There is assessed to be a heighted risk of further limpet mine attacks on merchant tankers carrying Russian oil and oil products, according to security services specialist in maritime Ambrey.
Since 2025, at least seven merchant vessels carrying Russian-origin oil have been targeted using limpet mines.
Ambrey warns that ports receiving Russian crude or refined products may be indirectly exposed to this threat.
“Vessels may be targeted after arrival, rather than during transit, particularly while alongside or at anchor. The targeting may be designed to cause disruption to the port operations and to send a symbolic message to the oil recipient port,” it says.
Ambrey’s analysis of confirmed and suspected limpet mine incidents indicates a consistent and deliberate attack methodology, resulting in vessel disablement and prolonged port disruption.
In the majority of the incidents, the vessel was rendered non-operational and unable to proceed under its own power, necessitating emergency response, salvage support, and extended repair periods.
These incidents demonstrate that limpet mine attacks were designed to cause partial loss to targeted vessels; however, in practice, they have imposed significant operational disruption, economic loss, and compliance risk on ports, extending well beyond the immediate damage to the vessel itself.
“Ports receiving Russian crude or refined petroleum products are exposed to significant secondary risks following a limpet mine incident, extending past the immediate physical damage to the vessel. The recovery and remediation process places substantial operational, legal, and compliance burdens on port authorities, terminal operators, and service providers,” Ambrey writes in its analysis.
The availability of salvage and towage assets presents a further constraint. Ambrey asserts that in many regions, suitable salvage and towage resources are limited or not immediately available, resulting in extended berth occupation and disruption to port operations.
In accordance with Ambrey, jurisdictional complexity further compounds the challenge. Depending on the location of the incident, ports may be required to coordinate with port state control authorities, flag state investigators, coastal state environmental agencies, and law enforcement and security services.
“In parallel, ports must support or facilitate multiple technical and regulatory surveys including class and condition surveys, forensic examinations of hull damage, environmental damage and pollution risk assessments and structural integrity and safety reviews prior to any movement of the vessel,” Ambrey writes in its analysis.
Environmental exposure represents a critical concern. Even in the absence of a spill, ports may be required to implement precautionary pollution response measures, deploy containment assets, and conduct environmental impact assessments, all of which carry operational and financial implications.
Ambrey added that human factors also contribute to prolonged disruption. Crew members may need to be repatriated or rotated due to extended immobilisation, interviewed as part of investigations, and temporarily housed ashore under port authority oversight.
Collectively, these factors result in extended vessel downtime, berth unavailability, and sustained operational strain on ports.
