Politico recently published an article discussing Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” operating in the Baltic Sea.
The piece suggests that the European Union may be considering actions to halt or even seize Russian oil tankers in an effort to enforce sanctions and curb illicit trade. However, a closer analysis of the article raises several concerns regarding its sourcing, general feasibility, and geopolitical implications.
Unverified Sources and Speculative Reporting
A significant issue with Politico’s article is its reliance on unnamed sources. The piece references two anonymous EU diplomats and two government officials, without specifying their roles or affiliations. This lack of transparency undermines the credibility of the claims, as it remains unclear whether these sources have any actual authority over EU maritime policy.
Additionally, the article refers to “behind-the-scenes talks” about large-scale ship seizures but fails to provide concrete details on which EU states or institutions are actively considering such measures. This vagueness suggests the report is largely speculative rather than based on firm policy initiatives.
Politico’s Dependence on Anonymous Sources: A Wider Trend?
Politico is well known for its frequent use of anonymous sources, particularly in political and security-related reporting. While the use of unnamed insiders allows them to break stories on sensitive discussions, it also raises concerns regarding verification, accountability, and potential bias.
Although Politico did not pioneer this approach, it has significantly contributed to normalising the reliance on anonymous sources in modern journalism, particularly within EU and US political reporting. This practice, commonly seen in coverage of NATO, the EU, and national governments, fosters a reporting style that prioritises speed and exclusivity over full transparency.
The dangers of this approach include unverifiable claims, speculation, and the potential spread of misinformation. In the case of the “shadow fleet” article, the reliance on anonymous sources results in ambiguity regarding whether the proposed ship seizures are a formal EU policy discussion or merely speculative comments from individual officials.
Russia’s Response: Counterclaims and Diplomatic Risks
Following Politico’s publication, Russian authorities and state media swiftly responded, dismissing the claims as unfounded and portraying them as an escalation of anti-Russian rhetoric. Moscow has framed the discussion around the shadow fleet as an attempt to justify the unlawful seizure of commercial vessels under the guise of environmental concerns or security threats.
Russian officials have warned that any effort to seize tankers operating legally under international maritime law could lead to retaliatory measures, including increased naval presence in the Baltic Sea and potential disruption to European shipping lanes. Russian commentators have also noted the lack of concrete evidence that Russian-affiliated tankers were involved in sabotage incidents, arguing that Western accusations are unsubstantiated.
This response underscores the diplomatic and security risks inherent in speculative reporting. By presenting ship seizures as a feasible enforcement mechanism without robust legal backing, Politico’s article risks exacerbating tensions between the EU and Russia, rather than providing an objective assessment of the situation.
Legal Challenges in Seizing Russian Tankers
Politico suggests that European authorities could seize tankers on environmental or piracy-related grounds. However, such actions would face considerable legal hurdles. International maritime law, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), guarantees the freedom of navigation in international waters.
The legal justification for confiscating ships in international waters is weak, except in cases of piracy or clear environmental violations. Politico briefly acknowledges these legal difficulties, citing maritime lawyers who confirm that acting beyond territorial waters could result in legal retaliation and substantial financial costs. However, the article downplays the likelihood of such measures being overturned in international courts.
A notable example included in the article—the Finnish seizure of the tanker Eagle S—illustrates the complexities involved in enforcing such actions.
Finnish authorities initially detained the vessel, suspecting it of damaging a subsea power cable. However, they later dropped their investigation into the tanker’s cargo, highlighting the legal ambiguity surrounding such enforcement efforts. The case demonstrates that without indisputable evidence of wrongdoing, European states may find it challenging to hold seized vessels indefinitely.
Environmental and Security Justifications: A Weak Basis?
The article claims that many of Russia’s “shadow fleet” tankers are ageing and could pose environmental hazards. While older vessels may present a greater risk of leaks or accidents, Politico does not provide evidence of widespread incidents involving Russian-linked tankers. If these ships are fully certified by reputable classification societies and insured by major marine insurers, authorities would struggle to justify seizures based on hypothetical environmental risks.
Similarly, the assertion that Russian tankers could be involved in undersea infrastructure sabotage is speculative. While the Eagle S case remains under investigation, Politico does not establish a pattern of deliberate attacks linked to Russian oil tankers. Furthermore, piracy laws are generally designed to address attacks against other vessels, not damage to underwater infrastructure.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Read Also: THE POLITICO CONTROVERSY: JOURNALISTIC INTEGRITY UNDER SCRUTINY
Tara Palmeri (via X)
The journalistic world is abuzz following pointed criticisms levelled against Politico by two of its former reporters.
Tara Palmeri, now with Puck News, and Marc Caputo, a senior politics reporter at Axios, voiced their frustrations on Palmeri’s podcast, Somebody’s Gotta Win, over the outlet’s editorial decisions surrounding the coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop and other politically sensitive stories during the 2020 presidential election.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
