## UK Government Grilled on Inaction Against Russia’s ‘Shadow Fleet’ in Home Waters
A pointed parliamentary inquiry has put the spotlight on the UK’s strategy for confronting Russia’s clandestine “shadow fleet,” specifically questioning the non-deployment of specialist Maritime Counter-Terrorism forces.
### The Unanswered Call for Direct Action
During a recent session, Lord West of Spithead lodged a formal query, challenging why the UK’s dedicated Maritime Counter-Terrorism units were not being mobilized to intercept vessels linked to Russia’s illicit “shadow fleet” as they navigated the English Channel and other maritime zones adjacent to the United Kingdom. The underlying concern highlighted the potential for these vessels to be complicit in activities detrimental to international security.
### Ministry of Defence Highlights Broader Strategy, Skirts Direct Question
Responding on behalf of the Ministry of Defence, Defence Minister Lord Coaker opted not to directly address the specific inquiry regarding the use of specialist boarding forces. Instead, his statement focused on the broader, multi-faceted efforts underway to combat sanctions evasion and other illegal maritime activities.
Lord Coaker unequivocally stated the UK’s “commitment to countering the Russian Shadow Fleet,” characterising it as “an expanding network of illicit operations that underwrites global illicit ventures and bolsters the Kremlin’s war machine in Ukraine.” He underscored the severe implications of this clandestine shipping network, linking it directly to the financing and support of malevolent activities worldwide.
The minister detailed existing measures, noting that the UK has already blacklisted over 500 vessels. He further emphasized ongoing collaboration with international allies and partners, coordinating robustly to escalate measures against those flouting sanctions, all while strictly adhering to the principles of international maritime law.
### The Lingering Question: Why No Interdiction by Specialist Forces?
Despite the comprehensive overview of the UK’s general efforts, Lord Coaker’s response notably failed to elucidate the specific rationale behind the non-deployment of Maritime Counter-Terrorism forces for interdiction operations against the shadow fleet. Furthermore, the minister did not explicitly rule out their potential engagement in future scenarios.
Instead, Lord Coaker concluded by affirming that the government would leverage “the full spectrum of available capabilities” to dismantle shadow fleet activity, consistently maintaining fidelity to the international law of the sea. This leaves the initial question regarding the immediate use of specialist forces unanswered, while keeping the door open for a range of unspecified future actions.