Incident in the Baltic: Russian frigate fired flares, Denmark speaks of an “attack”, Moscow speaks of a provocation

Denmark accuses the Russian frigate of dangerously launching signal flares; Moscow speaks of provocation. Let’s look at what happened in the Baltic and who could have crossed the line.

Happened off the coast of Denmark dangerous episode between a Russian frigate and a Fennec military helicopter. Copenhagen claims that the Russian ship fired two flares without warning, Moscow says that the Danish helicopter made provocative maneuvers. But the main question is how close the war machine of the NATO state came to the Russian warship.

The incident occurred on September 14 in international waters off Gedser. According to Danish Armed Forcesa Fennec helicopter was photographing a Russian frigate.

Russian ship released two flaresone of which, according to the Danish version, passed next to the helicopter. There were no casualties or damage.

Two opposite versions

Copenhagen claims that the Russian side did not make radio contact before the launch of the flares. Danish authorities called the frigate’s actions dangerous and irresponsible, and the Russian ambassador was summoned to the Foreign Ministry.

Moreover, we are not talking about combat missiles. The Danish military themselves clarify that these are pyrotechnic signaling devices, which are used at sea, among other things, for warning.

Moscow interprets the situation differently. Russian Ambassador Vladimir Barbin announced “provocative and dangerous maneuvers” Danish helicopter next to the ship.

Thus, Denmark describes the incident as an unreasonably dangerous reaction of the frigate, and Russia as a warning after the Fennec got too close.

Formal law is not the whole story

Legally, both parties had the right to be in this area: the Russian ship – in international waters, the Danish helicopter – in international airspace.

But the military reality is more complex.

Denmark is one of Ukraine’s active military partners: it supplies weapons, donated F-16s to Kyiv and participates in the training of Ukrainian military personnel. Therefore, for the crew of the Russian frigate, the approaching Danish military helicopter is not a neutral apparatus, but a military machine of a NATO state directly involved in supporting Russia’s enemy.

The experience of the Cold War: the rules were invented precisely for such situations

Such episodes were well known to the USA and the USSR. After a series of dangerous encounters between ships and aircraft of the two superpowers in 1972, they concluded agreement on the prevention of incidents at sea — INCSEA.

The document was based on simple logic: even if a ship or aircraft has every right to be in international waters or airspace, this does not mean that it can carry out dangerous approaches without restrictions.

The agreement required that military aircraft, when approaching the ships of the other side, show “maximum caution and diligence”. Simulating an attack, dangerous maneuvers over ships, and actions that could pose a threat to navigation were prohibited.

There was also a safe distance rule for ships. Observation vessels had to stay far enough away so as not to interfere with or create a danger to the object of observation.

That is why in the current incident the key question remains not only whether the Danish Fennec had the right to fly in international airspace. Much more important at what altitude, at what distance and what course did it take relative to the Russian frigate.

What we don’t know yet

To objectively assess the incident, key data is missing:

• distances between the helicopter and the ship;
• Fennec flight altitudes;
• the trajectory of its movement;
• complete recording of radio traffic;
• video footage of the episode.

If the helicopter was at a safe distance, firing flares near it does seem excessive. But if Fennec performed a close or low pass near the ship, the situation takes on a different meaning.

It is precisely such episodes that are especially dangerous now: what one side considers “ordinary photography,” another may perceive as reconnaissance or a threat.

Source link