessels and just go “oops, pirates that far north, who could’ve known” and act all innocent. That’s the kind of war we’re in right now.
I was moreso responding to the other commenter saying “so what if we start a larger conflict”. I’m not saying to do nothing, but that preventing a nuclear world war has to be a serious consideration in any actions taken by anyone.
Russia has nothing to win using nuclear weapons, and all to lose.
Check out “MAD” doctrine.
Russia sabre rattling is working though, which will make people like you let them do atrocities all day long, which IMO is immoral.
What is there to win in donbas?
I’m aware of what mutually assured destruction is.
Putin alone controls whether they would use them. No one else. Do you trust in him to value human life?
This is just a scaremongering lie lol.
“Putin will anihilate humanity if you don’t clean the dishes!!1!” Now will you do it?!!
You should check out “command structure” I guess, if you are not just trolling.
I’m not a troll, I just have extremely little faith in dictators to abide by rules they are 100% capable of overruling. There are 3 chegets, which were once physical briefcases but now might not be. The president of Russia has one, the minister of defense, and the chief of the General staff. It is not publicly available information whether or not a majority of the chegets need to be activated in order to activate the strategic nuclear forces system. It is assumed this is the case.
The minister of defense is probably Putin’s closest confidant and extremely unlikely to defy him. He has stated the use of nuclear weapons is limited to “extraordinary circumstances”. But I think that outright war with America would probably bring along plenty of “extraordinary circumstances”. The chief of the general staff is also a very close person to Putin and does not seem to have made many public comments on the use of nuclear weapons.
I do not have faith in those 3 men to act in the best interests of humanity.
Agreed. History has shown that appeasement does not work with these kind of people. You need to set boundaries and push back hard when they test the boundaries you setup or else they’ll just step over any new boundary you set.
Russia cannot sustain a larger conflict.
“trys”
Seriously?
Yes?
Removed by mod
That kind of embargo is how Pearl Harbor got bombed but okay.
Lol
Ancient history and not at all relevant anymore.
Man, Russia is really quadrupling down on the villainy.
People act like Russia is in somekind of a phase but they are behaving in such a evil way since decades now.
I never implied that. Just pointing out the obvious.
I know, i also did not imply that you said so :)
As long as russia remains a dictatorship, they will continue. Enriching a handful at the expense of everyone else. The dictatorship is not going to govern itself responsibly. Only outside pressure helps them do that.
I guess the idea is that if there’s no guarantee the oil will make it to port, they can sell it at a much lower price?
Why not just stopping the ships from sailing through your waters on these grounds?
They most likely didn’t sail through our waters. It’s international water. The only place where they would sail through ours or Danish waters would probably be Öresund.
However, if I remember it correctly there’s a treaty in place that allows ships to pass through.
We also have treaties that say attacks on civilian infrastructure is an act of war.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Russia appears prepared to create “environmental havoc” by sailing unseaworthy oil tankers through the Baltic Sea in breach of all maritime rules, the Swedish foreign minister has said.
Speaking to the Guardian during his first visit to London since Sweden became a Nato member, Tobias Billström called for new rules and enforcement mechanisms to prevent the ageing and uninsured Russian shadow fleet causing an environmental catastrophe.
Foreign ministers from the eight Nordic-Baltic grouping of countries met on the strategic island of Gotland a fortnight ago to discuss how to tackle the Russian fleet.
He said every state that was a member of the International Maritime Organisation had a responsibility to uphold IMO rules and regulations, and had the right to ask the captain of a ship not deemed seaworthy to take action before leaving port.
The former UK armed forces minister James Heappey said he kept a copy of the Swedish civil defence manual on his desk as a model for what Britain should emulate.
Like all foreign ministers, he said he was wary of the implications of a Trump presidency had for Europe, Nato and Ukraine, but doubted the bulk of the Republican party had succumbed to pro-Russian propaganda.
The original article contains 1,000 words, the summary contains 200 words. Saved 80%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
