sentry

As of Wednesday evening local time, Finnish authorities had yet to offer a motive for the cable damage and did not assign any blame beyond the ship itself. However, the damage occurred amid growing concerns about Russian hybrid warfare against NATO nations. That is just below the threshold of armed conflict and comes at a time of mounting tensions between Moscow and the alliance as the war in Ukraine drags on.

Almost exactly a year ago, Finnish authorities seized the Russian-linked oil tanker Eagle S, accusing it of dragging its anchor on the sea floor to break an underwater cable running from Finland to Estonia. The ship was later found to be full of spy equipment. You can see the Eagle S being seized in the following video.

Police in Finland say Eagle S crew detained as Estlink-2 cable damage probe continues

That incident and a spate of others led NATO to stand up Baltic Sentry on Jan. 14. It is an effort “to deter any future attempts by a state or non-state actor to damage critical undersea infrastructure there,” according to NATO in a statement at the time.

Baltic Sentry has deployed warships and aircraft from several nations to help deter sabotage incidents. In addition, a U.K.-led 10-member consortium of northern European nations called the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) reactivated an AI-based system to track suspicious ships in these waters.

A NATO official we spoke with on Wednesday declined to comment on the specifics of today’s telecommunications cable break. However, he did reiterate that Baltic Sentry was created to keep incidents like this from happening

“Since Baltic Sentry began in early 2025, and before this current incident, still under investigation, there have been zero incidents of maligned damage to sea cables in the Baltic Sea,” a NATO official told us Wednesday morning. 

“Baltic Sentry plays a role in our deterrence efforts along with expedient responses when suspicious incidents occur,” the official added. “In this case, NATO is supporting Finland with analysis and information exchange from our NATO shipping center to assist Finland with their response.”

“These incidents are more broadly actioned beyond just regional navies and militaries,” the NATO official noted. “As in the case of the current incident, this is a national and local police investigation led by national authorities.”

There is still much we don’t know about this incident. However, regardless of whether this was intentional or not, the episode again highlights the precarious nature of important undersea cables.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

Amid all this aerial activity, President Donald Trump today said he was open to notifying Congress before a direct attack on Venezuela. His comments to reporters at the White House today came a day after the House of Representatives shot down measures requiring the president to obtain prior permission for such an action.

“I wouldn’t mind telling them,” Trump said when asked if he would seek permission from lawmakers for land and boat attacks against Venezuela. He added that prior notification is not required. 

“I don’t have to tell them,” he posited. “It’s been proven, but I wouldn’t mind at all. I just hope they wouldn’t leak it. You know, people leak it. They are politicians, and they leak like a sieve, but I have no problem.”

Trump’s views on Congressional authority have generated debate on Capitol Hill that broke down almost completely along party lines, with nearly all Republicans in agreement and Democrats opposed.

Under the 1973 War Powers Resolution, the Commander-In-Chief must notify Congress within 48 hours after “introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement is clearly indicated by the circumstances.” The Resolution also says any such actions are limited to 60 days without subsequent Congressional authorization, though the President can extend that timeline by 30 days with a written certification of the need for the continued use of force.

Trump, who ordered a blockade against sanctioned ships carrying oil to and from Venezuela, continues to assert that the U.S. has a right to that oil. On, Wednesday, Trump doubled down on his blockade warning, telling reporters that the U.S. is “not gonna let anybody go through that shouldn’t go through.”

The blockade announcement sparked a separate debate in Congress and elsewhere about its legality.

“American presidents have broad discretion to deploy U.S. forces abroad, but Trump’s asserted blockade marks a new test of presidential authority,” international law scholar Elena Chachko of U.C. Berkeley Law School told Reuters.

Meanwhile, Venezuela condemned the blockade and said it would take its case to the United Nations.

Despite Trump’s pronouncement, several ships carrying oil byproducts from the South American country sailed from Venezuela’s east coast under escort from that country’s Navy “between Tuesday evening and Wednesday morning,” The New York Times reported.

“The ships transporting urea, petroleum coke and other oil-based products from the Port of José were bound for Asian markets,” per that story, citing anonymous sources. “The Venezuelan government imposed the military escort in response to Mr. Trump’s threats.”

The blockade announcement came after the U.S. government had already seized one sanctioned oil tanker, the M/T Skipper. That mission, which occurred on December 10, was led by the U.S. Coast Guard with elements of the U.S. military providing support.

In a social media post on Tuesday, Trump designated the Maduro regime as a foreign terror organization. That announcement and the blockade declaration were the latest moves in the Trump administration’s efforts to increase the range of actions it can take. The cartel Maduro allegedly leads was officially designated as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO) last month, a move Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said increases U.S. military options in the region.

To that end, the U.S. military, as we have frequently noted, has been building up a large military presence in the region.

At present, the Navy has at least 11 surface warships in the region, including the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world’s largest aircraft carrier. It has four squadrons of F/A-18 Super Hornets, a squadron of E/A-18 Growler electronic warfare jets, a squadron of E-2D Advanced Hawkeye airborne command and control aircraft, MH-60S and MH-60R Seahawk helicopters and a detachment of C-2A Greyhound carrier onboard delivery planes.

There are also a number of other aircraft, including combat search and rescue (CSAR) aircraft, E/A-18G electronic warfare aircraft, Marine Corps F-35B and AV-8B Harrier II combat jets, and MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotors, MQ-9 Reaper drones, AC-130 Ghostrider gunships, and various helicopters already in the region. In addition, there is a looming deployment of an unspecified number of F-35A stealth fighters, which we were the first to report. 

The presence of aerial refueling tankers is also growing. KC-46 Pegasus tankers have been flying sorties out of the U.S. Virgin Islands for months, with a ramp-up in activity in recent weeks. There are now at least 10 KC-135 Stratotanker refuelers deployed to the Dominican Republic.

While these assets, along with about 15,000 deployed U.S. troops, are capable of limited sustained operations, it is far from the force that would be required for a land invasion or any large ground operation in Venezuela.

Since September, U.S. military operations in the Caribbean Sea, as well as the Eastern Pacific, have already included nearly two dozen strikes on boats allegedly involved in drug smuggling. The first of these strikes, which came on September 2, has become the focus of particular controversy, including allegations that it may have constituted a war crime.