- November 25, 2025
- /
In a fascist surge, the entire British media, audiovisual et written, private et public, prominently feature a press release from the Ministry of Defence concerning a “Russian spy ship” in “British waters”.
No British media outlet appears to have been able to speak with anyone who knows the basics of the law of the sea.
Here are the facts:
The exclusive economic zone extends 320 km from the coastal baselines. The continental shelf can extend even further, due to geology, and not to an imposed maximum limit.
On the continental shelf, the coastal State has the right to mineral resources. In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State has the right to fisheries and mineral resources.
For navigational purposes, both the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone are considered part of the high seas. Freedom of navigation applies on the high seas. Foreign vessels, including foreign military vessels, may come and go as they please. There is also no prohibition on "espionage," just as there are no restrictions on satellite espionage.
A state's territorial waters extend to a distance of twelve nautical miles. They are subject to the domestic laws of the coastal state. Foreign vessels, including military vessels, are free to transit them, but only under the principle of "innocent passage," which specifically excludes espionage and reconnaissance. Within territorial waters, vessels must genuinely be in transit; otherwise, they may require the coastal state's permission to conduct their activities.
The exclusive economic zone is subject to the rules of the coastal state only with respect to the reserved economic activities to which that state has a right. Scientific research is specifically free for all states within the exclusive economic zone.
The Russian vessel Yantar was just outside British territorial waters. It therefore enjoyed "freedom of navigation," not "innocent passage." It was free to conduct scientific research.
I have no doubt that he is indeed gathering intelligence on military, energy, and communications installations. That's what states do. The UK does it all the time with Russia, in the Black Sea, the Barents Sea, the Baltic Sea, and elsewhere. Not to mention 24/7 satellite surveillance.
It is perfectly legal for Yantar to do this. Personally, I wish the whole world would put an end to this type of activity, but blaming the Russians when they are under massive surveillance and encirclement by NATO forces is simply ridiculous.
Not to mention the ultimate hypocrisy of the United Kingdom, which carries out daily intelligence missions over Gaza and provides information on targets to facilitate genocide in Gaza.
The UK's allies blew up the Russian Nord Stream gas pipeline. The UK is now accusing Yantar of having specifically targeted this type of attack, which we approved when the pipeline was Russian.
For example, HMS Sutherland, accompanied by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary Tidespring and two other NATO warships, penetrated 260 km into Russia's exclusive economic zone and lingered 60 km from the Russian naval base at Severomorsk. There was no doubt they were doing nothing more than gathering intelligence and probing defenses.
In relations The UK, in its armed forces, boasted that this was an affirmation of freedom of navigation. Yet, we are just as harassing the Russian vessel on the high seas for exercising its freedom of navigation.
It was also perfectly legal. The idea that the same activity is commendable when we engage in it, but constitutes a pretext for war if the Russians engage in it, is so puerile as to be ridiculous. But no mainstream journalist is willing to denounce it.
As this photograph of HMS Somerset illegally threatening the Yantar on the high seas shows, forcing it to perform dangerous maneuvers, the aggression did not come from the Russians. The British aircraft illegally flying over the Yantar were met with lasers designed to disrupt the attacks. This was not the Russian aggression that John Healy claimed. The absurdity that this would blind the pilots is pure fabrication.
Unless the aircraft is flying extremely low or is very far away, it is physically impossible to direct a laser at the eyes of a pilot in a modern fighter jet from beneath a ship. The pilot will not be looking at the ship through the window, but rather at his screens and the images from cameras located under the aircraft. These could be disrupted by lasers, which is also a perfectly valid and sensible defensive measure.
It's the Eurofighter Typhoon.
Imagine it in the sky above you and look at its fuselage, especially the front: how could you see the pilot? It's impossible. Lasers only travel in straight lines.
Most sinister of all is the universal control of the media by the state, which ensures that all major media outlets broadcast the propaganda discourse, without any questioning.
This bellicose rhetoric is, of course, the usual refuge of extremely unpopular governments. But it is part of a broader tightening of the military-industrial complex's grip on the state. Starmer has pledged to increase military spending by tens of billions of pounds a year, while simultaneously imposing austerity on the rest of the economy. In Scotland, we are told that the closure of major industrial sites like Grangemouth and Mossmorran will be offset by the opening of new arms factories.
Transforming plowshares into swords.
The rise of racism and authoritarianism at the national level is accompanied by an increase in militarism and a desire to portray Russia and China as enemy states with which we are already in a state of proto-war. The state has mainstream media outlets that are ready to disseminate even the most blatant propaganda for this purpose without any questioning.
Western democracy is already dead. Not everyone has noticed yet.