Another undersea cable damaged in Baltic Sea
france24.com
france24.com
https://www.aklagare.se/nyheter-press/pressmeddelanden/2025/...
> A vessel suspected of carrying out the [suspected] sabotage has been seized following a decision by prosecutors.
It probably has the long term cost of making us more willing to invest in defence though.
Now you might say "...but these cables are so low value", but these are easy targets that reduce the resilience of the Baltic states. Any more conventional attack would now be more effective because they've taken the backups out first.
So, annoyance at most.
Sure, in aggregate lots of technologies are critically important to modern society. But you don't cry when a single rail car gets damaged.
To adapt the old saying, the internet interprets cut cables as unreachable intermediate nodes and routes around them.
Investing in Ukraine's ability to deal with Russia is clearly the most economical way to deal with Russia for everyone else. Hence they want to distract us from that.
Spend - to give money as a payment for something.
Invest still sounds to me like the word I'm looking for.
Paying military subcontractors is not putting resources into improving the military, it's spending. Be it bombing a country for no profit (like Afghanistan), for resources (like Irak), or geopolitics gain (like Syria/Ukraine), it's an expense, not an inversion. The military will not get ROI from oil or geopolitics.
https://newsukraine.rbc.ua/news/four-rheinmetall-plants-set-... for example.
"What is hybrid warfare? – Kilcullen's theory about liminal maneuver" by "Anders Puck Nielsen, an officer and military analyst at the Danish Defence Academy, specializes in Russia, Ukraine, and maritime operations."
Or they're just being bullies, or testing willingness to defend. At this point, I'd assume it's some type of aggression, at least. Unless cables have been cut all the time, but now suddenly it's becoming headlines for political reasons...
If we're talking about the Chinese state, I'd say it's viable. Perhaps not breaking AES 256 outright, but screwed up implementations of cryptography. And perhaps even backdoors.
This is the second such incident in a row that we know where the sailors and the vessels have been seized. Hope Europe will keep doing the same for future sabotages.
PS. This situation reminds me of a presentation at my former company by some lawyers who sued US Government on behalf of some Gitmo inmates. The inmates survived an attack by US forces in the middle of Afganistan and then were arrested. The inmates' legal case (as per lawyers) was they did not know what cargo they transported - and yet they were paid 3-4 times the usual amount for transport cargo in combat region almost deserted by civilians. I am not convinced these inmates were 100% innocent....
If they share who gave the order to do illegal damage, maybe they will receive more lenient sentencing.
I can’t see them running out of sympathetic merchant sailors anytime soon.
How would you know?
"MV Vezhen Siezed by Swedish Coast Guard For Suspected Cable Break in the Baltic Sea"
Sal Mercogliano / What's Going on With Shipping?
Economy will not collapse while China (and other “neutral” countries) supports it.
Even if they rolled through Kiev with tanks tomorrow, the future for the typical Russian looks bleak.
(My prediction is that just like other countries with bad demographics, Russia will require mass-immigration in the near future to avoid collapse. This will dilute their national identity, weaken central control, cause internal strife, etc… Also, if you’re a poor Asian worker looking for a country to move to, would you rather choose South Korea or rural Russia?)
It is not that they are winning territory, they gain power over EU.
If they win, EU politically will be destroyed as half of Europe will seek protection by agreeing to whoever promise it, while US withdrawing from all its obligations.
It is really may be a new order when everyone is on themselves.
I think all the statements that the EU "is freeloading" on the US are not factual. The US spends more than the EU because it has a nuclear arsenal (forbidden for many EU countries) and regularly engages in hegemonic wars like in the second Iraq war or in Afghanistan.
If the US withdraws its forces from the EU, Poland alone could stop a Russian invasion, not to mention a two front war with Finland involved.
I blame the EU politicians for not responding with more confidence and concrete examples like the above to Trump's recent statements. Trump has no cards to play. If he leaves, good riddance. If he threatens 50% tariffs, block Google, Meta, Amazon, X and Tesla. This is the language he understands.
There is no guarantee that part of the EU will decide not to block any joint military action for either fear of retaliation from russia or because of separate peace agreements with it.
You can see that right now US incites division in multiple ways: Musk in Germany, Republicans in UK, Trump in Denmark.
These are all coordinated attacks with the same strategic goals.
The Polish "elite" has portfolio of real estates located from Spain to Dubai. The Russian invasion would be meatgrinder of youngish non rich male population as in Ukraine.
But they are. Germany's Minister of Defence recently admitted that Bundeswehr is in such sorry state that "pretty much anyone could defeat it". They have tanks, but those tanks are not even operational, because they are not maintained. Same goes for other types of equipment, and other EU countries.
War in Ukraine was a wake-up call, but it will take at least a decade for EU to be able to defend themselves without US help.
https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/2024-the-us-mili...
Germany has a higher budget than Poland. Apparently Poland is able to keep 1000 tanks operational. Germany/von der Leyen made the mistake to use McKinsey as consultants for the army. McKinsey can leave Germany, too.
2020 'during a recent military exercise all 18 Pumas deployed suffered technical failures' https://thehill.com/homenews/ap/ap-technology/ap-german-mili...
There is high failure rate and there is just broken but nobody noticed because we never use them despite owning 350 and ordering next 200 batch. https://www.dw.com/en/puma-tanks-unusable-is-germanys-milita...
Polish army is nepotist institution with budget being spent on things like 40 years old retirees. Any equipment numbers reported by them to be multiplied by 0.6 or even 0.4.
We did have close to 750 operational tanks before 2022, but I think around 300 of them were given to Ukraine when the war started. We are now slowly replacing them with M1 Abrams and Korean's K2.
All of the countries formerly occupied by Russia are seeking protection from Russia. There's no scenario where they'd turn toward it for protection, no matter whether US withdraws from European obligations.
Oil and gas are the last thing that comes to mind when thinking about resources of that region. Coal, agriculture, manufacturing…
> Their military will be so degraded
Russian army is currently stronger than before the war. There’s ongoing purge in ministry of defense to clean the ranks from corruption, they learned a lot and invested a lot in military industrial complex. The casualties are high, mostly among fresh recruits, but also a lot of professional military personnel got plenty of experience. It will be wrong to dismiss it.
> that they might face a series of rebellions in their border regions in the next decade
Absolutely not. Situation in politics is very stable now and there’s no path leading to such destabilization.
>Also, if you’re a poor Asian worker looking for a country to move to, would you rather choose South Korea or rural Russia?
Central Asian workers did well and will be fine in construction, hospitality and few other sectors in Russia where they historically filled significant numbers of jobs. They are scared now, but as the war ends, incentive to return will be high. Biggest Russian advantage here over South Korea is cultural proximity, shared language and established travel routes.
Coal usage is levelling off and might even start going backwards over the next decade: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/global-coal-c...
You can't farm in soil that's filled with landmines, unexploded ordinance, and various shrapnel metals. Just ask how productive the fields of Verdun are.
Ukraine wasn't exactly a manufacturing powerhouse before the war, and Russia nearly levelled a big chunk of it, such as the Azovstal steel plant.
> Russian army is currently stronger than before the war.
Have you not watched /r/combatfootage recently? They're doing suicide-runs with golf buggies. They've completely run out of entire categories of armoured vehicles. They might have more meat left for the grinder, but they're forced to buy shells from North Korea!
> It will be wrong to dismiss it.
Oh sure, they retain a lot of strength on paper, but we've all seen what that paper is worth over the last three days... err... years.
> very stable now and there’s no path leading to such destabilization.
“How did you go bankrupt?” The other responds, “Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.”
> They are scared now
"Everything is fine" != "They are scared".
> incentive to return will be high
What incentive? The Ruble is going to lose a lot of its value when the Russian government can no longer afford to artificially prop it up. People don't like being paid in turnips and promises.
> South Korea is cultural proximity, shared language and established travel routes.
Sure, maybe, but would you rather work in an air-conditioned robotics factory that looks like a clean-room and getting paid in hard currency or cutting lumber in Siberia and getting paid in Rubles?
Coal is phased out as energy source, but it is used in steel production. There's some local demand for it, but nevermind, you are right, economically it may be already irrelevant. My point was, your mentioning of oil and gas was not based on the knowledge of economic geography of this region.
>Ukraine wasn't exactly a manufacturing powerhouse before the war, and Russia nearly levelled a big chunk of it, such as the Azovstal steel plant.
Speaking of which, you are certainly not aware that there's a property boom in Mariupol right now, thanks to 2% mortgages subsidized by government (that's basically free money). In peaceful times it will be incredibly attractive for investment for many reasons. Reconstruction jobs will last for a while and the example outcome of such spending you can see in the skyline of modern Grozny. It's more likely than in Chechnya that the economy of this region may actually produce some surplus within 10-15 years due to a different governance model. In Ukraine it would be an economic powerhouse too, but it is wrong to think that Russia has ruined it forever.
>Just ask how productive the fields of Verdun are.
There's nothing even remotely comparable to Verdun in Ukraine. The same region was a battlefield in WWII and civil war, it did not make it lifeless. Cleaning and reconstruction effort will take some time, but Russia does have resources for that.
>Have you not watched /r/combatfootage recently?
Of course not. I can work with native sources in Ukrainian and Russian on both sides of the conflict that give me a full picture, not just drone videos.
> but they're forced to buy shells from North Korea!
Taken out of context this means nothing. Russia is currently producing 3 times more shells than entire NATO combined. They were much more efficient in increasing production than supposedly economically superior Western countries. They buy extra from North Korea due to the intensity of the conflict. The same can be said about many other types of equipment (drone production increasing even ahead of schedule).
> The Ruble is going to lose a lot of its value when the Russian government can no longer afford to artificially prop it up. People don't like being paid in turnips and promises.
Wrong assumption. There exists scarcity of the workforce in Russia, so salaries in non-government sector are rising too. As a matter of fact, the war reduced inequality for the first time in many years, thanks to visibly higher incomes of working class. For migrants, who send the money abroad this only means that they should not save in rubles and use less volatile currency. Yuan is already popular in Russia.
> Sure, maybe, but would you rather work in an air-conditioned robotics factory that looks like a clean-room and getting paid in hard currency or cutting lumber in Siberia and getting paid in Rubles?
Reality is not how you imagine it. First of all, many Siberian and Arctic jobs are paid better and are often taken by Russians. Most Central Asian immigrants go to European part of Russia and a few big cities in Asian part. It's mostly a hard work, for sure, but assumption that they will get anything better in Korea or anywhere else in South Asia is surely wrong. Nobody is going to hire a guy from Tajikistan who does not speak Korean and has no idea what to do on an air-conditioned robotics factory. He will be doing the same type of the job as in Russia but with less social security, no support from diaspora, much harder visa process etc. It's basically an ignorant fantasy that they might have gone to Korea. It does not work that way.
Russia's male military-age population is under 12 million, and maybe 800,000 have been killed or seriously injured so far. The solution Russia is trying: "Pregnant at 16", a reality TV show, to encourage young women to get pregnant.[1] They need fresh meat for the grinder.
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/11/10/russia-popul...
Shells from North Korea are just clickbait news taken out of context. Russia produces locally 3x times more shells for this war than the entire NATO.
Extending the war seems to be the current plan for Putin.
The West has been pretty wishy washy on blocking Russian oil sales. That could change.
Trump is just itching to have a tariff war and tariffs/sanctions on any country buying Russian oil, including India and China could cause problems for Russia with it being their main source of income and their being a bit on the edge financially already.
I think what Trump has done to Colombia is not reproducible at scale and he won't use the same approach against China or India for wrong reason (war in Ukraine is an unworthy problem in "America first" mindset).
Monroe doctrine may be still alive, but re-alignment is going to happen everywhere now and further sanctions will have less and less effect because of that most of all.
I do think that the West has lost this war in 2023, when Biden and northwest of Europe were sleeping and ignoring the signs. This happened not least because the West does not actually care about Ukraine, it's pure moral standing with zero strategic interest. I mean, Poland may believe that Ukraine is a good buffer and Baltics may believe that Ukraine is a good distraction, but what makes them safe is that they do enjoy Article 5 protection and Russia will not test that for wrong reason.
https://youtu.be/lNZ56C-f4a8?t=362
re "the West does not actually care about Ukraine", I think they care about the principle that you should be able to go about your business without getting invaded more than about Ukraine specifically. It's like if someone gets mugged in your town - you may not care that much about the specific victim but you care about the principle that the muggers don't get away with it.
Seems a bit unfair. Trump was clearly elected and not part of a long line of Bush/Clintons + friends. Also his main plan is to stop the fighting, perhaps by being economically aggressive but that's a step back from killing people.
All of the signs, and US & ally weaknesses that allow for a lead-up, were out in plain sight.
While I don’t agree with Trump’s methods (nor do I wish to see war), both the US and our allies have grown complacent.
Some in Europe believe we have economy of scale in terms of military and output, but this belief is many decades out of date.
It may be more than one war.
https://therecord.media/philippines-arrests-chinese-nationa-...
Insurers will figure out who is trustworthy enough.
It is a pity that the EU would have to fight a two front war against Russia and the US after the US has started the eastern front part (as acknowledged by Trump himself).
The Danish Royal Ordinance of 27 Feb 1976, amended in 1999 by the Ordinance Governing the Admission of Foreign Warships and Military Aircraft to Danish Territory in Time of Peace, only allows passage during times of peace, and is specific that "Other vessels which are owned or used by a foreign State and which are not employed exclusively for commercial purposes shall be equated with foreign warships in the application of the provisions of this Ordinance."
Quoting https://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_t... says the US isn't signatory to UNCLOS.
My reading of article 19 of UNCLOS says Denmark and/or Sweden can't place a new universal insurance requirement for innocent passage, because it is not on the list of activities which are "prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State."
Article 235 says there can be 'procedures for payment of adequate compensation, such as compulsory insurance or compensation funds' for 'the protection and preservation of the marine environment' but that's the only mention of insurance I see.
I don't think an insurance company would pay out for deliberate acts of sabotage.
It's all to easy to set up an insurance company which would go bankrupt in that case, requiring oversight.
Clearly of Denmark were to set up the only insurance company which could meet all the criteria, then we are back to having Sound Dues.
If one wanted to play devil's advocate, you could argue that an anchor malfunction could be to blame, but that doesn't explain why the captain didn't then stop the vessel, why they didn't divert to a safe course.
That also means that 2nd easiest to acquire PADI qualification is enough to dive there by yourself.
How? Open water diver is 18m, advanced Open water diver is 30m. With „deep diver“ specialty, you’re at 40m.
I think you need to become an instructor to go deeper, that’s not the 2nd easiest qualification at all.
Diving to 80m is a serious endeavor on this scale.
It requires helium mixes and personally I'd only want to do it with a rebreather, not normal "blowing-bubbles" type SCUBA gear (too wasteful on the breathing gas). 20-30 minutes at the bottom will mean around 90-120 minutes decompressing. You don't want to be doing anything taking too long, or being too laborious.
Could be done from a fishing boat without any problem.
Having had equipment failures no deeper than 30m, I decided any dives that require decompression are not for me. I'll leave deep dives and sabotage to others :)
It would seem simple, being able to deep dive then without decompressing. I'm sure there's a good reason it's not being done, I just wonder what.
You can't breathe pure oxygen under water, as it becomes very toxic very quickly as pressure goes up. So you have to dilute it with something. Nitrogen is easy to get hold of (actually you just compress atmospheric air). I'm also not sure cutting nitrogen out helps much with decompression sickness, you get it with other gases too - maybe more slowly, I'm not sure.
You can, and do, replace nitrogen with other gases, mostly helium (and in rare circumstances, hydrogen), but for other reasons. Nitrogen too becomes toxic under pressure, around the 30-40m mark, with symptoms similar to drunkenness - not good under water.
Funnily enough, helium does the same deeper down, except the symptoms there are the opposite - nervousness, tension etc. So to some extent perhaps these two balance out. Hydrogen has very low toxicity, but for some reason people feel queasy about mixing pure hydrogen and oxygen.
Crucially, too, a lot of deep diving is commercial in nature, and cost-sensitive. Anything that isn't just compressed and bottled air is getting very expensive very quickly.
It all gets incredibly complicated. Deep enough, you need to breathe gas that contains so little oxygen that you would suffocate on it at surface pressure. At pressure, it's fine - the partial pressure of oxygen is sufficient, and having less of it makes it less toxic. But you have to be careful to only use this gas deep enough, else you'll run out of oxygen. Or at other times, when decompressing, you might use an oxygen-rich mix, which while more toxic, helps you purge some of the other gases from your bloodstream, cutting decompression times.
It's a fascinating topic to read about from the comfort of my sofa.
Also, you would need to have pure oxygen available and breathe that for maybe an hour before each dive, which would be expensive and annoying. For touristic dives, especially along the shore, it's easier to just plan the dive so you can still see something interesting while waiting for decompression.
Correct. Those are the limits of those certifications.
> I think you need to become an instructor to go deeper, that’s not the 2nd easiest qualification at all.
In order to go down to deeper depths and returning you generally need a technical or professional certification. Anyone can go to any depth, as long they don't expect a reasonable chance to get back to the surface alive.
PADI open circuit technical course go down to 50 but there are other agencies for technical diving with a bit better reputation, and those generally max out at 100.
Most people who are trained for 80+ depth usually do so on a rebreather. Padi do have a 100m course for that. However with rebreathers, students mostly look towards specific instructors and not agencies. What agency a instructor uses is generally much less important than that you trust the instructor.
As nvradov says, the sanctions need to get a lot harder, especially on German machine tools.
Especially as authorities seem to have trouble finding those responsible. Tracing the owner of the ship leads to some hotel in Dubai or similar (previous incident). Just keep the ship until the owners call. If there seems to be no owner interested in taking responsibility, sell it.
And we should start enforcing the requirement for insurance and environmental compliance for any passing the danish straits to/from Russian ports. Any ship that isn’t up to standard can turn back to the Atlantic.
NATO controls Kategat and Finnish straits.
Close airspace around Kaliningrad as it is unsafe due to GPS jamming.
This obviously doesn't include the "cost" (losses) of the cable not being operational.
What else are you going to do? Stop each and every commercial ship going over any bit of cable? It's not practical.
I prefer this, not only is it better for environmental reasons, you can also sell the seized ship and cargo to help cover repair costs.
I'm not sure how you stop this from happening besides build a record of handling these incidents with firmness, as opposed to acting like a wet noodle, as they did the first couple of times it happened.
The ship has as much to with Malta as .io domains with British Indian Overseas Territory.
It's about as easy to figure out who actually owns and is operating a ship as tracing an international bank account ~1980.
It'll be curious if one outcome of the Russian shadow fleets is a stronger worldwide push for verifiable true commercial maritime registration. Essentially: mandating transparency in shells and KYC reporting, in the same way post-9/11 financial reporting was implemented.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/01/19/russia-balti...