Until the evening of March 2 the Russian gas tanker Arctic Metagaz was being tracked east of Malta; a few hours later its transponder went dark. The Russian Transport Ministry said the vessel had been struck by Ukrainian drones launched from the Libyan coast. Video footage showed the ship alight and a large breach in its hull, and the ministry reported that all 30 crew members were evacuated.
Italian authorities say the unmanned tanker is now drifting toward the Libyan coast and represents a serious environmental hazard. 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,” and that there had been explosions, visible fires and gas leaks on board.
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, adding that any 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 tied the disaster risk to Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet,” a web of vessels believed to operate to evade sanctions. These tankers are often older, in poor condition, uninsured and sail with tracking systems switched off to avoid detection; they frequently take on cargo at sea, a process that can lead to 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 asking that the EU civil protection mechanism be activated.
Libya’s National Oil Corporation said on March 21 it would work with Italian oil group Eni to recover the damaged tanker, planning to tow it to a Libyan port after coordination with relevant authorities and taking measures to reduce pollution risk. Italy’s Civil Protection Department warned that towing would be complex because of the large breach in the ship’s side.
The incident also raises legal questions under the law of armed conflict if Ukraine is confirmed to have carried out the attack. Alexander Lott of the Norwegian Center for the Law of the Sea noted that, so far, only the United States and India have declared ships carrying goods that help finance a war to be legitimate targets; if Ukraine conducted the strike, it would be consistent with that stance. Russia has also struck merchant vessels in the past, and in 2023 its Defense Ministry suggested cargo ships bound for Ukrainian ports might be carrying war material, potentially making their flag states de facto allies of an opposing side.
Comments from Kremlin adviser Nikolai Patrushev — that Russia might deploy armed naval patrols to protect its merchant fleet and even arm the ships themselves — point toward possible escalation. There have also been reports of Russian military personnel aboard vessels in the shadow fleet.
Maritime security expert Ian Ralby warned that attacks on tankers may become more common as both sides increasingly target maritime traffic, comparing the trend to past 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 operating outside normal global trade rules. He urged making sanctions more effective and improving relations with countries that trade with sanctioned states, including nations such as India, Egypt and Indonesia.
Gozak argued the longer-term 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.”
Originally written in German.