commercial

One of Russia’s commercially flagged vessels in the Baltic has appeared armed with heavy machine guns, and it isn’t just any cargo hauler. The weapons fit is likely intended to provide close-in protection against naval drone attacks but is also evidence of increasingly bold measures taken by Moscow to ensure that military bases in its strategically important Kaliningrad exclave continue to be supported. After all, the ship in question, the Marshal Vasilevskiy, is a highly strategic one — Russia’s only floating storage and regasification vessel — that plays a key role in supporting Kaliningrad.

This comes at the same time that Russia ramps up efforts to protect its notorious ‘shadow fleet,’ used to circumvent Western sanctions on oil exports, despite efforts to interdict it.

Evidence of the armed tanker development was brought to light in an exclusive report from Holger Roonemaa, an investigative journalist working for Delfi Estonia, an Estonia-based news website.

Roonemaa secured the release of imagery from the Estonian Border Guard showing the Marshal Vasilevskiy operating in the Baltic Sea last month, with machine gun positions on either side of the deck above the bridge.

The Marshal Vasilevskiy, a 945-foot liquefied natural gas (LNG) tanker of 118,000 gross tonnage, was spotted by an Estonian Border Guard surveillance aircraft as it was sailing past Estonia’s western islands toward the Russian port of Bolshoi Bor in the Gulf of Finland.

The sandbagged gun positions were armed with 12.7mm Kord heavy machine guns, a belt-fed weapon that is used by infantry, as well as being mounted on vehicles and ships.

KORD Heavy Machine Gun

The Marshal Vasilevskiy is not a part of the shadow fleet, but it has been subject to sanctions. Moreover, this appears to be the first direct evidence of Russia installing weapons on a civilian ship in the Baltic region.

The vessel is owned by the Gazprom company and regularly supplies Kaliningrad with natural gas, with four such voyages identified since last August.

Almost certainly, the guns on the Marshal Vasilevskiy are intended to help defend against Ukrainian drone attacks.

The Kord fires at a rate of 600-650 rounds per minute and has an effective range of around 2,000 yards.

Earlier this month, Ukraine used aerial drones to attack the prestigious Russian Navy base at Kronstadt, near St. Petersburg, in what appears to have been the first strike of its kind against the Baltic Fleet.

By targeting Kronstadt, Ukraine signaled the opening up of a new front in its drone war with Russia, namely against the Baltic Fleet while it is in port.

Previously, Ukraine’s naval campaign had focused overwhelmingly on the Russian Black Sea Fleet. Many successful attacks have been recorded against Black Sea Fleet vessels and facilities, forcing the general evacuation of Russian naval assets from occupied Crimea and to bases in Russia proper. Ukrainian attacks on Russian-linked shipping have also extended, to a more limited extent, into the Mediterranean.

These attacks have also involved a growing and increasingly advanced array of uncrewed surface vessels (USVs, or ‘drone boats’) as well as uncrewed underwater vessels (UUVs).

Ukraine’s proven ability to launch long-range aerial drone attacks, as seen in the video below, as well as to bring kamikaze drones closer to Russian targets, and strike them from short range, underscores the potential vulnerability of Russian tankers working the Baltic, too.

While Ukraine, as far as is known, has not launched any USV or UUV attacks in the Baltic, it would certainly be within its capabilities to do so.

At the same time, Russia has no doubt also considered the possibility of an Operation Spiderweb-type attack in the Baltic, in which short-range drones could be launched covertly, in mass, from locations much closer to their targets.

In the same way that Operation Spiderweb used commercial trucks as covert launch platforms for one-way aerial attack drones, any suitable vessel could be used in the same way by Ukraine in the Baltic, whether to launch aerial drones, USVs, or UUVs.

In this context, the Marshal Vasilevskiy would be a particularly prized tanker. It is currently Russia’s only floating storage and regasification vessel, a ship that takes on board super-cooled LNG and then converts it into gas that is then fed into pipelines, in this case, in Kaliningrad.

As well as countering potential drone attacks, putting guns on the Marshal Vasilevskiy sends a signal to NATO forces not to interfere with it. Warning shots could be fired to send a message to boarding parties or helicopters. Russia’s willingness to use warning shots was demonstrated in the English Channel earlier this month. With the Kord gun, the vessel could bring down a helicopter with ease, forcing a boarding force to kinetically attack the ship before attempting boarding.

Typically, the crew of a vessel such as the Marshal Vasilevskiy would not be trained to operate heavy machine guns. This raises the likelihood that the ship’s crew includes members of the Russian military or, more likely, the Federal Security Service (FSB), Russia’s principal security agency. It is not inconceivable that man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS) could also be stowed below decks to defend against an aerial drone attack.

The development comes as Russia takes increasingly forceful measures to protect the vessels of its shadow fleet. These provide Russia with a critical lifeline, allowing oil to be sold and funds generated to continue the country’s war against Ukraine. Both China and India regularly accept such deliveries.

Over the past year, European authorities have intercepted shadow fleet tankers on several occasions, typically on the grounds of flying a false flag or for being suspected of damaging undersea cables.

There have been previous reports indicating that shadow-fleet oil tankers regularly include former mercenaries and soldiers among their crews.

Holger Roonemaa has helped establish that almost half of the “passengers” listed as going aboard the Marshal Vasilevskiy also have backgrounds in the Russian military, the National Guard, and/or the FSB.

At the same time, Russian Navy warships are increasingly used for escort, monitoring, and security missions for shadow fleet tankers as they transit the Baltic Sea carrying sanctioned Russian oil to markets prepared to bypass Western restrictions. You can read more about this here.

Returning to this vessel, the appearance of heavy machine guns on it is significant because it illustrates Russia’s militarization of civilian shipping supporting critical operations. There are many historical precedents of merchant vessels being armed during wartime, but it remains unusual to see a commercially flagged tanker openly carrying heavy machine guns in this region. In areas with piracy, it is not uncommon for security crews on vessels to be equipped with small arms, but this is a different kind of weapon, and the ship is operating in waters with no piracy risk attached.

In practical terms, a pair of Kord machine guns could be effective against small drones or boats at close range, but would offer little protection against larger, coordinated attacks, let alone modern anti-ship missiles.

With that in mind, it’s possible Russia might further boost the weapons fit of the Marshal Vasilevskiy to provide a more comprehensive defense. After all, this vessel is a critical asset, due to its unique capabilities in the Russian merchant fleet, and its special role supporting Kaliningrad. This makes it a strategic vulnerability that demands protection. If lost, it could have an asymmetric impact, threatening the ability to keep military assets in the exclave operational.

More broadly, this is evidence of Russia’s growing concern that logistics vessels, including civilian ones supporting critical infrastructure, could become targets in the Baltic region, too, as the war increasingly extends beyond traditional battlefields and further from Ukraine.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

More commercial flights have been departing from Iran’s largest airport following its reopening last week.

Iranian authorities announced the resumption of flights at Imam Khomeini international airport after approximately 58 days of suspension since the launch of the US-Israel war on Iran. Flight information boards also went offline after the closure of Iran’s airspace.

For weeks, the suspension of flights stranded many travellers, disrupted businesses, and separated families.

Air traffic gradually resumed from April 25 with flights to 15 destinations operated by eight domestic airlines, covering regional and international destinations such as Medina, Istanbul, Muscat, China and Russia. Yet the number of flights is a fraction of what it was before the war.

Maryam, a passenger who planned to go to Toronto to see her daughters, told Al Jazeera: “After a lot of stress and problems, now I’ve found a ticket with an Iranian airline — flying first to Armenia with a long layover, and then on to Canada.”

Before the war, the airport was bustling with travellers and would witness 150 flights on a typical day. Now, terminals that were packed, then empty, are slowly filling up again as flights resume.

Ramin Kashef Azar, CEO of Imam Khomeini Airport City, told Al Jazeera that the return of foreign carriers, many of which have operated in the country for years, “will depend on political stability and their own risk assessments.” According to the Iranian Civil Aviation Organization, 20 aircraft have been destroyed and are no longer operational. However, the airport infrastructure has not been damaged and is approximately 95 percent ready.

These developments come after Iran’s gradual reopening of its airspace from April 19, in four phases. It encompasses transit flights followed by domestic flights, culminating in the full resumption of operations at international airports, as stated by the Iranian aviation regulator.

Foreign companies are apprehensive about returning to operate at Iranian airports amid the uncertainty surrounding the political and negotiating landscape between Tehran and Washington.

Targeting of airports

Iran’s civil aviation sector has suffered damage as a result of the war. More than 3,300 people have been killed in Iran, and thousands have been injured, in addition to widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure.

Another airport that was subject to US-Israel attacks several times was Mehrabad airport, also in Tehran. The airport mainly handles domestic flights. Located in the west of the capital, it was the official airport for international and domestic flights before the construction of Imam Khomeini airport in 2009.

In addition to Mehrabad, airports in Kashan, Tabriz, Ahvaz, Mashhad, Khoy and Urmia were also targeted. Several civilian aircraft have been damaged.

It is not the first time Mehrabad Airport has been attacked. In June 2025, it was reported that Israel targeted Mehrabad airport during the 12-day war. Iranian authorities, however, said the airport and its runways escaped damage.

The impact of the war goes beyond airports. It has affected other businesses, causing revenue losses, layoffs and operational disruptions.

Babak, a tour guide, said he and many of his colleagues lost their jobs “because there were no incoming or outgoing tours, as flights were suspended and the war was ongoing”.

Nowruz, the Persian New Year, which comes with a peak aviation season for Iranian airports, also witnessed flight suspensions and caused major disruption. According to Bijan, a travel agent, this affected tours, charter flights, and hotel bookings. He added that they are processing refunds and had to cut staffing from 20 to just two.

Airports are coming back to life, and passengers are returning, hinting at a fragile normalcy after weeks of silence. Each departure signals renewed connection with the world, even as uncertainty on the ground endures.

April 18 (UPI) — Just one day after the Strait of Hormuz was declared open, Iran has blocked the passage again, citing “breach of promise” by the United States, and has begun firing on commercial ships.

Iran accused the United States of “banditry and piracy under the guise of a so-called blockade.”

“Until the United States ends its interference with the full freedom of movement for vessels traveling to and from Iran, the status of the Strait of Hormuz will remain under intense control and in its previous state,” Iran’s semiofficial Fars media said on X.

On Friday, Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi said the Strait of Hormuz was open after a cease-fire in Lebanon.

But by Saturday morning, that had changed. President Donald Trump said the United States would continue blocking Iranian ships.

Gunboats fired on a tanker in the strait Saturday morning, CNN reported the United Kingdom Maritime Traffic Organization said.

The UKMTO said a tanker captain reported that it was “being approached by 2 [Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps] gun boats,” about 20 nautical miles off the coast of Oman.

The captain said there had been no radio warning before the ship was fired on.

“Tanker and crew are reported safe,” UKMTO posted.

Just hours later, a container ship was hit by “unknown projectile which caused damage to some of the containers” about 25 nautical miles off the coast of Oman, CNN reported the UKMTO said. In the second event, the UKMTO did not say who was responsible for the attack. No fires or environmental damage have been reported.

Trump reported Saturday that talks between Iran and the United States were continuing but that “Iran got a little cute,” CNN reported.

“We have very good conversations going on,” Trump said. “They got a little cute, as they have been doing for 47 years.”

“They wanted to close up the strait again, as they’ve been doing for years. They can’t blackmail us,” the president said.

“We’re talking to them, and you know, we’re taking a tough stand. They killed a lot of people. A lot of our people have been killed,” Trump said.

On Friday, Trump told CBS News in a phone interview that Iran had “agreed to everything.”

He said that the United States would remove Iran’s enriched uranium but would not involve ground troops.

“No. No troops,” he said. “We’ll go down and get it with them, and then we’ll take it. We’ll be getting it together because by that time, we’ll have an agreement and there’s no need for fighting when there’s an agreement. Nice right? That’s better. We would have done it the other way if we had to.”

“Our people, together with the Iranians, are going to work together to go get it. And then we’ll take it to the United States,” he said.

But hours later, a spokesperson for Iran’s foreign ministry said in a statement, “Enriched uranium is as sacred to us as Iranian soil and will not be transferred anywhere under any circumstances. … Transferring uranium to the United States has not been an option.”