On June 13th, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin held an extraordinary press conference in which he made a series of audacious statements about the sprawling reach of Beijing’s territorial sovereignty and administrative authority. Placed in the context of China’s other recent actions and statements, the incredible size and shape of its regional ambitions are brought into sharp relief.

In simple terms, Beijing is determined to thoroughly dominate its region.

Wang began by addressing Canada’s protests over China’s harassment of its reconnaissance aircraft, which were enforcing United Nations sanctions of North Korea. It was China, Wang countered, that had reason to be “threatened” by  “the Canadian military aircraft that flew thousands of miles to harass China at its doorstep.”

This is patent nonsense, of course. China voted for the U.N. sanctions in question, together with the “enhanced vigilance” against illicit petroleum transfers the unarmed Canadian plane was deployed to ensure. This wasn’t about threats to China. Rather, it was part of a brazen pattern designed to deter and intimidate foreign ships and aircraft from operating legally in China’s rapidly growing sphere of influence – specifically the international sea and airspace that China wants the world to accept as its own sovereign territory.

And make no mistake, that claimed territory is massive, including well over 3.5 million square miles of the maritime commons and the skies above it. Of course, China has not yet gained complete control over all this space, but its effective control is growing and its ambitions are increasingly clear.

Just ask the crew of the Australian P-8A Poseidon patrol aircraft that on May 26th was buzzed by a Chinese fighter jet near the Paracel Islands. The Chinese fighter also released flares near the Australian plane, followed by aluminum strips called chaff, some of which were dangerously ingested into the Poseidon’s engines.

Again, Beijing’s military spokesperson was quick to pin the “dangerous and provocative” label on the target of its aggression, declaring that the unarmed Australian plane “threatened China’s sovereignty” because it “approached China’s territorial airspace” over the Paracels. It is noteworthy that China did not claim the aircraft actually violated its (already exaggerated) territorial claims in the Paracels, but disinformation is central to its rhetorical strategy.

This strategy begins by effectively nullifying the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS, which China signed in 1996 and has never formally abrogated. While still giving occasional lip-service to this agreement, Beijing pivots to claim “historic rights” within the entirety of its baseless nine-dashed line around the South China Sea. Under this formulation, this vast maritime commons is unilaterally reclassified as China’s domestic territory, ostensibly marking it outside of UNCLOS’ purview.

China’s government then embarked on a bold campaign to back up its claim by sheer force of overwhelming presence. It did so by building out its occupied rocks and reefs into bases capable of sustaining both forward-deployed military assets and — more immediately — its rapidly expanding maritime militia.

Thus, when a U.N.-mandated tribunal ruled in 2016 that its claims were nonsense, Beijing could simply shrug its shoulders. Having already changed the facts on the reclaimed ground to ensure its smaller neighbors would dance to its tune, China has determined that might will eventually make right in the South China Sea.

Further north, China’s claims rely on a somewhat different obfuscation, as evidenced by Wang’s June 13 comments. Referring to the Canadian flights, he said that “none of the relevant Security Council resolutions mandated any country to deploy forces for surveillance operations in the sea or airspace under the jurisdiction of another country” (emphasis added).

Where specifically was this alleged violation of China’s “jurisdiction”? Wang didn’t elaborate, but we know that China has increasingly expansive views on this, and makes liberal use of smoke and mirrors to justify these claims as somehow consistent with international law.

We need only to look at another of Wang’s June 13 assertions to see this phenomenon in action: “According to UNCLOS and Chinese laws, the waters of the Taiwan Strait, extending from both shores toward the middle of the Strait, are divided into several zones including internal waters, territorial sea, contiguous zone, and the Exclusive Economic Zone. China has sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction over the Taiwan Strait.”

Wang’s device here is to conflate the definition of the territorial sea, which extends a mere 12 nautical miles from a nation’s coastline, with that of the 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone. While UNCLOS does grant a degree of sovereignty over the former (and even that does not prohibit straight-line innocent passage), the latter grants the coastal state only the right to exploit maritime resources, while explicitly retaining the uninhibited freedom of navigation and overflight for “all nations.”

The bottom line here is that China is engaged in a long-term power play. Its mouthpieces will continue to muddy the rhetorical waters, believing that while Beijing cannot win the debate on the legal merits, it can keep its intimidated rivals off-balance while strengthening its military position until such time as it no longer matters what the law says.

Source: https://thediplomat.com/2022/06/chinas-vast-maritime-claims-are-becoming-reality/


The Dr. Hank Kaplan, a versatile and powerful harbor tug, entered service in Alaska earlier this month in the Cook Inlet Tug & Barge fleet.

Delivered to its original owner in 2017 by the Diversified Marine shipyard in Portland, Oregon, the 5,350 hp Robert Allan Ltd designed RAmparts-2400 series tugboat was the first built in North America with a Caterpillar integrated propulsion system featuring CAT engines and Z-drives. CAT also supplied the vessel’s electrical generators.

A member of the Saltchuk Group, Cook Inlet Tug and Barge, LLC traces its Alaska heritage back to 1924 and continues to be committed to Alaska.

“We call ourselves ‘Alaska’s tug and barge company’, and we take seriously our 98-year commitment to the state. This vessel brings additional capability to the Cook Inlet region while further supporting Alaska’s economy”, said Jeff Johnson, president of Cook Inlet Tug & Barge. “We are based in Alaska, operated by Alaskans and acquiring the Dr. Hank Kaplan helps grow our fleet in our namesake’s region of Alaska.”

The 79-by-36-foot vessel is named in honor of the Chief of Medical Oncology at Swedish Cancer Institute in Seattle, Wash., who has worked throughout his entire career on cancer research and treatment.

“This tug is built well, extremely powerful and complements the incredibly capable tugs we have in our fleet. It will help us grow our business while meeting our expanding customer needs,” said Mike O’Shea, vice president business development and planning at Cook Inlet Tug & Barge.

Powered by CAT 3516C marine diesel engines paired to CAT MTA 24-TZ-drives, Dr. Hank Kaplan is Caterpillar equipped throughout. Her electrical service is provided by two, Tier III complaint CAT C7.1 generator sets.

The deck equipment consists of a Markey DEPC-46 towing winch, mounted on the bow, and a Markey DEPC-32 towing winch, mounted on the stern.

Capt. Mark Theriault, Cook Inlet Tug & Barge’s director of operations, is excited to see the Dr. Hank Kaplan join the fleet.

“The tug packs 30,000 gallons of fuel, 2,800 gallons of fresh water, and 370 gallons of lube oil—and not only opens up our operating window, but it is also just what our customers have been asking for,” he said.

Source: https://www.marinelog.com/inland-coastal/coastal/versatile-tractor-tug-joins-cook-inlet-tug-barge/


On June 7, the dinner cruise vessel Spirit of Norfolk experienced a mass conflagration fire onboard during a daytime underway cruise on the Elizabeth River. The vessel was a complete loss and burned for several days before all the hot spots could finally be extinguished. I observed the vessel after the fire and to say it was totally destroyed, almost “vaporized” in its interior, would not be an exaggeration.

Onboard were nearly 100 passengers and crew. Many of them were grade-school children on a school outing with parent chaperones. The “Miracle on the Elizabeth River” was that not one passenger or crew was injured, and all were rapidly evacuated to another passenger vessel nearby. Akin to the U.S. Airways flight 1549 “Miracle on the Hudson” with Captain “Sully” Sullenberger, I’d say.

This incident could very easily have turned into a mass tragedy. From the first sight of smoke until flames took mere moments. The Spirit’s master, Captain Ryan Nadeau, responded instantly and correctly. The Spirit’s crew performed professionally. I have heard the USCG recordings of the VHF Channel 16 distress calls and Captain Nadeau sounded confident, deliberate, and professional. Captain Nadeau requested assistance from vessels on the river near the Spirit. Tugs from the close by Norfolk Naval Base raced to assistance with firefighting water. Captain Nadeau quickly positioned the vessel to minimize the deadly effects of smoke and flames. Spirit’s crew handed out life jackets quickly and kept the 100-plus passengers, again mostly children, calm. Precious time was saved to evacuate everyone from the Spirit without any injuries at all. When you have a raging fire onboard time is your enemy and time is precious. Time saves or costs lives. In the tragic fire onboard Spirit, perfect and professional actions saved time and many lives.

But there is also more to the “Miracle on the Elizabeth River” that day. Other passenger tour vessels were underway off the Norfolk Naval Base where Spirit’s fire broke out. There wasn’t a moment of hesitation by the passenger vessels on the Elizabeth River that day. The master of Victory Rover, Captain Brandon Peter, saw the Spirit in distress and heard the mayday call. He raced the Victory Rover up alongside the Spirit and perfectly coordinated with Captain Nadeau. I have seen the video of the two vessels together evacuating the Spirit’s passengers. I saw smoke and flames. Children were being placed in life jackets and lifted over the Spirit’s handrails and across and down to Victory Rover’s top deck. Spirit’s crew and those parents who were passengers looked like they had drilled for this many times. All passengers and crew were evacuated before Captain Nadeau himself left his vessel. Just like Captain “Sully” on the Hudson. A potential, almost to be expected, deadly tragedy was miraculously averted.

Everything went right that day. The positive ending is a testament to the professionalism of the passenger vessel industry and both long- and well-established cruise vessel companies. Spirit was operated by City Experiences by Hornblower, and Victory Rover is operated by American Rover Cruises of Norfolk, VA.

I always preach that training makes the last minute of a crisis count. Fire onboard is an immediate crisis. It is a “come as you are” emergency. Minutes separate life and death. Of note in the Spirit’s fire is that the passenger vessel industry is serious, professionally trained, run, and crewed. There are routinely thousands of passengers and tourists on these vessels every day and night. If there had been widespread injuries or tragically any deaths on Spirit that day, the passenger vessel industry’s reputation could have been damaged, perhaps beyond recognition, as the fire destroyed the Spirit.

Unlike the tragedy aboard the Costa Concordia – where Captain Schettino abandoned ship immediately, leaving passengers and crew behind – the Spirit’s captain and crew didn’t abandon ship before the passengers. Everyone involved that day upheld and were imbued with the honor and tradition of professional mariners. I salute them and the passenger vessel industry!

Captain Peter Squicciarini is a professional mariner and a retired U.S. Navy Captain. 


The U.S. will be buying a total of 23 combat / patrol boats from Louisiana-based builder Metal Shark for delivery to Ukraine, where they will be used to defend coastlines and waterways.

Six of these Metal Shark units were announced by the White House last week as part of a $450 million assistance package. The package includes 12 other patrol boats from existing U.S. inventory, including two 35′ Small Unit Riverine Craft (SURC) and ten 34′ Sea Ark patrol boats. The Sea Ark model is being phased out in favor of a Metal Shark 40′ model in U.S. Navy service, according to Sea Power.

All of the boat transfers are intended for riverine patrol and combat duty, a senior U.S. official told USNI News.

Metal Shark also has an additional 17 more aluminum-hulled vessels for Ukraine under construction, all in the range of 36-38 feet. They are all popular designs for military/patrol applications and have a history of service for other clients. The 36′ Fearless is a center-console interceptor designed for speed, and the 38′ Dauntless is a patrol boat designed as a versatile working platform for multiple missions.

All of these hulls were already in the works for long-term U.S. assistance to Ukraine, and a portion of the package was previously announced in January. However, the delivery timeline has been accelerated.

“Metal Shark has been working closely with the US Embassy in Kiev since 2019 to develop the strategy now being implemented to support Ukraine’s maritime capabilities, so it is fulfilling to see that the vessels will arrive when they are most needed,” said Henry Irizarry, Metal Shark’s Vice President of International Business Development. “Metal Shark provides next-generation, proven platforms to partner nations, but most importantly, we create long term partnerships with end users to train boat crews and provide seamless technical support.”

Source: https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/metal-shark-to-supply-23-combat-boats-to-ukraine


Two start-up cruise lines are reporting that they have been able to work around challenges created by the Russian sanctions. Both Swan Hellenic and Havlia Kystruten had financed their new ships with the Russian-owned GTLK, which in April was included on the growing list of sanctioned companies by European and American officials.

Helsinki Shipyard announced today that it has declared Swan Hellenic the winner of a tender auction staged by the shipyard to determine the ownership of the recently completed second expedition cruise ship Newbuild 517 built to Swan Hellenic’s specifications. The keel of the 370-foot cruise ship was laid down in December 2020 in Helsinki and the ship was ready for delivery when the sanctions intervened.

GTLK, which was due to take delivery of the cruise ship, was unable to complete the handover due to the sanctions. Helsinki Shipyard then announced under the terms of the contract, that they were going to place the cruise ship up for sale accepting bids through last Friday, June 24.

Swan Hellenic found itself in the unusual position of having to bid for its ship which is due to sail on its maiden voyage in just over a month’s time. They reported however that they were the priority bidder and today the shipyard said it had reviewed the bids and declared Swan Hellenic the winner. The cruise line said as soon as registration is completed with the Bahamas it will take delivery of the SH Vega and the maiden voyage will proceed as planned on July 20 from Tromsø, Norway.

In the spring, Swan Hellenic had announced that it was exercising the purchase rights under its charter for its ships from GTLK. The company’s first cruise ship, SH Mineva, however, was laid up in South America instead of repositioning for planned summer cruises in the Arctic. The cruise line cited a softening of demand due to the geopolitical situation, travel restrictions due to COVID-19, and its need to complete the purchase of the ship.

Havila found itself also caught in a similar situation. The first of the company’s four cruise ships, Havila Capella, had to be laid up in April after the sanctions were announced and its insurers canceled the general liability coverage for the ship. The cruise line reported it was seeking a solution to refinance and went to court in Norway and the UK seeking to win control of their first ship.

After being laid up for 11 weeks, Havila Capella will resume its Norwegian coastal voyages on June 28. The company reported that it recently won a court order in Norway to arrest the ship with forced use for up to two years. Last week, they were able to resolve the insurance issues and received the necessary certificates from the Norwegian Maritime Directorate to resume operations of the Havila Capella.

The cruise lines, however, continue to have challenges from the sanctions as they also seek to refinance the ownership of the vessels. Under the sanctions, they are not permitted to hand over monies to GTLK as a sanctioned entity. Havila had proposed putting the proceeds into a blocked account which GTLK could access when the sanctions ended. GTLK, however, reportedly rejected that option continuing to seek immediate payment for the ships.

Both Swan Hellenic and Havila also have additional cruise ships under construction that would have been covered under the original financing arrangement. Havila reported that the UK court ordered that the shipyard could not take any actions on Havila’s two additional cruise ships due for delivery in late 2022 without the line’s approval. Helsinki Shipyard is also building a third, larger cruise ship for Swan Hellenic due for delivery at the end of 2022.
Source: https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/swan-hellenic-and-havila-make-progress-against-russian-sanctions


It is indeed a tragedy that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine jolted the world into action in using clean fuel, according to Dr. Sanjay Kuttan, Chief Technology Officer, Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonization, during a panel discussion at the Bunker & Shipping Summit on June 16.

However, when it comes to decarbonization, there is no silver bullet solution or “one fuel fit all” approach. Maritime industry stakeholders are left in the precarious situation of making investment decisions for future fleets with a general lack of clarity regarding the million dollar question – which alternative fuel would be the future?

According to the United Nations, to keep global warming to no more than 1.5°C – as called for in the Paris Agreement – emissions need to be reduced by 45 percent by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050.

Shipping alone transports close to 80 percent of global trade by volume and is estimated to contribute two to three percent of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. As such, decarbonization has become the greatest challenge to the maritime industry in this century.

There are numerous decarbonization opportunities that exist across the life cycle of maritime assets such as vessels and ports.  The typical life cycle of a maritime asset starts from the design.  This is followed by construction, operation, retrofit and eventually decommissioning.

Different alternative fuels

The energy sector is the source of around three-quarters of GHG emissions today and holds the key to averting the worst effects of climate change. Replacing fuel oil with alternative fuel would dramatically reduce carbon emissions.   Therefore, the World Shipping Council considers fuel supply development as a critical pathway to zero-carbon shipping.

According to the Nanyang Technological University (NTU) Maritime Energy and Sustainable Development (MESD) Centre of Excellence, there are three major groups of primary energy sources with various production path ways.

The first type of derived fuels would be fuels containing less carbon such as liquified natural gas (LNG), methanol and its derivatives.  The next type of alternative fuels would be those containing biogenic carbon, typically known as biofuels.  These include bio-liquified natural gas (Bio-LNG), bio-methanol, biodiesel, hydrogenated vegetable oil etc.

The last type of alternative fuels would be the carbon free ones also known as non-bio renewable energy, primarily consisting of electricity and resulting in hydrogen. There is also research on using nuclear energy as an alternative source of fuel for ships.

Alternative fuels are expensive

Of at least the same importance as technological and environmental aspects, the economic performance of alternative fuels plays a crucial role in their adoption.

According to NTU MESD, with the current status of technological development, the adoption of fuel cells is around four to six times more expensive than using internal combustion engines.  However, the cost of fuel cells is anticipated to be lower in the future as the technology matured.

The cost of fuel storage tanks for convention fuel oils, biodiesel, methanol, LNG and liquified hydrogen range from 0.1 USD/kWh to 0.95 USD/kWh, with the storage of liquified hydrogen being the most expensive.

The application of biodiesel can leverage the existing fuel tanks used for the storage of conventional fuel oils with only some precautions.  However, the storage for methanol is still more expensive due to its flammable characteristics and material compatibility.

The cost of storage for cryogenic liquids especially liquefied hydrogen can be nine times more expensive than the conventional marine fuels and other liquid alternative fuels i.e. biodiesel and methanol.  Moreover, the cost of other types of hydrogen storage are still unknown as they are in fundamental development stages.

For the application of alternative fuels onboard ships, the cost must consider both the selling cost per ton but also the efficiency of energy conversion when using a particular fuel.

Among all options, using LNG is cheaper than using conventional fuel oils and other alternative fuels.  The cost of methanol and biodiesel blended diesel is comparable with marine gas oil (MGO).  In comparison with the price of fossil-based diesel, biodiesel price is higher and this is mainly because of feedstock cost. The application of ammonia will result in a cost of at least two times higher than that of MGO due to its high specific fuel consumption.

Alternative fuels are not adequate

The availability of alternative fuels is one of the major components enabling energy transition, leading to sustainability in terms of energy systems and meeting climate action targets.  For the maritime industry, the adequacy of alternative fuels refer to the combination of availability of feedstocks and production capacity of alternative fuels with the consideration of competing use in other sectors.

In an interview with Serena Huang, project manager at Drewry, during the Bunker & Shipping Summit, ammonia was cited as an example of a future fuel.  Huang said that people and companies are investigating ammonia from its production scale to its transportation.  Even the automobile industry is interested in ammonia as seen by Mitsubishi’s research on its power generation capabilities and whether it is economically good as a future fuel.

When it comes to convention fuels i.e. low sulfur fuel oil (LSFO) and MGO as well as fossil-based LNG, there is adequacy such that they can meet more than 50 years of global demand. When it comes to fossil-based methanol, Bio-LNG, Bio-methanol and hydrogen, adequacy can only be achieved if a significant expansion of production capacity is realized.

However, first generation biodiesel production produced from edible oils will not be an ultimate choice due to its insufficient supply of feedstock. If biodiesel is to be a preferred choice, third-generation biodiesel from microalgae has to be considered, requiring R&D for microalgae harvesting and establishment of bio-refinery.

Infrastructure for alternative fuels

Other than securing a steady supply of alternative fuels, the infrastructure needs to be on par in order to accommodate them. The requirement of storage facilities at terminal and bunker ships will depend on the fuel’s characteristics, such as physical state, boiling point, flashpoint and storage conditions.

In the case of bio-methanol, new requirements and safety protocols for bunkering would need to be introduced worldwide as it is a flammable liquid. Double-wall fuel storage tanks with leak detectors would need to be in place to ensure the usability of the fuel as well as safety of workers.

As for hydrogen, there is a requirement of the establishment of renewable hydrogen supply chain and bunkering infrastructure. Hydrogen requires either super-insulated low pressure tanks or stainless steel alloy with high level of nickel in order to store and transport it.

It is also important for infrastructure for bunkering to be standardized, so that ships can call at ports regardless of the alternative fuel they are using. Ports need to ensure that they have ready and competent manpower to serve ships using various alternative fuels especially when it comes to cleaning of equipment for flammable fuels.

Other considerations

Although alternative fuels like hydrogen can provide zero emissions onboard ships, hydrogen is produced from fossil fuels without carbon capture technology.  The GHG emissions from the production of hydrogen is definitely not a sustainable approach and “defeats the purpose” of decarbonization.

Instead, hydrogen produced from renewable energy is considered an ideal option.  However, there needs to be more R&D and future studies for adoption of hydrogen as a fuel.

According to Huang, only small volumes of various alternative fuels have been produced by different fuel producers, resulting in a premium price for environmentally friendly fuel. As such, this may be a hard pill to swallow for ship owners as fossil-based fuels are much more available and thus pocket friendly.

Fortunately, overtime, the economies of scale will improve with better technology and lower pricing of the energy source, thereby driving down the cost of generating energy services.

The importance of collaboration

Kuttan emphasizes on the need to “bring people around a table” to “understand stakeholder’s needs and constraints” in order to decarbonize effectively.  The maritime industry is a “highly interdependent industry”, as such, the government, land-based authorities, ports, customers, ship designers and people in technology need to work together in a timely fashion.

All stakeholders need to reflect on their carbon footprint and make changes which will have a “ripple effect across the industry”, thus relieving the burden of the industry as a whole. There also needs to be a shared model and procurement policy to get green shipping moving in the right direction.

Kuttan from the Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonization also shared about the importance of working with the insurance sector as these new fields have different risk profiles.  Working closely together with Protection and Indemnity (P&I) clubs to bridge the issues and gap would help the industry move forward with decarbonization.

Source: https://maritimefairtrade.org/maritime-alternative-fuels-consideration-and-options/


Just 10 days before his inauguration as the Philippines’ 17th president, Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. announced that he would also take on the job of agriculture secretary, which includes managing the country’s fisheries.

“I thought that it is important that the president take that portfolio to not only make it clear to everyone what a high priority we put on the agricultural sector, but also as a practical matter—so that things move quickly because the events of the global economy are moving very quickly,” Marcos told journalists on June 20 without specifying programs or actions.

Analysts said the move was risky, because the president-elect, as agriculture minister, may quickly diminish his 31.6-million-vote mandate, the largest in Philippine history, because of the sector’s problems.

But positive developments may also help boost his political capital and convince the 14 million Filipinos who voted for his closest election rival, Vice President Leni Robredo, to take another look at his leadership abilities.

“We have to be able to be agile. We have to be able to respond properly in a measured way as soon as there’s a situation that needs to be addressed,” he added.

The fisheries sector and the maritime dispute with China will almost certainly be one of the first issues that will confront him when he starts his term on June 30.  Although he has declared that he will assert the Permanent Court of Arbitration (UNCLOS)’s ruling in favor of the Philippines, he has also shown that he knows the game of international brinksmanship.

“We have a very important ruling in our favor and we will use it to continue to assert our territorial rights. It is not a claim. It is already our territorial right,” the president-elect said in his first foreign policy pronouncement last month.

Marcos Jr. during the Award for Promoting Philippines-China Understanding ceremony on June 10, 2022. 

China is Philippine’s ‘strongest partner’, says Marcos

But earlier this month, at an event of the Association for Philippines-China Understanding (APCU) and the Chinese Embassy, he described China as the country’s “strongest partner” and called for continued cooperation.

“That cooperation is what I believe will bring us forward to a bright future. We can only do it with our partners. And our strongest partner has always been, in that regard, our close neighbor and our good friend, the People’s Republic of China (PRC),” Marcos said.

The event was meant to honor 10 Filipino “laureates” for their contributions to “strengthening friendly ties and promoting mutual understanding between the Philippines and China.”

The APCU and Chinese Embassy included the president-elect’s mother Imelda Marcos among the honorees.

In 1975, then-President Ferdinand Marcos, the president-elect’s father, sent Imelda to China to establish formal diplomatic relations with the PRC which was just recovering from decades of economic difficulties and was just starting to refine oil.

The mission was a success and Imelda returned home with a Chinese commitment to provide refined oil at the height of the global oil crisis.

“Thank you for putting my mother in the Hall of Fame,” the president-elect said at the APCU reception. “I think it is just right because China cannot find a greater champion than my mother in the Philippines.”

Imelda will turn 93 years old next month and while Bongbong’s sister is a senator and his cousin, Martin Romualdez, is expected to take the lead of the House of Representatives, foreign policy remains the duty of the president.

Philippine-Singapore ties to grow stronger under Marcos administration

Aside from taking congratulatory calls from foreign leaders, the president-elect has also been busy receiving diplomats from various countries.

Earlier this month, he met Singapore Ambassador Gerard Ho Wei Hong with whom he had an interesting conversation about Marcos Sr. and Singapore’s founding father Lee Kuan Yew.

“Singapore and the Philippines are friends and close partners. The countries are both founding members of the ASEAN (or Association of Southeast Asian Nations) and successive generations of Singaporean and Philippine leaders have worked together for the peace and prosperity of the region,” Ho stressed.

The envoy said Singapore is among the Philippines’ largest trading partners and foreign investors.

“I think with the resumption of cross-border travel as well as the passage of a lot of significant economic reforms in the Philippines under the current administration, we are hopeful that we will continue to grow this bilateral economic relationship with the Philippines and it will continue to flourish,” Ho said.

“We see a lot of growth potential in the Philippines and we hope to see more and more Singapore companies coming into the Philippine market,” the envoy added.

Marcos himself stressed the importance of ASEAN not only in terms of the regional economy, which is among the largest in the world but also in territorial issues.

Marcos to continue ‘independent foreign policy’

Like most other Filipino presidents before him, Marcos said he would pursue an independent foreign policy which he characterized as being a “friend to all, enemy to none.”

“This is what we feel is best in the national interest and I feel it is to be advantageous not only to our friends in China but to all our friends around the world,” he added.

“I think ASEAN will still be a very critical part of that discussion, but nonetheless we also have to continue to pursue bilateral contact and communication with China,” he said.

“In fact, this is what I mentioned when I spoke to President Xi when he called me to congratulate me on winning the election. I said we have to continue to talk about this, this cannot be allowed to fester and to become more severe in terms of a problem between our two countries,” he added.

“I do not subscribe to the old thinking of the Cold War when we had these spheres of influence, where you’re under the Soviet Union or you’re under the United States.”

At the same time, he said the United States, a long-time ally of the Philippines, is going to play a key role in the region.

Source: https://maritimefairtrade.org/new-philippine-president-to-walk-tightrope-between-maritime-powers/


Ukrainian forces struck a Russian-operated drilling rig off the coast of Crimea for a second time over the weekend, according to Russian state media.

The jackup drilling rig Tavrida was hit by a Ukrainian missile, leaving a 15-foot hole in the helipad, according to TASS. No injuries were reported in this strike, unlike the previous round of attacks, a spokesperson for Crimea’s emergency services department said.

Tavrida is reportedly one of the three rigs targeted in an earlier Ukrainian missile strike on June 20. Three people were injured in the first attack and seven remain missing. Satellite imaging appears to indicate that one of the targets (not Tavrida) is still on fire after five days.

Given the long distance from Ukrainian-held territory to the rig, many observers have suggested that the strikes were carried out using Western-supplied anti-ship missiles. The UK, U.S. and Denmark have all provided Ukraine with Harpoon anti-ship missile systems, which have already seen confirmed use against one Russian Navy vessel in the conflict.

Analysts suggest that the attacks could be part of a broader campaign to lift the Russian blockade on the Ukrainian port of Odesa. Ukrainian military sources have accused Russia of installing military surveillance and electronic-warfare equipment on the platforms, to include long-range radar observation systems; destroying these installations could help reduce Russian sea control in the northwestern Black Sea.

Tavrida is a jackup rig built in 1995 by Ukraine’s JSC Kherson shipyard. It was appropriated by Russia during the annexation of Crimea in 2014, along with the other assets of its operating company, Chernomorneftegaz.

Source: https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/ukraine-strikes-jackup-rig-in-the-black-sea-for-a-second-time


This weekend, the maritime industry celebrates the Day of the Seafarer, a day for remembering and honoring the role that seafarers play in the global economy – and the challenges they face.

“The world counts on seafarers,” said Secretary-General António Guterres. “Ships transport a remarkable 90 per cent of the world’s commodities – from grains and energy, to consumer goods and much more. Without ships and the women and men who work on them, economies would stall and people would starve.”

This year, the IMO is calling seafarers to share the story of their own personal voyages in a social media campaign. The agency has asked seafarers to post two photos on Twitter using hashtag #SeafarersJourney: one photo of their first voyage and another of their most recent voyage. IMO is also asking for stories about what has changed over the span of seafarers’ careers.

“Every day, hundreds of thousands of seafarers are underway on ships, while others take their well-deserved break – getting ready for their next voyage. Their ships are key movers of global trade, and engines of the global economy, transporting cargoes such as food, medicines, electronics and more,” said IMO Secretary-General Kitack Lim in an address. “Shipping and the call of the oceans, form a way of life. It is a meaningful, important career that provides a solid foundation for life and offers endless opportunities to learn and progress. This noble profession is something that I hold close to my heart and for many of us, our voyages are the start of a lifelong maritime journey.”

The day is also an opportunity for the industry to reflect on the future of seafaring, including working conditions, recruitment questions and public perceptions of a seafaring career. The COVID-19 pandemic, the crew change crisis and the curtailment of shore leave have had a measurable impact on seafarer happiness, with potential effects on the industry’s retention rate and reputation as an employer.

“What happened during the COVID crisis, with crews stuck for months on board vessels, has done lasting damage to how shipping is perceived,” said Capt. Rahul Khanna, Global Head of Marine Risk Consulting at Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty. “Some initiatives are pushing for change, but the fact that the seafaring community often feels like secondhand workers compared to those on shore must be addressed by the ship-owning community and stakeholders . . . We need to emphasize the positives of seafaring to the young men and women who are willing to explore it.”


An EU/UK plan to ban their insurers from providing cover to ships transporting Russian oil is causing tensions with Washington. America contends that Europe’s dominance of global insurance will make it very difficult for Russia to export oil if this goes ahead, potentially pushing oil prices far higher than they are already.

Yet this may not happen, because Russia is making moves to overcome the problem itself. The nation’s state reinsurance company, RNRC, is reportedly stepping in to take the place of western insurance companies by insuring fleets and their cargo. Russia will also now provide third-party liability and environmental damage cover in place of protection and indemnity (P&I) clubs. If these changes are viable for the long term, it will mean that a chunk of business that used to mostly go to European and British insurance companies will now be kept in Russia.

This is only one of numerous ways that western insurance is being affected by the war in Ukraine. Insurers are already facing serious losses from sanctions passed in March prohibiting provision of various types of cover to activities related to Russia. This is having significant knock-on effects across the board for business and society. So what is happening and where does it go from here?

Insurance and geopolitics

The insurance industry dwarfs the GDP of all countries in the world except China and the US. It was estimated to be worth over $5 trillion in premiums paid in 2021 and is set to grow 10 percent in 2022.

We’re all used to thinking of insurance companies as protecting people and companies against risks, but behind this lies another set of specialist companies known as reinsurers. These players insure insurance companies’ risks from say, losses arising from claims – in other words, they offer insurance taken out on insurance. In some cases, complex webs of insurance and reinsurance exist to make sure risk is adequately protected.

Prior to the invasion of Ukraine in February, there were instances where sanctions against Russia involved the insurance industry. When the US was putting pressure on Germany to abandon its NordStream 2 pipeline project, insurance and reinsurance companies were among those who pulled out until the Biden administration softened its approach.

This time around, it’s a whole different level. Claims have been made on policies related to aviation, maritime, trade credit, cyber and political risk. This only adds up to relatively modest exposure for the industry overall, but the potential long-term effects are another matter. Since the western sanctions were imposed in March, major players such as Lloyd’s of London, Swiss Re and SCOR and brokers such as Marsh, Aon and Willis Towers Watson have stopped taking new business from Russia. With a considerable amount of insurance previously provided to Russian sectors such as aviation and space in London and New York, for example, this is a major shift.

We are now in a situation where the world’s planes no longer fly through Russia. This raises the prospect of years if not decades of claims by the owners of up to 600 seized aircraft, many of which are leased.

Counting the cost

Estimating the overall hit to the western insurance industry from the deterioration in relations with Russia is not easy. This is not least because it very much depends on how much worse the current crisis becomes, and whether a political or military solution can be reached.

In early April, a report from S&P Global predicted that the losses to specialist categories such as aviation, maritime and political risk would be in the range of $16 billion to $35 billion. Lloyd’s of London alone was reported in March to be facing payouts in aviation and space of between $1 billion and $4 billion, which is one percent of its premiums.

The industry could be affected by payouts on claims for one or even two decades, acting as a drag on insurers’ balance sheets in the meantime. Those which have not yet offloaded their Russian business also run the risk of their policies being seized by the Russian government.

Meanwhile, premiums are on the up and up as insurers seek to make up for their losses – especially in all categories besides life insurance. Global aviation insurance premiums are said to have doubled as insurers seek to protect their profit margins. Premiums on oil tankers and other important cargo in the Black Sea, such as agricultural and cereal products, have also risen significantly. This will all feed through to higher prices for consumers and businesses, even apart from all the other inflationary pressures at present.

Another affected area is cyber insurance, which protects against the risks of cyber attacks. With Russia linked with numerous cyber attacks, both in relation to Ukraine and other countries, demand for cyber insurance has risen, yet it is becoming harder to obtain and therefore prices are spiralling.

Russia is a potential winner in much of this. Assuming sanctions continue, it is likely that western insurers will increasingly be substituted by Russian insurers (and those of countries that it deems friendly). For example, RNRC is already replacing western reinsurers in relation to other cargoes besides oil. Russia may also follow the model in Iran where various new government-guaranteed reinsurance pools, companies, P&I clubs and co-insurance (multiple companies providing cover) were set up in response to sanctions.

Russian sanctions and the enforced exodus of western firms from the Russian market leave Russia with the good fortune of having internal, inherited expertise and knowledge of the insurance and reinsurance business which it did not pay for. While western insurance firms need to absorb the hit from the sanctions, it is not completely clear that their Russian counterparts will suffer in the same way.

Source: https://www.maritime-executive.com/editorials/tanker-cover-ban-may-benefit-russian-insurers-and-raise-premiums


Company DETAILS

SHIP IP LTD
VAT:BG 202572176
Rakovski STR.145
Sofia,
Bulgaria
Phone ( +359) 24929284
E-mail: sales(at)shipip.com

ISO 9001:2015 CERTIFIED