THE French naval patrol plane plunged through the clouds, levelling off at 275m above the Baltic Sea, skimming the waves.
The target was a Russian warship, dark grey against a light grey horizon, coming into view off the plane’s port side.
The aircraft, an Atlantique 2 of the French navy, was designed to hunt submarines and enemy craft.
But on this mission, its torpedo bay was empty – its only weapons were a high-resolution camera and sophisticated surveillance instruments.
The goal was to observe and be seen.
“We are to show that we are here,” said Romain, a lieutenant-commander and crew member.
Never fully tranquil, the Baltic Sea – heavily militarised by Northern European and Russian navies – has become a flashpoint in the ongoing tension between Russia and the West.
Later on patrol, Russian forces attempted to jam the plane’s GPS, and another Russian warship briefly locked onto the aircraft with radar – a warning it could open fire.
Below, Russian naval ships and a submarine cut through the sea.
But the main concern lay underwater.
The Baltic’s silent threat
In the past 18 months, commercial ships have allegedly damaged crucial undersea communication cables and a gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea.
European officials suspect sabotage, with the Kremlin seen as the likely culprit, though evidence remains elusive.
In response, Nato launched Baltic Sentry in January, increasing sea and air patrols in the region.
While primarily led by Baltic nations like Sweden, Finland and Poland, French and British forces participate alongside US Marines in Finland.
Baltic Sentry was hailed as an example of Nato’s renewed vigilance.
Since its launch – days before Donald Trump took office as US president – there have been no further incidents of suspected sabotage. Still, officials caution that the mission is young.
“This demonstrates the alliance’s ability to respond rapidly to destabilisation,” said US Army Gen Christopher Cavoli, Nato’s supreme allied commander in Europe. “It shows the strength of our unity in the face of any challenge.”
Although Nato insists Baltic Sentry is not aimed at any particular nation, Russia is clearly its focus.
A close encounter
Aboard the French patrol, tensions spiked when the aircraft swooped low over a Russian warship.
Crew members, issued parachutes in case of emergency evacuation, are wary of provocation.
“It’s a touchy situation,” said Romain, speaking under military protocol that allows only his first name and rank to be published.
During the 14-hour mission, about a dozen crew members were crammed into a tight fuselage lined with computer monitors displaying satellite and radar data.
The patrol launched at dawn from a French airfield, traversed the Baltic from Germany’s northern coast to the Gulf of Finland, and returned.
But their primary focus was Baltiysk, headquarters of Russia’s Baltic Fleet.
As the plane neared Kaliningrad, the Russian exclave between Poland and Lithuania, its instruments detected GPS jamming.
Below, a Russian attack submarine and several frigates were on the move.
A crew member zoomed in on the vessels with the aircraft’s camera, while another flipped through a reference manual to identify them. The camera then turned to the naval base, where more ships were docked.
At one point, the targeting radar of a Russian vessel briefly locked onto the plane, which remained in international airspace.
While this could signal an intent to fire, crew members suspected it was a means of gauging the aircraft’s altitude. Regardless, the French military later condemned the incident.
“This intimidation is part of unnecessarily aggressive actions hindering freedom of navigation,” the French military’s Joint Staff posted on X.
A wider campaign
Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Europe has grappled with a string of mysterious incidents – suspected arson, explosions and assassination attempts – that intelligence agencies increasingly link to Kremlin sabotage efforts.
Moscow denies involvement but last year, intelligence officials revealed that fires at DHL shipping hubs in Britain and Germany were part of a Russian plot to place incendiary devices on cargo planes.
The Baltic’s severed undersea cables ultimately spurred Nato into action.
The Kremlin dismissed accusations of sabotage in the Baltic Sea as “absurd”.
Military and shipping experts have largely praised Baltic Sentry, though some argue it does too little.
The Baltic, though accessible to Russia via key ports, is often described as a “Nato lake” due to its eight alliance-member coastlines. This makes it relatively secure.
The greater challenge is protecting infrastructure in the North Sea, where wind farms, oil rigs and transatlantic cables are vulnerable.
The shadow fleet
Baltic Sentry also does little to disrupt Russia’s “shadow fleet” – a collection of ageing tankers that Western officials say is used to covertly transport Russian crude oil worldwide, bypassing sanctions.
This fleet is crucial to Moscow’s war finances, and Western nations have struggled to counter it.
A rare exception occurred in January when Finnish commandos boarded a suspected shadow fleet vessel. Officials noted it bore hallmarks of such operations.
“Russia is using a shadow oil fleet to sustain its revenues and evade sanctions,” said Justin Crump, chief executive officer of intelligence firm Sibylline and a maritime security expert.
“We know exactly how they’re doing it. And yet, we’re not allowed to stop it. That’s the missing ingredient.”
Aboard the Atlantique 2, Romain said his crew closely monitored suspected shadow fleet tankers but admitted their hands were tied.
“There is no procedure to stop them in international waters,” he said. “No specific agreements allow us to board them.”
Throughout the patrol, the plane’s captain received reports of suspicious vessel activity. One ship had recently departed Russia’s Ust-Luga port; another was bound for Primorsk. Each time, the captain radioed the vessels.
“Are you aware of Nato’s Baltic Sentry operation?” he asked, then inquired whether they had seen any unusual maritime activity.
Each replied with the same answer: No. — ©2025 The New York Times Company
This article originally appeared in The New York Times
