Moscow redeploys troops to protect shadow fleet

The Sea of Azov is shallow, narrow, and now a kill zone. Ukraine launched maritime drones against Russian tankers this month, claiming strikes on over 147 vessels in eleven days. Moscow suspended navigation through the Don-Azov Canal and the Kerch Strait (The Guardian, Kyiv Independent/Reuters). Then came the tell: Russia pulled drone operators and air-defence troops off the frontline to guard the tankers (Euromaidan Press).

That redeployment says more than any sanctions communiqué. Moscow now treats its sanctions-evasion fleet as military infrastructure worth defending with combat units. Ukraine is making the shadow fleet a battlefield problem. Europe still treats it mostly as a regulatory one.

The workaround that carries 54% of Russian oil

The shadow fleet is a loose network of aging tankers with murky ownership, frequent flag swaps, manipulated tracking signals and non-Western insurance. Its purpose is moving Russian oil outside the EU/G7 price cap. The cap does not ban Russian oil exports. It bars Western companies from providing shipping, insurance and related services for Russian crude sold above a set price. Once cargoes shift to vessels beyond that service chain, Western leverage drops. By June 2026, around 54% of Russia's seaborne fossil-fuel exports moved on shadow tankers (CREA, The Insider).

Ukraine is attacking that workaround with explosives. The campaign targeted fuel routes to Crimea and southern occupied territory, hitting tankers, tugboats and cargo vessels (Times of India/Reuters). Russia struck Odesa, Chornomorsk and Izmail in the same period, tying the tanker campaign to Ukraine's grain-export corridor (BBC, gCaptain).

But market intelligence warns against overclaiming. The Sea of Azov is not Russia's main export artery. Many struck vessels appear to be smaller coastal craft rather than the large crude carriers that generate real revenue (Hamer). Russia adapts by rerouting through Novorossiysk and other Black Sea terminals (IndexBox).

Europe enforces unevenly

The EU listed 189 additional shadow-fleet vessels in its 17th sanctions package last year (Council). Sanctioned tankers still sailed through European waters while the 21st package was being negotiated (EUobserver). Listing a ship is not the same as stopping it.

The Netherlands wants authority to stop and detain stateless or falsely flagged vessels. The Dutch government sent an urgent amendment to its foreign-ships law to the Council of State (the body that reviews legislation before parliament votes), proposing powers to inspect and hold ships at ports, locks and certification checkpoints (SWZ Maritime).

Dutch authorities also frame the risk beyond sanctions: shadow-fleet vessels could serve as platforms for espionage and sabotage against North Sea data and electricity cables (Rijksoverheid). The limit is international maritime law. Innocent passage (the rule that lets properly flagged ships transit territorial waters without interference, provided they pose no threat) still applies on the open sea. Dutch enforcement works at chokepoints, not between them.

Greece occupies the opposite corner. Athens resisted restrictions on transporting Russian LNG to third countries during the 21st package negotiations (Euronews). The argument: poorly designed bans push cargo from regulated European carriers toward less transparent operators, without actually cutting Moscow's income (Cyprus Mail).

That logic has substance. If sanctions merely relocate business from insured Western ships to darker fleets, Russia still exports and Europe loses oversight. But it also hands Athens leverage inside the Council, where sanctions require unanimity (meaning any single country can block). Greece and Cyprus, both major shipping states, can protect globally dominant fleets while framing obstruction as policy realism.

Who pays for what

The burden splits unevenly. Ukraine spends drones and absorbs Russian retaliation strikes on its ports. Coastal states like Romania face physical proximity to a maritime war zone. Shipping states protect revenue and claim they preserve oversight. Russia reroutes.

The next decision belongs to the EU Council: whether shipping states can keep protecting maritime business while asking Ukraine to absorb the military cost of enforcement that Europe's regulations have failed to deliver.