Maritime Defense Weekly: Trade Friction, Maritime Pressure Points

The Week in Focus

• The White House announced a two-month military “quarantine” of Venezuelan oil, raising immediate questions around scope, legal authority, and treatment of non-sanctioned vessels.
• Russia’s shadow fleet remains a key economic vulnerability, with maritime activity increasingly tied to pressure on war sustainment.
• In the Black Sea, Russian shadow fleet tankers are shifting routes to hug the Turkish coastline following Ukrainian drone strikes, signaling tactical adaptation and heightened escalation sensitivity near NATO-adjacent waters.
• Defense technology trends, especially drones and AI-enabled systems, continue to lower the threshold for maritime disruption and surveillance.

Black Sea: Shadow Fleet Seeks Coastal Cover

Following Ukrainian maritime drone strikes in late November and December, Russia’s shadow fleet has begun altering its operating patterns in the Black Sea. Instead of transiting directly across open water, tankers are increasingly hugging the coastlines of Georgia and Türkiye, in some cases operating within or near Turkish territorial waters.

Windward data identified multiple high-risk tankers operating unusually close to Türkiye’s coast, all previously flagged for smuggling risk and linked to opaque ownership structures. The route change adds approximately 350 miles – roughly 70% additional distance – to voyages from Novorossiysk to the Bosphorus, reflecting a deliberate tradeoff between efficiency and exposure to Ukrainian drone strikes.

By operating near Turkish waters, shadow fleet operators may be betting that Ukraine will hesitate to strike where escalation risks and diplomatic consequences are higher. This places Türkiye in a sensitive position as a key transit corridor for Russian oil exports while facing growing navigational, environmental, and security risks from aging, poorly insured vessels operating along its coastline.

Looking Ahead: Maritime Risk Signals for 2026

Macro Global Overview: Friction Without Closure

As global security and trade structures continue to fragment, through uneven sanctions enforcement, bilateral trade frameworks, contested legal authorities, and the selective application of maritime force, the maritime space is emerging as a primary arena where pressure is applied without formal blockades or closures. Heading into 2026, the prevailing trend is behavioral deterrence – using enforcement ambiguity, jurisdictional gray zones, and escalation risk to influence movement rather than issuing explicit prohibitions.

Transshipment and Rules of Origin Enforcement

In 2026, aggressive enforcement against transshipment and tariff circumvention is likely to expand. This will place increased scrutiny on:

• Routing patterns.
• Port call sequences.
• Ship-to-ship transfers.

Maritime operators should expect compliance risk to be assessed increasingly through behavioral analysis, not just declared documentation.

U.S.-China: Maritime Pressure Below the Threshold

While large-scale conflict remains unlikely, the U.S.-China dynamic will continue to generate maritime risk through gray-zone pressure, trade leverage, and selective enforcement. Partial disruptions, inspections, or signaling actions at sea are more likely than overt escalation.

South Korea and Japan: Maritime Capacity and Deterrence

South Korea’s investment in submarines and shipbuilding, alongside Japan’s accelerating defense posture, points to a more capable and active maritime security environment in East Asia. These developments will shape naval balance, sea lane security, and alliance logistics heading into 2026.

Defense Technology: Lowering the Cost of Maritime Disruption

The continued scaling of drones, autonomous systems, and AI-enabled sensing is reducing the cost of maritime disruption. Surveillance, harassment, and denial at sea are becoming accessible to a wider range of actors, increasing the importance of early detection and pattern recognition.

Russia-Ukraine: Maritime Pressure as Economic Leverage

As the war extends into 2026, maritime pressure is becoming one of the few levers capable of imposing sustained costs on Russia. With Ukraine facing manpower constraints, drones and asymmetric maritime attacks are increasingly used to offset conventional limitations.

Russia’s ability to fund the war remains closely tied to moving energy and commodities by sea. Strikes on oil infrastructure and shadow fleet tankers, including recent Black Sea incidents involving falsely flagged vessels, show how maritime logistics are being treated as economic targets rather than neutral commerce.

The impact goes beyond individual vessels. Elevated risk across maritime logistics chains, unresolved salvage scenarios, and mounting operational friction are already constraining access and increasing the cumulative cost of sustaining maritime flows. As Russia’s economic position continues to degrade, persistent pressure on shadow fleet operations will remain a critical indicator of leverage heading into 2026.