Saturday, October 25, 2025

Polaris of Enlightenment

Finland faces multimillion lawsuit over illegal boarding of Eagle S

The new cold war

Published October 3, 2025
– By Editorial Staff
The Eagle S was dramatically boarded on Christmas night 2024 – an action that the court has now determined lacked legal basis.

Helsinki District Court rules that Finland lacked jurisdiction to prosecute the crew of oil tanker Eagle S.

Harsh criticism is now directed at authorities' boarding of the vessel in international waters – an action that risks becoming very costly for Finnish taxpayers.

The ruling from Helsinki District Court is a heavy setback for Finnish authorities who dramatically boarded the oil tanker Eagle S in international waters last year. The district court establishes that Finland simply lacked the right to prosecute the crew for the alleged cable breaks.

Captain Davit Vadatchkoria and officers Robert Egizaryan and Santosh Kumar Chaurasia were charged with aggravated sabotage and aggravated disruption of postal and telecommunications traffic. The charges also included alternative, lesser criminal classifications: sabotage, aggravated vandalism and causing public danger.

But since the cable breaks – which involved five underwater cables – occurred outside Finland's territorial waters, Finnish criminal law cannot be applied, the court states.

"International waters – period"

Lawyer Herman Ljungberg, who represents shipping company Caravella FZ LLC, has consistently argued that the action was illegal.

— The damage occurred in international waters, period. Therefore Finland has nothing to do with the matter. Only the flag state, in this case the Cook Islands, has jurisdiction, he tells Svenska Yle.

Ljungberg goes further and calls the incident an illegal hijacking.

— The boarding should absolutely be investigated. We already filed a police report about the boarding at an earlier stage, but it was left without investigation, he says.

District court refers to maritime law convention

In its ruling, the district court states that the incident was an accident and refers to articles in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The court does note that the act according to the charges had caused "exceptionally large" economic damage, but still establishes that a Finnish court cannot try the case.

The court's conclusion underscores the inappropriateness of the authorities' actions: They boarded a vessel in international waters, held it for over two months and brought charges – despite lacking jurisdiction.

Taxpayers will pay the bill

The direct cost of the failed legal process already amounts to €193,000 in legal costs that the Finnish state must reimburse the three acquitted defendants.

But that could be the beginning of a significantly more expensive bill. The shipping company is preparing extensive damage claims.

— It could involve damages of tens of millions of euros. The shipping company believes the Finnish state owes them money due to the illegal hijacking of the vessel, says Ljungberg.

He points to the cargo – primarily unleaded gasoline – allegedly being damaged during the months the vessel was held, as well as lost rental income while the ship stood idle outside Sköldvik, Finland.

"Shadow fleet" – a loaded term without clear definition

The case has been characterized by strong words and dramatic headlines. When the EU introduced new sanctions in May 2025 against what is called "the Russian shadow fleet," Eagle S was placed on a list of so-called shadow vessels.

The term "shadow vessel" or "shadow fleet" is used by politicians and in media, but there is no unified, official definition of what is meant. The concept generally seems to refer to older vessels with complicated ownership structures that transport Russian oil, possibly to circumvent international sanctions.

That a vessel appears on the EU's sanctions list does not, however, affect the question of jurisdiction. In the Eagle S case, the court establishes that Finland lacked the right to prosecute the crew, regardless of the vessel's status as a listed shadow ship.

What happens now?

The prosecutors, represented by Deputy Prosecutor General Jukka Rappe, have not yet commented on the ruling. Rappe has previously unsuccessfully tried to justify why Finland should have jurisdiction:

— In this case, the cable capacity has been so large that in my opinion it is clear that data communication and the electrical system have been affected in Finland. Therefore the act is considered to have been performed in Finland even though the location where the cables were cut lies outside Finnish borders, Rappe told Svenska Yle in August.

Now prosecutors face the choice of appealing to the Court of Appeal or accepting defeat.

It is also possible that the Cook Islands, as flag state for Eagle S, chooses to take over the investigation – if they would even consider there is a case to investigate.

For the three crew members, who spent months in Finland with travel bans and obligations to report to police weekly, the matter is now over. But for the Finnish state and taxpayers, the consequences of the hasty boarding could prove far more costly than those responsible originally imagined.

TNT is truly independent!

We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.

Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…

Russian skiers banned from Olympics: “A price I’m ready to pay”

The new cold war

Published October 22, 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Russian President Vladimir Putin presents awards to Veronika Stepanova (third from right) and other medalists from the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics.

The International Ski Federation (FIS) decided on Tuesday that Russian and Belarusian skiers will not be allowed to participate in the Milano-Cortina 2026 Olympics.

Veronika Stepanova, who won Olympic gold in the relay in 2022, condemns the decision, defends her country and accuses the federation of hypocrisy.

The decision from FIS means that Russian and Belarusian cross-country skiers remain banned from international competitions. The suspension has been in place since the war in Ukraine escalated in 2022.

Shortly after the decision was announced, Veronika Stepanova, who was part of the women's relay team that won Olympic gold in Beijing 2022, commented on the event in a message to Swedish public broadcaster SVT Sport.

"It's very simple: Vladimir Putin is my president, and my country is always right. If that's the reason why some questionable, nameless characters won't allow me to compete internationally... Well, then that's a price I'm ready to pay", she writes.

Stepanova simultaneously accuses FIS officials of political discrimination:

"You're stopping me and my teammates solely based on political beliefs. Next you should start suspending Israelis and Americans who support Trump. Because that's what your system is built on: Stopping people who think differently".

Intense lobbying behind the decision

Karin Mattsson, Swedish board member of FIS, rejects the comparison with other conflicts and believes the situation is unique.

— Both Putin and Lukashenko have for so many years used sports, and she herself is a very good example of that when she expresses herself as she does – and that's the reason why this war has been treated in this way, she says.

FIS president Johan Eliasch, who is Swedish-British, has previously been a driving force for reinstating Russian skiers with the argument that "athletes are not responsible for where they are born". Several southern European federations have supported this position.

But the Nordic countries have had a different view on the matter. According to Russian national team coach Yuri Borodavko, their opposition was decisive.

— Norway conducted intense lobbying and threatened a boycott. Sweden, Finland and France joined in. That's why FIS made such a tough decision against Russia, he tells the Russian website Championat.

"Completely in line with our position"

Pernilla Bonde, secretary general of the Swedish Ski Association, is very positive about FIS's stance.

— We have been clear all along: as long as the war in Ukraine continues, Russian and Belarusian skiers should not participate in international FIS competitions. FIS's decision is completely in line with our position, she says in a statement.

— Sports has a strong voice and a responsibility. By standing up for our values, we show what sports is really about – community, democracy and fair play, she further claims.

Swedish defense minister calls on Europe to enter “war mode”

The new cold war

Published October 21, 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Swedish Defense Minister Pål Jonson wants Europe to tighten sanctions against Russia and accelerate military preparations.

Europe must enter "war mode" and mentally prepare for armed conflict with Russia. This is the demand from Swedish Defense Minister Pål Jonson in an interview with the German media network RND, where he also calls for tightened sanctions.

The statements come as the EU accelerates its military investments, and the defense minister's words have attracted international attention, not least from Russian media.

— A change in mentality is needed – we must enter 'war mode' to resolutely deter the threat, defend and preserve peace. Russia constantly tests our unity and determination, Jonson declares.

He emphasizes that Europe must prepare "both mentally and militarily for the possibility of war".

The Swedish defense minister also calls for tightened sanctions against Russia and believes that frozen Russian assets should be used to support Ukraine's military.

— Only then will Putin understand that this war threatens his own power and cannot be won, he asserts.

The defense minister refers to Russia's alleged military losses in Ukraine. Over the past year, according to Jonson, "more than 300,000 of the country's soldiers have been killed or wounded" to capture "less than 0.5 percent of Ukraine's territory".

Arms deliveries from the US

Jonson also defends European arms purchases from the United States and argues that Europe "simply does not have or cannot yet produce" certain weapons systems.

— Ukraine needs these assets quickly. If Europe lacks them, it is logical to procure them from the US, he says.

The statements coincide with the European Commission presenting a plan last week to expand joint arms procurement to at least 40 percent by 2027.

Moscow has previously rejected European claims that Russia poses a threat to the EU and described the narrative as a political distraction from Europe's domestic crises.

Slovakia: EU must prioritize economy over Ukraine

The new cold war

Published October 17, 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico's Slovakia is one of the few EU countries that has refused to deliver weapons to Ukraine and opposed Ukrainian NATO membership.

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico accuses the EU of concealing its own fundamental problems by constantly focusing on Ukraine – and refuses to discuss new Russia sanctions until the union's economic crisis is taken seriously.

Ahead of next week's European Council summit, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico is launching a frontal attack on the EU's priorities. In a post on X, he states that the union's constant focus on Ukraine masks its inability to handle the bloc's own serious challenges.

At the summit, EU leaders are expected to discuss increased defense spending, military cooperation and continued support for Kyiv. But Fico argues this is happening at the expense of more urgent problems within the union.

"Not interested"

On Wednesday, the Slovak leader stated that he is "more and more convinced" that the EU, by ""constantly discussing Ukraine, we in the EU are covering up our inability to deal with our most fundamental challenges and problems". He says he has raised the issue with European Council President António Costa.

Fico then issues an ultimatum:

— I am not interested in dealing with new sanctions packages against Russia until I see, in the conclusions of the EC summit, political instructions for the European Commission on how to address the crisis in the automotive industry and the high energy prices that are making the European economy completely uncompetitive.

Automotive industry and energy prices in focus

The criticism doesn't come from nowhere when it comes to Slovakia. The country's economy is heavily dependent on automobile manufacturing, a sector under severe pressure from EU green policies and global competition. At the same time, Slovakia remains heavily dependent on Russian gas and crude oil under long-term contracts, despite Brussels demanding a complete phase-out of Russian energy imports by 2027.

Bratislava plans to present more concrete proposals on the automotive sector and energy prices at the summit than what is currently in the draft conclusions.

Fico continued:

— I refuse to let such serious issues be handled in the EC conclusions with general phrases, while detailed decisions and positions are devoted to aid for Ukraine and support for the war.

Divergent line

Slovakia stands out among EU countries in its stance on the war in Ukraine. Unlike most member states, the country has refused to deliver weapons to Ukraine, opposed Ukrainian NATO membership and repeatedly turned against EU sanctions on Russia.

The majority of EU countries maintain that Western support for Ukraine must continue and support rapid military rearmament, citing the alleged threat from Russia. The Kremlin has dismissed these claims as "nonsense" and accuses Western governments of using them as a pretext for increased military spending.

Hegseth to Europe: Buy more American weapons for Ukraine

The war in Ukraine

Published October 15, 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Pete Hegseth together with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte.

Western military support to Ukraine has nearly halved over the summer. Now the US Secretary of Defense is demanding that NATO countries once again open their wallets for more American weapons deliveries – but several major European nations are hesitating.

Pete Hegseth had a clear message when he met with his NATO counterparts in Brussels on Wednesday: Europe must invest even more money in American weapons for Ukraine.

The US Secretary of Defense pointed to a report from the Kiel Institute for the World Economy showing that military support to Kiev fell dramatically during the summer months – a 43 percent decrease compared to the first half of the year.

Hegseth was explicit about his view on how peace is achieved.

— You get peace when you are strong. Not when you use strong words or wag your fingers, you get it when you have strong and real capabilities that adversaries respect, he declared to assembled journalists.

Zelensky wants more

At the center of discussions is the PURL program – Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List – which has fundamentally changed how the U.S. supports Ukraine militarily. Previously, Washington donated weapons directly, but now NATO countries must pay for the deliveries themselves.

According to Hegseth, the logic is simple: The more Europe buys, the faster the war can be concluded.

— Our expectation today is that more countries donate even more, that they purchase even more to provide for Ukraine, to bring that conflict to a peaceful conclusion, he said.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte announced that $2 billion has been pledged so far through the PURL system, and that he expects additional contributions. But the figure falls far short of the $3.5 billion that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky had hoped to secure by October.

Three countries made new pledges on Wednesday: Sweden, Estonia, and Finland. Corresponding commitments from European heavyweights such as Spain, Italy, France, and the United Kingdom are still lacking.

USA - the big winner?

The Russian government has accused Kiev's European financiers of prolonging the conflict at the expense of Ukrainian lives, and Moscow claims that European countries are unwilling to acknowledge the failure of their strategy.

Meanwhile, European NATO members continue to bear the economic consequences of their sanctions policy against Russia. After rejecting Russian energy, many EU economies have been hit by rising production costs and widespread bankruptcies in industry.

The United States, however, has benefited from developments through increased investment flows and higher sales of liquefied natural gas to Europe.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
Consider a donation.

You can donate any amount of your choosing, one-time payment or even monthly.
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Dont miss another article!

Sign up for our newsletter today!

Take part of uncensored news – free from industry interests and political correctness from the Polaris of Enlightenment – every week.