Until the evening of March 2, the Russian gas tanker Arctic Metagaz was tracked east of Malta. A few hours later its tracking system went offline. The Russian Transport Ministry says the tanker was attacked by Ukrainian drones launched from the Libyan coast; footage showed the vessel burning and a large gash in its hull. The ministry reported all 30 crew members were evacuated.

Italian authorities say the unmanned tanker is now drifting toward the Libyan coast, posing a serious environmental threat. A Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman said the damaged vessel was carrying about 450 tons of heavy fuel, 250 tons of diesel and “significant amounts of gas.” She reported explosions on board, visible fires and gas leaks.

Natalia Gozak of Greenpeace warned that time is critical. “It is absolutely essential to bring the ship under control, pump it out and sink it in a controlled manner,” she said, noting that an oil or diesel spill would be devastating. She also cautioned that the large quantities of gas on board — estimated at over 60,000 tons — could explode, making recovery operations highly dangerous.

Gozak linked the incident to Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet,” a network of vessels believed to be used to evade sanctions. These tankers are often older, in poor condition, uninsured and have tracking systems switched off to avoid detection. They frequently take on cargo at sea, a process that can cause spills.

On March 18 the leaders of Malta, Italy, Spain, Greece and Cyprus wrote to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen warning of the severe threat of a large-scale environmental disaster in EU waters and calling for the EU civil protection mechanism to be activated.

Libya’s National Oil Corporation announced on March 21 it would work with Italian oil group Eni to recover the damaged tanker, saying it would be towed to a Libyan port after coordination with relevant authorities and that measures had been taken to reduce pollution risk. Italy’s Civil Protection Department said towing would be complex because of the large breach in the ship’s side.

The incident also raises questions under the law of war if Ukraine is confirmed to be behind the attack. Alexander Lott of the Norwegian Center for the Law of the Sea noted that only the US and India have so far declared ships carrying goods that help finance a war to be legitimate targets. If Ukraine carried out the strike, it would align with that position. Russia has also attacked merchant ships in the past and in 2023 its Defense Ministry suggested cargo ships heading to Ukrainian ports might be transporting war material, potentially making their flag states de facto allies of an opposing side.

Statements by Kremlin adviser Nikolai Patrushev, who said Russia might send armed naval patrols to protect its merchant ships and even arm the ships themselves, point toward escalation. There have also been reports of Russian military personnel aboard vessels in the shadow fleet.

Maritime security expert Ian Ralby warned attacks on tankers may become more frequent as both sides focus on maritime traffic. He compared the situation to attacks on tankers in the Strait of Hormuz amid conflict involving Iran. Ralby said the case highlights shortcomings in sanctions, which have encouraged parallel trading systems outside normal global trade rules. He urged making sanctions more effective and improving relations with countries that trade with sanctioned states, including members of the BRICS group such as India, Egypt and Indonesia.

Gozak argued the deeper solution is to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. “This situation could only arise because we are dependent on fossil fuels, a large portion of which still comes from Russia,” she said. “That is why we must switch to renewable energies. When we no longer need oil, Russian shadow tankers will no longer be a problem.”

This article was originally written in German.

Until the evening of March 2 the position of the Russian gas tanker Arctic Metagaz was known — it was east of Malta. A few hours later its tracking system stopped working.

The Russian Transport Ministry said the tanker had been attacked by Ukrainian drones launched from the Libyan coast. Footage showed the ship ablaze with a large gash in its side; the ministry said all 30 crew members had been evacuated.

Italian authorities later reported the unmanned tanker drifting toward the Libyan coast, posing a risk of a major environmental disaster. A spokeswoman for the Russian Foreign Ministry said the damaged vessel was carrying 450 tons of heavy fuel and 250 tons of diesel, along with “significant amounts of gas.” She reported explosions on board, leaking gas and visible fires.

Natalia Gozak of Greenpeace warned that rapid action was critical. “It is absolutely essential to bring the ship under control, pump it out and sink it in a controlled manner,” she said. “If the oil and diesel leak, it will be devastating for the environment.” She added that an operation would be dangerous because the quantities of gas on board, estimated at over 60,000 tons, could explode.

Gozak also highlighted the role of Russia’s so-called shadow fleet — a clandestine network of vessels used to evade sanctions. She said the fleet often uses old, poorly maintained, uninsured tankers whose tracking systems are switched off, and that these ships frequently take on cargo at sea, a process that can cause spills.

On March 18 the leaders of Malta, Italy, Spain, Greece and Cyprus wrote to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen warning of the severe threat of a large-scale environmental disaster in EU waters and urging activation of the EU civil protection mechanism.

On March 21 Libya’s National Oil Corporation said it would work with Italian energy group Eni to recover the damaged tanker and tow it to a Libyan port, and that it had already taken measures to reduce the risk of pollution. Italy’s Civil Protection Department cautioned that towing would be “a complex operation” because of the large breach along the hull.

The incident also raises questions under the law of war if Ukraine was responsible for the drone attack. Alexander Lott, research professor at the Norwegian Center for the Law of the Sea, noted that only the US and India have so far explicitly treated ships transporting certain oil or gas whose sale helps finance a war as legitimate targets. “If Ukraine did carry out this attack, it would mean that it had aligned itself with this US position,” he said. He pointed out Russia has itself attacked merchant ships and in 2023 declared that cargo ships bound for Ukrainian ports might be carrying war material and therefore could be seen as aiding an adversary.

Lott added that statements by Nikolai Patrushev, an adviser to President Vladimir Putin, signaled escalation: Patrushev said Russia would send armed naval patrols to protect its merchant ships and might equip ships with weapons — measures that, Lott asked, would risk making those vessels legitimate targets. There have also been reports of Russian military personnel aboard ships in the shadow fleet.

Maritime-security expert Ian Ralby warned that attacks on tankers could become more frequent as both sides increasingly target maritime traffic. He pointed to a similar pattern in the Strait of Hormuz, where tankers have been bombed amid the US-Israel–Iran tensions. Ralby argued the situation exposed limitations of sanctions, which have spurred a parallel trading system operating outside established rules. He recommended making sanctions more effective by improving relations with countries that trade with sanctioned states, citing BRICS members such as India, Egypt and Indonesia.

Greenpeace’s Gozak said addressing the broader problem is also necessary: the incident underscores global dependence on fossil fuels and on Russian supplies. “That is why we must switch to renewable energies. When we no longer need oil, Russian shadow tankers will no longer be a problem.”

This article was originally written in German.