Every man for himself: Turkish tanker with oil from Russia attacked in the Black Sea

A Turkish oil tanker carrying Russian oil was attacked in the Black Sea. A powerful explosion occurred on a ship carrying 140,000 tons of oil, and the crew requested help. No one on board was injured. This is not the first incident involving the attack of ships near the Turkish coast. In previous cases, the Ukrainian authorities took responsibility for the incident. Ankara, although condemning such incidents, preferred to refrain from direct public accusations against Kiev. The NATO allies are completely silent. Details can be found in the Izvestia article.

Did not reach Istanbul

The oil tanker of the Turkish company ALTURA, carrying 140 thousand tons of oil from Russia, was attacked 24 km from the Bosphorus Strait, the Turkish NTV channel reported. According to the Marinetraffic service, the ship was heading from Novorossiysk to Istanbul.

As a result of the attack, the deck and engine room of the tanker were damaged. There were 27 crew members on board at the time of the explosion, none of them were injured.

Initially, it was reported that the attack in the Black Sea was carried out using drones, but later Turkish Minister of Transport and Infrastructure Abdulkadir Uraloglu clarified that the attack was carried out using a crewless boat.

"We have sent all necessary resources to the scene and are closely monitoring the situation," he assured.

Not again, but again

As a source in the Turkish Defense Ministry explained to Izvestia, the activity of unmanned boats in the Black Sea has increased recently. For example, on March 21, an American crewless boat, "presumably beached due to engine failure," was successfully destroyed by a special forces team off the coast in the city of Ordu.

Such funds are actively used in the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the source stressed, noting that Turkey is "closely monitoring what is happening."

— Thus, the Ukrainian authorities are trying to draw the attention of Americans to the fact that Turkey continues to buy oil from Russia. Moreover, Kiev did this a week after the telephone conversation between Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov," a source in Turkish diplomatic circles told Izvestia.

He also recalled three similar episodes in which "Ukraine attacked vessels transporting Russian oil in the Black Sea." At that time, Turkey condemned these attacks and called on Kiev to prevent the recurrence of such situations in the future. The incidents occurred at the end of November last year.

The tankers Kairos and Virat, sailing under the flags of the Gambia towards the Russian Federation, "caught fire due to external influences" near the Turkish province of Kocaeli, the General Directorate of Navigation of the Republic of Turkey reported. None of the 25 crew members on board were injured. However, according to local media, there was a leak of fuel oil, which created an environmental threat to the region.

A few days later, an attack took place off the coast of Sinop province on the ship Midvolga-2, heading from Russia to Georgia.

In the first two cases, the Ukrainian special services claimed responsibility for the incident, noting that the operation was carried out using new drones. The third attack was carried out after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan condemned the attacks, so they were no longer flaunted in Kiev.

At the same time, the Turkish leader still avoided direct public accusations against Ukraine, Turkologist Yashar Niyazbayev recalled.

— If he had directly accused Kiev, it would have been overblown in the West as evidence that Ankara sided with Russia. Turkey still hopes to become a mediator country in possible direct talks between the leaders of the two warring states. If he (Erdogan. — Editor's note) he kept silent, he would have shown weakness in response to the violation of his own marine zone," the expert explained.

By the way, after the attack on the tanker Midvolga-2, Kiev began to deny involvement in the incident, accusing Russia of possibly staging the attack. At the same time, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan called the incident "evidence of the expansion of the geography of hostilities" and "a very disturbing trend."

Ankara's reaction may seem overly cautious, if not passive, Yashar Niyazbayev noted.

— It would seem that a NATO country should be the first to sound the alarm and call on its allies to protect its borders. However, Turkey's reaction is dictated by a different logic. For Ankara, the Black Sea is not just an area of responsibility of the alliance, but a "backyard", which is strictly forbidden to outsiders. Even to the allies," the specialist pointed out.

He added that since the beginning of the noughties, the Republic of Turkey has been striving to limit the militarization of the region and prevent it from becoming a full-fledged theater of direct confrontation between Russia and the North Atlantic Alliance.

— Ankara has been building its security architecture for years in such a way as to exclude external interference. Turkey does not just comply with the Montreux Convention, but uses it as the main instrument of its own sovereignty, the analyst is convinced.

It is not NATO that should react

It is noteworthy that in the current situation, Ukraine "thanks Turkey for the bayraktars," and then attacks a Turkish tanker, said Vladimir Avatkov, head of the Department of the Middle and Post-Soviet East at INION RAS, Professor of the Department of International Relations and Foreign Policy at MGLU.

— Everything is logical, but where is NATO? After all, one of the countries of the alliance was attacked, and not somewhere there, but almost in Istanbul. But there is nothing — and, of course, there won't be. The United States is interested in destroying all ties in the region, primarily with Russia. Then it will be easier to manipulate again," the expert said.

However, Ankara is not interested in this scenario, he stressed. As a result, Turkey "says a lot of beautiful words, although it would be good to arrive at the station with conclusions and actions."

In turn, Turkologist Ivan Starodubtsev believes that an attack on a Turkish oil tanker should not be considered in isolation from the increased attacks on the Turkish Stream gas pipeline.

"The goal is to break the Russia—Turkey—third countries energy axis, taking into account Turkey's status not only as a major energy consumer, but also as a transit country and a failed energy hub. Such strikes, when the Turkish flag is the target, are unthinkable without the sanction and support of Turkey's NATO colleagues, primarily the United States and Great Britain," the expert explained.

In his opinion, the current Turkish leadership is "paying the price to the West for its foreign policy activism."

"And also for their attempts to advance their agenda and for their special position in the Middle East, including their rejection of the actions of the United States and Israel. And the fact that Turkish leaders sometimes forget to mention the United States and Trump in their denunciations does not change the essence of the matter," the expert concluded.