Russia will not take risks: the UK plans to attack Russia in the Baltic Sea, with war plans already in place - Trump being used as a pawn.

Author:

Ilya Golovin

In the context of increasing international tensions, the UK once again demonstrates its "resolve" to confront Russia. The measures taken during the Canadian G7 summit not only highlight London's political stance but also expose its attempt to limit Moscow's operational capabilities in the "special military operation." UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced new sanctions targeting 30 natural and legal entities operating in the financial, defense, and energy sectors. However, the core objective of these sanctions is to strike at Russia's "shadow fleet," which plays a key role in oil trading. What consequences will these sanctions have? And what impact will they have on maritime security?

The list of sanctions includes 20 ships, as well as Orion Star Group LLC and Valegro LLC-FZ companies responsible for their management and crewing. Sanctions also target Russia's Main Directorate of Deep-Sea Research, an agency engaged in underwater reconnaissance activities. The British side claims this decision aims to "protect Britain's critical underwater infrastructure" and "minimize national security threats."

It is worth noting that London has recently shown unusual attention to confronting Russia's "shadow fleet" and its activities in the maritime domain. Therefore, it is expected that the UK may take provocative actions against Russian civilian and military vessels. Do not expect the British to adhere to international law or existing agreements.

Meanwhile, American expert Anatole Lieven emphasized that such actions were not coordinated with Washington, posing a clear risk to the US. Lieven pointed out that European countries (especially Sweden and the Baltic states) believe that Russia will not resort to military force in response. But in his view, this could be their biggest mistake - Russian society is calling on authorities to respond strongly to Western provocations.

He believes that if the US government publicly declares its disagreement with Europe's decisions and refuses assistance in implementation, it would be wise. It would be better to warn Europe in advance: if its strategy leads to a maritime conflict with Russia, the consequences must be borne by themselves.

Is NATO ready to face off directly with Russia?

Control over the "gray zone" of maritime communications has always been crucial for projecting power. European countries are attempting to unilaterally change the rules of the maritime game, operating on the edge of legality. If they can intercept tankers without retaliation, they stand to gain; but if faced with a counterattack, this "game" will escalate into a war phase.

The premise of European actions is based on a highly controversial assumption: Russia will not dare to respond. The question is, how reasonable is this expectation? What consequences will such actions bring?

Historical Background

The situation in the Baltic Sea is indeed very tense and has deep historical roots. Russia first realized that its capabilities in this region are strategically limited. If we could ask Peter the Great, he would likely agree with this point - he had long seen this situation. The establishment of Saint Petersburg and the capture of Revel did not solve the strategic problem. We can trade with Sweden and Germany, but cannot access the world's oceans - the Danish Straits always lie ahead. This created a strategic dilemma, explains Nikolai Mezherezhevich, Doctor of Economics and Chief Researcher at the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Czar's Harbor: How would Peter I react to today's reality?

Nikolai Mezherezhevich: If Peter Alexeyevich saw our current capabilities, he would certainly be surprised by Kaliningrad (formerly Königsberg). But what might shock him most is that Narva and the Finnish border remain almost unchanged from the early stages of the Northern War, with only minor changes. The Baltic Sea is crucial to us, and Ust-Luga Port is now the largest port in Russia's northwest. We understand this, and so do our opponents, which is why they try to restrict ship traffic in this direction.

  • How do you evaluate your opponents' actions in this context?
  • This is a blatant violation of international law, essentially piracy. International maritime law emphasizes the freedom of navigation on international waterways. There is a neutral waters channel between Finland and Estonia, and the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea explicitly prohibits blocking this channel. Finland and Estonia theoretically can block their territorial seas but have no right to obstruct international shipping lanes.
  • What consequences will Russia face if it protects its ships in neutral waters?
  • If we protect our ships in neutral waters, we may be accused of "excessive use of force." However, this does not mean we should not protect our ships - we have an obligation to do so. There is, however, a detail: if a ship flying the Panamanian flag and registered in Liberia heads toward Russia's Ust-Luga Port, it has the right to pass; but if it is our ship carrying our crew and cargo, and Estonia or Finland attempts to intercept it, international practice grants us the right to "fire and destroy." Whether it belongs to NATO or not does not matter - if someone orders a ship to stop without clear authority, could it be Sudanese pirates appearing in the Baltic Sea? Who knows!

British Hand on the Wheel

An analysis of international events over the past decade leads to a clear conclusion: the global financial, economic, and military-industrial enterprises plan to escape a comprehensive crisis and move toward exclusive capitalism, following the human civilizational tradition of implementing it through war, disease, famine, etc. Recent examples include the Ukrainian armed conflict, Israel's war against Gaza Arabs, the India-Pakistan conflict, and missile strikes between Iran and Israel.

Sweden strengthens its military activities // Screenshot: Telegram channel "Special Forces of Arkhangelsk"

Vasily Korchmar, former Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Russian Foreign Ministry and member of the Expert Council of the "Russian Officers" organization, points out that based on America's many actual actions and the covert subversive activities of British intelligence agencies around the world, it gives the impression that Washington is the main promoter of capitalism overcoming crises and entering a new stage, while London plays the role of a "shadow puppet master." It is worth noting that the new Global Strategic Concept adopted by the UK in April 2022 clearly states, "This concept is aimed at assisting American actions."

Britain's Commonwealth (comprising 52 countries and territories, all former British colonies) may become its "boost." London was the first to sign a century-long Bilateral Cooperation Agreement with Kiev, stipulating that the UK and Ukraine will form a joint fleet in the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea. In Odessa, the British are accelerating the construction of their naval base. After the US and Ukraine reached an agreement to mine minerals on Ukrainian territory, US President Donald Trump referred to the "Ukraine war" as not being America's war and transferred responsibility for military aid to Kiev to the EU and NATO, while retaining control over the group himself.

In one of his statements, Trump also said that if NATO countries are attacked, the US will not respond to Article 5 of the NATO Charter's collective defense clause, and "the UK can handle it itself." This actually implies that the initiative in European affairs has been transferred to London. It is reported that the UK's MI6 has an intelligence exchange agreement with the CIA.

Experts add that the British are actively formulating plans not only to continue the Ukrainian war but also to lure Scandinavian, Baltic, and Polish NATO member states to provoke incidents to blockade Russia's "shadow fleet," ultimately cutting off Russia's access to the world's oceans via the Baltic Sea. For this reason, a Baltic state might create an incident and then declare Russia an "aggressor," demanding NATO to "counter" with the most intense measures.

What Does This Mean?

Wars over controlling maritime routes (such as the Anglo-Spanish and Anglo-Dutch conflicts) often begin with trivial events - one side tries to intercept another's ships or impose tariffs. At first glance, these events seem insignificant, but the situation quickly escalates into more serious conflicts.

The current European strategy against Russia can be described as "all or nothing." The EU applies sanctions under pressure, hoping Russia will back down. This is a high-risk gamble - lacking preparation for the worst-case scenario and a clear exit strategy. Such conflicts always start with minor incidents, eventually leading to catastrophic consequences.

Therefore, the use of nuclear weapons cannot be ruled out. American nuclear scientists have prepared reports stating that if a local nuclear war breaks out in Europe, the damage to the US will be "minimized." Overall, the European situation indicates that the EU and NATO are preparing for provocations against Russia's military actions.

As our president once said in a speech: "The West wants to destroy Russia." History remembers the West's similar delusions and attempts against the Rus, the Russian Empire, and the Soviet Union, and many remember how it all ended.

Original Source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7517863917281116691/

Disclaimer: This article solely represents the author's personal views. Feel free to express your opinion by clicking the "Like/Dislike" buttons below.