Black Sea oil spill: political aspects of an environmental disaster

The oil tanker Volgoneft-212 in 2018. Photo: wikimedia.org

In December 2024, the media reported on the disaster involving two Russian tankers near the Kerch Strait. The tankers designated Volgoneft 212 and Volgoneft 239, carrying fuel oil for the Russian Navy, suffered damage. According to official information, more than 2,000 tons of fuel oil spilled into the waters of the Black Sea. This disaster significantly disrupted the marine and coastal ecosystems. However, this incident is not just an ecological catastrophe, it also has serious geopolitical and security dimensions.

First of all, the tragedy highlights challenges related to Russian compliance with international standards and norms. Both tankers were manufactured more than 50 years ago. Although they allowed for dual use on inland waterways and on the open sea, they were designed for the latter option only in case of favourable weather conditions. However, these were far from ideal at the time of the incident in mid-December. Given the age of the vessels and the possible unauthorized modernization of at least one of them, they posed serious risks.

Secondly, the oil spill is a manifestation of the consequences of the war in Ukraine. The militarization of the Black Sea has transformed it from a common space into a contested battlefield. The security circumstances in the region are extremely tense, and the situation is also complicated by environmental disasters. The destruction of the Kakhovka Dam and the fires on oil platforms in the Black Sea are merely consequences of the armed conflict in the region.

All these events also demonstrate a worrisome absence of environmental responsibility in a time of war. The unwillingness to prevent disasters or at least mitigate them effectively turns ecological crises into a strategic tool. Moreover, Russia’s half-hearted approach to eliminating the consequences of this disaster significantly undermines the prospects for broad international cooperation.

The Black Sea as a disputed space

The Black Sea lies on an important geopolitical boundary. It borders NATO member states – Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey – EU candidate countries – Ukraine and Georgia – and Russia, including territories under its control. The individual countries of the region have diverse interests that can be a significant obstacle to meaningful cooperation. But the fact that the spilled fuel oil reached Georgian beaches suggests that nature and disasters are indifferent to these human categories.

However, the incident and its consequences point to a significant problem in the Black Sea region: the lack of effective governance. The Montreux Convention, signed almost 100 years ago, regulates access to the Black Sea, but it says nothing about safety or environmental standards. The region thus suffers as a typical example of the “tragedy of the commons”.

Furthermore, the Volgoneft tankers disaster only confirms this view. Russia is using outdated tankers from its “shadow fleet” to circumvent sanctions aimed at limiting the Kremlin’s ability to finance the war in Ukraine. However, an unintended consequence of this is that it indirectly enables behaviour that poses significant risks. And the inability to enforce international laws and norms creates a space for increasingly unsustainable actions.

However, the issue of the fuel oil spill can also be conceptualized beyond the broader context of environmental risks. It is legitimate to consider it as a hybrid tool employed by the Russian Federation. The deployment of aging tankers poses a significant risk, which has a potential to destabilize neighbouring countries without direct conflict. Such activity allows Russia to project its power in the region by exploiting environmental crises and undermining wider regional stability.

Possibilities for cooperation?

The outlook that says that the problem is merely a challenge, and that the challenge presents an opportunity, is generally very productive. Such an approach would also be suitable for NATO and its partners. As regional actors, they share not only the waters of the Black Sea but also its benefits and risks. Addressing this disaster requires collaboration – from clean-up and monitoring to rules enforcement. NATO and the European Union should seize this opportunity, providing leadership alongside technical and financial resources.

There are indeed obstacles to possible cooperation. Unorthodox approaches to the application of international rules and standards undermine enthusiasm and trust between states. Individual countries also have different economic and institutional capacities, which can complicate joint action. However, neglecting their collective responsibility can further fuel the problems that make the Black Sea prone to crises.

Individual governments must be aware of the potential harm of the situation. The leakage of oil products is a serious threat to local economies, especially fisheries and tourism. Failure to address this and other crises could lead to serious economic problems and political tensions. Countries with weaker governance systems should be particularly mindful of these potential consequences.

Suggestions for development

The oil spill in the Black Sea is not just an environmental disaster. The incident reflects the strategic implications of environmental laxness in geopolitical contexts. Russia’s use of outdated vessels may not simply reflect negligence but could represent a calculated risk aimed at testing NATO and the EU’s capacity to respond to non-military threats. Therefore, it is important to first resolve the acute crisis. Secondly, it is necessary to address the causes leading to this incident.

This crisis is an opportunity for regional cooperation that goes beyond the immediate clean-up of the local environment. It is crucial to create modern governance mechanisms in the Black Sea region capable of addressing current security challenges. The focus should not be solely on enforcing existing international standards, but also on addressing the issue of environmental threats as a potential tool of hybrid warfare. This incident shows that such disasters can have consequences comparable to conventional military threats.

At the same time, today’s reaction of partners in the Black Sea region will also affect future solutions to environmental and security crises. Integrated and strategic efforts are required without delay. Otherwise, the Black Sea does not only risk becoming a zone of ecological disasters, but also a region prone to unrestrained activities that undermine regional stability. States in the region are not choosing between cooperation and independence today. They are choosing between deterring similar behaviour or accepting it as common practice.

Maroš Cuník is a Slovakia-based risk analyst and South Caucasus associate of GeopoLytics. He specializes in defence, security, politics and societal issues in Eastern Europe and the South Caucasus. Maroš holds advanced degrees in Comparative Politics and Russian, Central and Eastern European Studies. He has professional experience as an analyst for the Slovak Ministry of Defence and as a NATO Advisor in Tbilisi, Georgia, where he supported defence capacity building.

Please support New Eastern Europe's crowdfunding campaign. Donate by clicking on the button below.

Black Sea, environment, oil, Russian invasion of Ukraine