NATO Will Deploy Unmanned Vessels to Protect Baltic Sea Cables - Plus Data-Assessing AI (twz.com) 48
The BBC brings news from the Baltic Sea. After critical undersea cables were damaged or severed last year, "NATO has launched a new mission to increase the surveillance of ships..."
Undersea infrastructure is essential not only for electricity supply but also because more than 95% of internet traffic is secured via undersea cables, [said NATO head Mark Rutte], adding that "1.3 million kilometres (800,000 miles) of cables guarantee an estimated 10 trillion-dollar worth of financial transactions every day". In a post on X, he said Nato would do "what it takes to ensure the safety and security of our critical infrastructure and all that we hold dear".... Estonia's Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna said in December that damage to submarine infrastructure had become "so frequent" that it cast doubt on the idea the damage could be considered "accidental" or "merely poor seamanship".
The article also has new details about a late-December cable-cutting by the Eagle S (which was then boarded by Finland's coast guard and steered into Finnish waters). "On Monday, Risto Lohi of Finland's National Bureau of Investigation told Reuters that the Eagle S was threatening to cut a second power cable and a gas pipe between Finland and Estonia at the time it was seized." And there's reports that the ship was loaded with spying equipment.
UPDATE (1/19/2024): The Washington Post reports that the undersea cable ruptures "were likely the result of maritime accidents rather than Russian sabotage, according to several U.S. and European intelligence officials."
But whatever they're watching for, NATO's new surveillance of the Baltic Sea will include "uncrewed surface vessels," according to defense-news web site TWZ.com: The uncrewed surface vessels [or USVs], also known as drone boats, will help establish an enhanced common operating picture to give participating nations a better sense of potential threats and speed up any response. It is the first time NATO will use USVs in this manner, said a top alliance commander... There will be at least 20 USVs assigned [a NATO spokesman told The War Zone Friday]... In the first phase of the experiment, the USVs will "have the capabilities under human control" while "later phases will include greater autonomy." The USVs will augment the dozen or so vessels as well as an unspecified number of crewed maritime patrol aircraft committed
One highly-placed NATO official tells the site that within weeks "we will begin to use these ships to give a persistent, 24-7 surveillance of critical areas."
Last week the U.K. government also announced "an advanced UK-led reaction system to track potential threats to undersea infrastructure and monitor the Russian shadow fleet."
The system "harnesses AI to assess data from a range of sources, including the Automatic Identification System (AIS) ships use to broadcast their position, to calculate the risk posed by each vessel entering areas of interest." Harnessing the power of AI, this UK-led system is a major innovation which allows us the unprecedented ability to monitor large areas of the sea with a comparatively small number of resources, helping us stay secure at home and strong abroad.
The article also has new details about a late-December cable-cutting by the Eagle S (which was then boarded by Finland's coast guard and steered into Finnish waters). "On Monday, Risto Lohi of Finland's National Bureau of Investigation told Reuters that the Eagle S was threatening to cut a second power cable and a gas pipe between Finland and Estonia at the time it was seized." And there's reports that the ship was loaded with spying equipment.
UPDATE (1/19/2024): The Washington Post reports that the undersea cable ruptures "were likely the result of maritime accidents rather than Russian sabotage, according to several U.S. and European intelligence officials."
But whatever they're watching for, NATO's new surveillance of the Baltic Sea will include "uncrewed surface vessels," according to defense-news web site TWZ.com: The uncrewed surface vessels [or USVs], also known as drone boats, will help establish an enhanced common operating picture to give participating nations a better sense of potential threats and speed up any response. It is the first time NATO will use USVs in this manner, said a top alliance commander... There will be at least 20 USVs assigned [a NATO spokesman told The War Zone Friday]... In the first phase of the experiment, the USVs will "have the capabilities under human control" while "later phases will include greater autonomy." The USVs will augment the dozen or so vessels as well as an unspecified number of crewed maritime patrol aircraft committed
One highly-placed NATO official tells the site that within weeks "we will begin to use these ships to give a persistent, 24-7 surveillance of critical areas."
Last week the U.K. government also announced "an advanced UK-led reaction system to track potential threats to undersea infrastructure and monitor the Russian shadow fleet."
The system "harnesses AI to assess data from a range of sources, including the Automatic Identification System (AIS) ships use to broadcast their position, to calculate the risk posed by each vessel entering areas of interest." Harnessing the power of AI, this UK-led system is a major innovation which allows us the unprecedented ability to monitor large areas of the sea with a comparatively small number of resources, helping us stay secure at home and strong abroad.
Technology (Score:1)
Cool. Time to engage technology against the ruZZian brute force.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously going to be doing this in the South China Sea as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed.
As we are seeing in Ukraine, failing to have an impact on the battlefield, the aggressors of today prefer to bombard unprotected civilian infrastructure and eople in an effort of, as they call it, "peace enforcement", that is, making normal life impossible.
With the US also embracing this wholeheartedly and against her allies, what's left to the only relatively democratic area in the world, the EU, to do, but adapt and consider countermeasures?
Re: Technology (Score:1)
America is the aggressor of today.
Neocon warmongering .. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Neocon warmongering like the threats of occupation that the incoming neocon administration in the US is levelling at Greenland and Canada, you mean?
And then what? (Score:5, Insightful)
a persistent, 24-7 surveillance of critical areas.
There's 2 results to consider: "Huh, this suspicious vessel is moving close to a cable." What will NATO do about that? And "Well, the cable broke after this vessel passed over it." SAME QUESTION. Surveillance is only useful to the degree it enables actions, either preventative actions or consequential actions. I'm not convinced NATO is prepared to sink a vessel that traps a cable.
And this represents a more general question: How much "little green men" activities will it take before NATO/EU actually takes responses. We've seen sabotage at munitions plants (dating back 10 years). We've seen obvious espionage, including drone overflights. We've seen jamming and other electronic/cyber attacks. The net response "politicians expressed concern." It's been clear for the last nearly 3 years that Russian nuclear blackmail and the unjustified perception that "we can manage this conflict" has done nothing but prolong the war in Ukraine Each time Biden or some NATO country changes its policy to provide new capabilities to Ukraine, I ask "What if they had done this 2 1/2 years ago? How many lives were lost because we held back?" (Yeah, this IS a hawkish perspective. Play to win, or don't play the game. Playing for a draw just gets more people killed.)
Re: (Score:2)
They won't do anything, as usual.
Re: (Score:1)
the nearest nato member seizes the ship involved. That's what they've already started doing. Surveillance gives you the proof you need to do that.
The soviets only have so many seaworthy vessels left, and the chinese aren't going to let theirs be used once they start losing freighters
Re: And then what? (Score:1)
"The Soviets"?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not convinced NATO is prepared to sink a vessel that traps a cable.
I agree. How about surveillance drones that "tag" a suspected ship, much in the same way that purple powder can tag thieves.
Also, the problem with sinking or commandeering a suspected ship is that evidence may be weak. If the evidence is sufficiently strong (like this is the only ship that was anywhere near the cable break at the time of the break), then commandeering might be considered reasonable.
Re: (Score:2)
It will work completly different than the war mongers here believe.
The ships will be required to have a pilot.
The pilot will be dropped by helicopter.
The helicopter will film the ship. Anchor is up?
The shipping companies will pay for the pilot a hefty fee.
The entrance into the Baltic sea is all national waters.
Simply do not let anyone in anymore without a pilot.
Re: (Score:2)
This, and damage can be demanded to be covered. Given those are important communication/transfer backbones, these can mount crucially high, and cease to be attractive. As tools for terror crime, vessels themselves may be seized.
Re: (Score:3)
There's 2 results to consider: "Huh, this suspicious vessel is moving close to a cable." What will NATO do about that?
The same thing the Norwegian military is doing to the anti-whaling fleet, for example.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
And "Well, the cable broke after this vessel passed over it." SAME QUESTION.
The same thing that Finland did to that ruZZian tanker, which cut a cable, arrest them and prosecute.
https://www.military.com/daily... [military.com]
Re: And then what? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Your critique confuses NATO’s defensive mission with your desire for aggressive action. Baltic Sentry is not about "playing to win" or imposing political will. It is a focused, defensive response to safeguard vital undersea infrastructure against sabotage. Introducing unrelated grievances, like NATO’s approach to Ukraine, undermines meaningful discussion and distorts the purpose of this mission.
a persistent, 24-7 surveillance of critical areas.
Surveillance is a critical first step in protecting undersea infrastructure. It enables NATO to monito
Re: (Score:2)
You fail to explain how you think NATO should respond when Baltic Sentry provides either forewarning or evidence of attacks on cables. So far, neither capturing ships nor protests and international tribunals haven't fixed the problem. I don't see the "safeguards", just the documentation of attacks after they've occurred. Mebbe there is a plan for an effective response that would have both deterrent and punitive effects. If so, I'd like to see it, or at least get a general sense of "what happens next."
Re: (Score:2)
A vessel which deliberately acts to damage undersea cables (I see damaging undersea cables accidentally as all but impossible), measured as "ship in area of a cable, communications failure over that cable, monitoring vessel sonar scan (or some other scan) shows ship is dragging an anchor or something similar" is subject to seizure, either at a future port of call or at sea by the affected nation's coast guard.
The US should honor vessel seizure requests from NATO members. (the cable cut is considered an atta
Re: (Score:2)
So Putin sends a junky boat with a pick-up crew, paying the captain $1m in a Swiss Bank Account to cut cables. After a couple years, the skipper is out of jail and living the good life. How many times does this have to happen before it's no longer "poor navigation, a violation of Law of the Sea", and considered to be something more significant? That's the core of my problem, Russia has been doing these kinds of things for quite a while, each one so far has been treated as "an act in isolation" with a le
Let NATO defend their infrastructure (Score:2)
Re: Let NATO defend their infrastructure (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
It's not 1946 anymore.
It's also not 1914 anymore, either - no matter how much you longingly look back at that era.
Re: (Score:2)
I think we're going back to the policies of the 19th century.
Re: (Score:3)
In the whole history of NATO the article 5 was triggered only once, by the USA. And Europe came to help. And yet, ingrates like you don't give a shit.
Re: Let NATO defend their infrastructure (Score:2)
Re: Let NATO defend their infrastructure (Score:2)
Simple solution (Score:2)
Re: Simple solution (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The world already has suitable laws in place to detain each and every Russian (sponsored) ship that dares sail through that NATO lake.
Re: (Score:2)
*Sail the ship into Tallininin harbor and scuttle it. Er, just let its existing deficiencies sink it.
Re: (Score:3)
Endless inspection of any ship with a Russian on it is not illegal. Well within the rights of the states surrounding that NATO lake. And deficiency whatsoever and the ship gets arrested.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Law of the sea provides for "innocent passage". When passage is not innocent then the ship may not sail there. It is up to the surrounding countries to define "innocent". See?
Re: (Score:2)
1. Seize ship ...
2. Install "special" autopilot
3. Load with fertilizer
4. Autosail into St Petersburg harbor
5. Ship sits and waits for the right Youtube video
6.
Very obvious solution (Score:2)
Bottom-mounted Torpedo Mines? (Score:2)
I suggested this sort of thing a while ago. Looks like someone else likes it too!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
finally it's time... (Score:1)
for sharks, with frickin' laser beams!