I don't think it's just benevolence. Territorial waters also doesn't mean what many think it means - unlike planes, ships have the almost-universally recognized right to cross territorial waters (innocent passage).

But what's more relevant here are rules about straits - territorial waters that fully enclose a section of someone else's territorial waters. My understanding is that that is a big part of the reason why the two countries restrict their claim of territorial waters to leave a corridor of international waters: They want to avoid the area falling under the straits rules (transit passage), which would give Russia more rights than it has now inside the territorial waters.

You saying the Finland and Estonia are guilty of russia cutting their cables because they signed an agreement?!

I will never understand why it has to be this way and Russia cannot be a normal country that has the goal to join the EU and be prosperous instead of doing nonsense for over a hundred years now.

Yes: Notice that without the Baltic Sea, which is effectively closed, and the Crimean region of Ukraine, Russia is not a European naval power, and experts have long argued (afaik) not much of a European power.

Similarly, notice how much they invested in their naval base in Syria on the Mediterranean (though I'm not sure of its status now, and they oddly seemed to abandon Assad, who provided it to them).

More critically, think of a war: How do they trade by sea by sea? Their economy could be choked off, restricted to Pacific trade and trains across Asia to the population centers. They are in a corner.

That or the Suwalki gap. They're both flashpoints.

The half that Russia hasn't already blocked, anyways.

That's what I said about nordstream.

Turns out it was the Ukrainians! I'm past even guessing at this point...

I assumed it was China. They both enjoy this activity.

Every single ship in/out of St Petersburg goes via the Gulf of Finland. All those ships will be "Russian" (have stopped in Russia). It doesn't mean they're "Russian". Owner, charterer, flag, crew can all have very different nationalities.

Which part or combination makes them "Russian", in the sense of "the Russian state asked asked the ship to harm Finnish infrastructure, and they actually did it"?

You can lazily speculate about the aggressive, warmaking nation (that illegally annexed Crimea, is currently at war with Ukraine, is regularly sending submarines, ships, drones, jets into the territories of its neighbours) all you like... but if you want to be able to prosecute them, you need to be able to show evidence of the Russian state ordering this action, and that the cable damage was actually caused by that ship. Where is your evidence?

Same reason they infiltrate airspace duringtraining, fly drones over airports, run submarines through ports.

Testing limits and tolerance, threatening what they could do in a real attack. Creating econocic pain in retaliation for support with a strong alibi to blame.

Boarding and detaining is a new escalation. How many cables cut before we consider military reaction? 3? 10? all of them?

> Is it just turning up the heat in the region?

The EU and US were an unassailable bastion of freedom, peace, and prosperity, with arguably the most solid political foundations in history in democracy, and the most solid alliance in history in NATO.

How do you defeat such a place? You turn up the heat, to describe it very generally. It means, n a sense, radicalizing the population, a classic solution to Russia's problem. That's what terrorists do: How do you cause the US to shoot itself in the foot: terrorize people into thinking they are unsafe and overreacting (even though 9/11 affected on small area of one city).

One way they turn up the heat is to spread ethnic hatred, social distrust, embrace of violence, and abandonment of those things that prevent those maladies: universal human rights, democracy, rule of law, etc.

You can see it in this thread: People rooting for warfare, abandonment of the rule of law, etc. - all by some minor, cost-effective actions, like cutting a cable.

The expensive action and infinitely more consequential action - the invasion of Ukraine - remarkably doesn't create the same outrage. That outrage would trigger the obviously best solution: Guaranteeing unlimited material and political support for Ukraine until they win the war.

That is, it's remarkable if you don't appreciate information dominance, especially with social media companies either abandoning all responsibility or openly aiding the radicalization. Russia can create radicalization directly too.

Scaring people, distraction, etc.

In the grand scheme, repairing the cables and supporting Ukraine will cost less and hurt Russia more than escalating tentions in the Baltic sea.

Simple, they know there will be no consequences and Europe will keep buying their gas.

They want to test how quickly the cables get repaired and what vessels do the repairs etc.

Lock em up, sell thier property. Rinse and repeat.

Works for small and medium-sized private companies. Doesn't work for major nations like Russia.

Doing as you suggest is like writing parking tickets for delivery trucks. They don't care. It's just a cost of doing business.

> There needs to be sufficient deterrent to actually stop this from happening

One ship might be considered a reasonable pawn to sacrifice. I'd go further: require that any ships passing through the strait to be bonded at some eye-watering amount like 10x the price of the ship plus the repair costs of the cable. Make it so if the cable is cut, you make a profit.

> pretty obvious what's happening here

Good start. Then turn off Russia’s cable that runs via Finland [1] and make vague threats about (a) seizing shadow-fleet vessels in the Baltics and (b) how vulnerable Russia’s cable to Kaliningrad [2] would be to careless anchors.

All the while: start setting up non-cable based back-up bandwidth for if Russia severs these cables in advance of invasion.

[1] https://www.submarinecablemap.com/submarine-cable/bcs-north-...

[2] https://www.submarinecablemap.com/submarine-cable/kingisepp-...

Russia started convoying some of those vessels, especially with more advanced operation bases than cable cuts [1].

They won't be able to seize those without opening fire.

https://ioplus.nl/en/posts/how-seven-students-unmasked-russi...

Europe has always been known for being governed by the rule of law. If we now start breaking laws and rights, especially regarding property/ownership, this will strongly backfire in the future. This can quickly become a slippery slope towards Willkürsjustiz. It is exactly the same as with the Russian assets held in Belgium at Clearstream. Selling them is a no-no.

I suspect the price of a ship compared to economic damages caused by the cut cable is negligible. This is what russia calls "assymetric war". The response should be more economic sanctions.

Russia has already carried out chemical attacks on UK soil, used radioactive poisoning in London, sabotaged rail infrastructure in Poland, and launched cyberattacks against German air traffic control.[1]

The Associated Press has documented 59 Russian hybrid operations across Europe. A systematic campaign of intimidation, sabotage, and violence: https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-europe-hybrid-...

Russia supplied the Buk missile system that shot down MH17, killing 298 civilians, most of them Europeans. Putin eliminates political opponents, like Alexei Navalny, who died in custody days before a possible release.

European leaders may be passive and slow, but what is making the situation truly dangerous, is the dictator-jealousy fueled encouragement and indulgence of the current U.S. administration, and all its sycophants, which got to the point of publicly applauding a dictator on U.S. soil.

That behavior legitimizes aggression, emboldens Moscow, and directly undermines European security, and is making thinks really, really, sketchy right now.

Germany accuses Russia of air traffic control cyber-attack: [1] - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgrrnylzzyo

There's essentially nothing you can do to deter this sort of behavior short of starting a war

They can use 30-year old handysize rust buckets that can be cheaper than some cable repairs.

Jailing crews in comfy Scandinavian prisons can hardly be a strong deterrent either.

Russia is all-in on this confrontation, Europe is much wealthier but won't commit anywhere near the effort or expense.

Nothing burger incoming. Previously Finland let go of Eagle S despite evidence of cutting cables https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/02/world/europe/finland-tank...

It's geopolitical. They don't care if you seize the ships because they don't care about a return on investment.

The crew are probably living much better and safer lives in Finnish jail than they would out of jail in Russia.

Speaking of the joy of living in Russia, check out the hilarious story of racist right wing Finnish Flat Earther anti-immigrant anti-refugee pro-Russian criminal asshole Ano Turtiainen, now living as a refugee in Russia and threatening to fight against fellow Finns.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ano_Turtiainen

Ano Turtiainen is a former Finnish powerlifter turned far-right politician who managed to embarrass himself and others at every step:

He was banned for two years in 1998 for androgenic drug use -- perfect start to a "morally upright" career.

As an MP with the batshit crazy racist right-wing Finns Party, he posted a mocking tweet about George Floyd's murder ("Pink Floyd"), which was widely condemned as even too racist for the Finns Party, which got him expelled.

He set up his own splinter faction and then a tiny party, Power Belongs to the People (VKK), which became known for praising Russia and opposing sanctions and Finnish NATO membership, utterly at odds with mainstream Finnish views.

Turtiainen even refused to fire an assistant who posted racist content and had a parliamentary visitor do a Nazi salute (which he photographed himself!).

Instead of behaving like a responsible adult during the pandemic, he mocked public health measures, called them "neo-communism", refused masks, and threatened violence over mask mandates.

Meanwhile his own company manufactured masks: the ultimate hypocrisy.

Turtiainen failed to explain how he used over €30,000 in parliamentary group funds -- so the Finnish Parliament is trying to collect it back through debt enforcement.

Not only that: He's a Flat Earther, doesn't believe in space existing, and was convinced NASA interfered in the last election he was involved in so that he only got 7 votes.

Now the Ultimate Irony: the Anti-Immigrant Asshole Becomes a Hypocritical Refugee.

After losing his seat in the 2023 election (with only ~632 votes), Turtiainen moved to Russia, the country he celebrated, defended even during its invasion of Ukraine, and praised as a cultural "brother".

Russia granted him refugee status (yes, refugee status), despite his previous anti-immigrant posturing -- and he proudly accepts it.

In videos he’s now said he might fight for Russia -- even against Finns -- in the war in Ukraine. That’s right: the man who slammed refugees and immigrants is now a political asylum seeker in Russia, flirting with joining Russian troops and fighting his own countrymen.

Turtiainen's political life is a one-man case study in right-wing hypocrisy, racism, ignorance, self-harm, and irony: The guy who mocked others' suffering ends up dependent on another country’s goodwill -- the same country he championed in Finnish politics.

Former Finns Party MP granted refugee status in Russia: The pro-Russian ex-lawmaker has claimed that he would be "ready to go to the front against the Finns" if necessary:

https://yle.fi/a/74-20201812

Former Finnish MP and his wife granted refugee status in Russia: Turtiainen founded and leads the political party "Power belongs to the people":

https://fakti.bg/en/world/1024214-former-finnish-mp-and-his-...

Ano Turtiainen: the PS doesn’t love me, I love the PS – watch me now eat my words:

https://migranttales.net/ano-turtiainen-the-ps-doesnt-love-m...

Ano Turtiainen Flat Earth Anti-NASA Views:

https://murha.info/rikosfoorumi/viewtopic.php?p=1866262#:~:t...

Escalation is a classic trap to fall into:

The other side wants escalation of tension, otherwise they wouldn't do this. And they get to choose when and where and, to a degree, the means by which it happens - you can be sure it's a time and place and means that benefits them.

The fundamental of international relations in conflict is to deter without escalation, and to act in the time, place, and manner of your choosing. You'll see leaders cite that specifically: 'We have this problem; we will respond in the time, place, and in the way we think best.'

-- Why not send a couple ships to drag anchors across Russia's cables? "Oh we are but innocent fishermen" is still valid going the other way.

-- Then when Russia inevitably seizes and imprisons the crew

Are you volunteering yourself for a vacation in a Russian gulag?

the Ukrainian already destroyed a pipeline in the same region, is it worth an internet cable?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream_pipelines_sabotage

To be fair every gouvernement does that.

Just seize the ships and auction them off. Damaging one cable isn't gonna be worth losing a whole ship, generally speaking.

Who controls these ships and what is their perspective? I don't understand how we know what they 'understand' or not?

Also, how do you identify the ships? Do you blockade all maritime traffic in the Baltic Sea? All too and from Russia? The first would destroy our own economy, the second is a certain act of war.

It is: Look up the theory of status quo and 'revisionist* powers, and how they interact. Russia is acting as the revisionist, very predictably in many ways. And many in the West act predictably as status quo - including not being able to fathom why anyone would revise their happy power structure (with them on top).

You can see the same thing in many areas, such as race relations. The status quo is outraged and can't believe that other groups may be unhappy - after all, things work well in the status quo person's experience!

The court threw out the previous case since there was no proof of sabotage. I understood the court ruled that they have no jurisdiction over accident cases under international law.

As far as I understand, it is totally different case if they find any proof of intent.

Then countries should be able to bomb these ships and go unpunished as well.

That would pass the right message if courts keep refusing to make things right.

Yes, we must submit and capitulate to Russia at every turn, or face war. Good plan.

Russia would deny any involvement, right? So throwing the crew in prison for a few decades and scrapping the ship aren't actions against Russia. They're not a party to this at all.

>Cooler heads prevail. You don't understand this. That's okay. It's not your fault.

You don't understand that your comment is incredibly aggressive and insulting? That's ok. You just don't understand that. Might not even be your fault you don't.

we have winston churchill, specialist of international relation and war here

Russia is already in a state of armed aggression against Ukraine, and committing sabotage against other countries throughout Europe.

Cooler heads in this case are idiotic heads. It doesn’t take two partners to start a war, it only takes one and Russia already decided.

Someone in the other comments linked an article stating that Europe was doing the “unthinkable” of planning to retaliate and I was agog reading it if true. Not because Europe was going to retaliate but that they hadn’t even come up with plans over the past decade of increasing aggression from Russia.

You don’t have war plans for every crazy situation your analysts and strategists can conceive of because you’re excited to use them. You have them so your state apparatus is prepared and ready to go in an unlikely emergency instead of needing to take the months to years that any large bureaucracy needs to be ready to take action.

Real shades of "that cable shouldn't have been dressed like that, in a dark and narrow channel, clearly marked on navigation charts(to mitigate exactly this scenario, from good captains at least)" energy.

Unfortunately the Baltic is pretty shallow and fairly featureless - the gulf of Finland - between Finland, Estonia, and Russia averages 38 metres deep

If only they had had you in the design team back then when the cables were put in place.

I'm sorry I have no snark-free way to respond to this.

Yeah, why don't they lower the floor of the entire Baltic Sea??