Following a weeks-long pursuit, the United States boarded and seized a Russian-flagged oil tanker in the North Atlantic on January 7th, 2026. When the US Coast Guard first attempted to intercept the vessel last month for transporting sanctioned oil to Venezuela, it was sailing under the Guyana flag and named Bella-1. By the time of its seizure, the ship had been renamed Marinera and its crew had painted a Russian flag on its hull.
Such name and flag changes are typical of Russia’s “shadow fleet” – the ships the country uses to circumvent the G7 price cap on Russian oil exports. In order to bypass the restriction set by this price cap – which sets a maximum price at which Russian seaborne crude oil can be purchased – Russia has sought alternative shipping fleets that are not insured or financed by Western companies. These vessels have obscure ownership, are poorly maintained, and often conceal their movements by manipulating or disabling their AIS, the tracking system required on all commercial vessels for the safety of maritime traffic. Typically, the ships take such action not only in order to enjoy more permissive regulations and evade sanctions, but also to distance themselves from any association to Russia.
What’s unusual about this case however, is that Russia did not attempt to distance itself. In fact, the country did just the opposite. Not only did the Russian military move around naval assets and to protect the ship ahead of its seizure, but the country also issued a formal diplomatic request asking the US to stop its pursuit.
For years, Russia has denied using shadow vessels to transport oil and energy products. By taking such action to protect the Marinera, Russia is now saying “we are connected to the shadow fleet,” explains Elisabeth Braw, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.
Russia’s increased protection expands beyond the Marinera. Recent months have seen a significant uptick in shadow fleet activity, and the European Union, the UK, and the US have been increasingly cracking down on these vessels as a result. Not only have they imposed sanctions, but in some cases they have also begun resorting to military action, especially following a series of episodes in which shadow vessels were linked to damage inflicted on undersea cables. As a result, 17 shadow fleet tankers adopted the Russian flag last month, and more than 40 have done so since June 2025. According to Maritime experts, they are doing so in order to invoke the threat of a Russian response in case there are any moves to deter them.
The spectre of Russian retaliation did not stop the US from capturing the Marinera however, and American forces intercepted the ship before any Russian vessels arrived. At the time, the ship was being escorted by a Russian submarine, which threatened the possibility of a direct confrontation between Washington and the Kremlin.
This spectacle was a show of force by the US, most definitely – something which the Trump administration certainly favours. But it could have unintended consequences. As Braw says, “if you board a Russia-flagged vessel, you should have thought about it before going ahead, because the risk of retaliation is much higher.”
“On the oceans what is clear is that what is legal was not always wise,” Braw continues. And while the US’s taking of the Marinera was probably legal, it could have the potential to put American ships in danger. While the US seized the Marinera without incident, Russia has been more aggressive about protecting shadow fleet ships that are closer to its shores. With the White House vowing to continue seizing sanctioned oil tankers, many analysts and observers are concerned that this will significantly increase tensions with Russia.
Not only this, but concerns extend to the message this could send beyond Russia. The Russian Ministry has condemned the US’s seizure for breaching the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which states that “no state has the right to use force against vessels duly registered in the jurisdictions of other states.” While the US has not ratified this convention, it generally recognizes its provisions as customary law. Beyond the legal dispute itself, experts warn that actions like this could have far-reaching consequences for global maritime norms.
In a geopolitical landscape where global standards of behavior are becoming increasingly ignored, a show of force such as this could “send a message to every other country in the world […] that they can take action against vessels on the high seas,” Braw says. “And who is going to stop them?” It is becoming increasingly clear that the aggressive, if justified, actions undertaken by the US could have unintended repercussions in future global interactions.
Image source: openverse
