[Goose]

An interesting read on the Shadow Fleet issue & possible approaches and consequences:
  Russia’s ‘Shadow Fleet’ and Sanctions Evasion: What Is To Be Done?  (Nick Childs, Jan 2025)

I liked the ideas mentioned at the end about sanctions on specific ports and crewing organizations, but it wasn't clear how effective they might be.

The article indeed tries to illuminate the possibility of enforcing sanctions by actions taken inside the EEZ or territorial waters of states that support those sanctions. While the Baltic and the English Channel make that mechanically possible, IMO there is no way that the necessary actions can be taken without violating UNCLOS/International law. The US and the UK are "experts" in this field, with the UK's experience going back to the 14th century :-). The simple fact has always been that in wartime, nations do what they believe is necessary.
 
The fact that the US and the western nations are not actually at war with Russia forecloses almost all actions they can legally take against ships that have visited "hostile" ports. The can't declare a blockade. They have no legal status to define "contraband" items. UNCLOS does not allow interfering with "innocent passage" because a ship MAY not be properly insured. FWIW the US did not sign UNCLOS. We follow it when it is "convenient". The "good" news is that if the "innocent passage" provision is violated, the nation that has legal standing to complain is the state where the vessel is "flagged". I don't believe any of these nations want to call attention to their "flag of convenience" status. IMO they will not protest. Russia can't protest, because it is not their ship being stopped. That said, Russia may adopt other solutions of a more kinetic nature. There is a history of this kind of action starting wars, so it must be carefully considered. OTOH the west applying sanctions in the first place raised those kind of questions.

[Goose]

An interesting read on the Shadow Fleet issue & possible approaches and consequences:
  Russia’s ‘Shadow Fleet’ and Sanctions Evasion: What Is To Be Done?  (Nick Childs, Jan 2025)

I liked the ideas mentioned at the end about sanctions on specific ports and crewing organizations, but it wasn't clear how effective they might be.

The article indeed tries to illuminate the possibility of enforcing sanctions by actions taken inside the EEZ or territorial waters of states that support those sanctions. While the Baltic and the English Channel make that mechanically possible, IMO there is no way that the necessary actions can be taken without violating UNCLOS/International law. The US and the UK are "experts" in this field, with the UK's experience going back to the 14th century :-). The simple fact has always been that in wartime, nations do what they believe is necessary.
 
The fact that the US and the western nations are not actually at war with Russia forecloses almost all actions they can legally take against ships that have visited "hostile" ports. The can't declare a blockade. They have no legal status to define "contraband" items. UNCLOS does not allow interfering with "innocent passage" because a ship MAY not be properly insured. FWIW the US did not sign UNCLOS. We follow it when it is "convenient". The "good" news is that if the "innocent passage" provision is violated, the nation that has legal standing to complain is the state where the vessel is "flagged". I don't believe any of these nations want to call attention to their "flag of convenience" status. IMO they will not protest. Russia can't protest, because it is not their ship being stopped. That said, Russia may adopt other solutions of a more kinetic nature. There is a history of this kind of action starting wars, so it must be carefully considered. OTOH the west applying sanctions in the first place raised those kind of questions.