Chinese ship suspected in Baltic cable sabotage: NATO on alert
Following the damage to two underwater telecommunications cables in the Baltic Sea, clues suggest the involvement of the Chinese cargo ship Yi Peng 3. Recently, the ship left the Russian port of Ust-Luga. Experts believe the incident was deliberate, possibly indicating collaboration between Beijing and Moscow services.
On Sunday and Monday, two underwater internet cables were damaged: one linking Lithuania with Sweden and another connecting Finland with Germany. Both incidents occurred within the Swedish economic zone. Stockholm police have launched an investigation into potential sabotage. In both situations, operators confirmed that equipment malfunction was not a factor. The cables were physically cut.
"Nobody believes the cables were damaged accidentally. I also don't want to think that ship anchors unintentionally caused the damage. We must consider sabotage as a possibility," stated German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius on Tuesday in Brussels.
Meanwhile, Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen noted that if the destruction of the cables results from hybrid actions by a foreign state, Finland might consider invoking Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. According to this article, an attack on any NATO member is considered an attack on all allies.
The Finnish newspaper "Iltalehti" reported that shortly before the incidents, the Chinese cargo ship Yi Peng 3 was nearby, performing unusual maneuvers. Scandinavian media suspect the ship of cutting the cables on the Baltic Sea floor. The vessel was detained by a Danish Navy patrol ship in the Great Belt Strait.
According to Mariusz Marszałkowski from Defence24, it seems unlikely to be a coincidence given last year's damage to the Balticconnector pipeline between Finland and Estonia, which was attributed to the anchor of a different Chinese freighter, NewNew Polar Bear.
"Additionally, other cables were damaged at that time. The pipeline suffered significant damage, resulting in a leak, and an anchor was broken off. The ship was suspected initially, but no swift action was taken, enabling it to escape the Baltic. This time, apparently under pressure from Germany, there was a much quicker response," explains Mariusz Marszałkowski, an expert at Defence24 and a lecturer at the Naval Academy in Gdynia.
He adds that it is hard to believe the crew of the Yi Peng 3 did not notice an anchor being dropped and randomly tearing the fiber-optic cables at the bottom of the Baltic Sea.
"This kind of incident would immediately affect the ship's manoeuvrability and speed, and it would take several hours. The only plausible explanation could be a technical malfunction. However, the ship's post-event behaviour does not support this. We know the ship did not stop or notify the relevant authorities," says the expert.
Meanwhile, Colonel (ret.) Maciej Matysiak, former deputy head of the Military Counterintelligence Service, highlights that despite the intense ship traffic in the Baltic, services and NATO have tools to track ship movements along critical infrastructure laid on the seabed.
"There are numerous lines: fibre optics, communication lines, gas pipelines, and oil pipelines. It's visible who and when appeared before the damage. From the perspective of Russia or China, knowing that such sabotage can occur, it's an ideal location for 'accidental' actions. Moscow or Beijing may have plans within hybrid warfare frameworks. Consequently, we should expect more incidents like this, involving not only reconnaissance but also damage to critical infrastructure," states Maciej Matysiak, former deputy head of SKW and expert at the Stratpoints Foundation, as reported by WP.
He suggests that it cannot be excluded that the operation on the Chinese-flagged ship was actually orchestrated by Russians. "They are adept at operating under foreign flags and later absolving themselves. Yet, Putin's advisor Nikolai Patrushev said last week that the USA and UK 'plan to blow up cables and destroy the global Internet.' This is suspiciously coincidental. Such statements, coupled with past Kremlin tactics, suggest this is likely a handiwork of Russia," Maciej Matysiak believes.
Mariusz Marszałkowski shares a similar view. "This incident might demonstrate that Sino-Russian service cooperation is effective. It indicates that Beijing is a reliable ally for Moscow. It remains unclear whether this was intentional or accidental. Nonetheless, it's noteworthy that in both instances within a year, strategic infrastructure damage in the Baltic was caused by ships bearing the Chinese flag," assesses the Defence24 expert.
"A Russian vessel would be suspected and detained immediately. Ultimately, the Chinese have nothing to lose and can deny involvement, claiming it was accidental. In last year's incident, they denied responsibility for many months. The question is: what did the Chinese receive from the Russians in return? This isn't merely a gesture of goodwill but likely a quid pro quo. Remember, the Russian navy is present in the Pacific, near Taiwan, so perhaps Putin is reciprocating in this manner," concludes Mariusz Marszałkowski.
