Defence Secretary John Healey has delivered a statement to the House of Commons condemning recent Russian maritime activity near British waters.
His remarks detailed the UK’s robust response to the presence of the Russian vessel Yantar, described as a “spy ship,” in the North Sea.
Mr Healey confirmed that Yantar entered the UK’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) on Monday, approximately 45 miles off the British coast. The vessel is believed to specialise in gathering intelligence and mapping critical underwater infrastructure.
“For the last two days, the Royal Navy has deployed HMS Somerset and HMS Tyne to monitor the vessel every minute through our waters,” he said. As part of an escalated response, Mr Healey authorised changes to the Royal Navy’s rules of engagement, enabling British warships to approach the ship more closely and track it more effectively.
Significantly, Mr Healey disclosed that during a previous encounter with Yantar in November 2024, a British nuclear submarine was deployed as a deterrent.
“I authorised the Royal Navy submarine to surface close to Yantar, strictly as a deterrent measure, to make clear that we had been covertly monitoring its every move,” he revealed.
The November incident also involved RAF maritime patrol aircraft, HMS Cattistock, HMS Tyne, and RFA Proteus, which collectively ensured Yantar left UK waters without further loitering.
Mr Healey framed these incursions as part of a broader pattern of Russian aggression.
“This is another example of growing Russian aggression targeting our allies abroad and us at home,” he said. He cited recent incidents, including periodic incursions of Russian aircraft into UK-managed airspace and the suspected sabotage of the S-LINK 2 undersea cable between Finland and Estonia on Christmas Day.
“Many analysts believe this was caused by a vessel in Russia’s shadow fleet,” Mr Healey added, emphasising the strategic threat posed by Russia’s activities.
A Message to Moscow
Directly addressing Russian President Vladimir Putin, the Defence Secretary declared:
“We see you. We know what you are doing, and we will not shy away from robust action to protect this country.”
He reiterated the UK’s commitment to working with NATO allies to ensure Russian ships and aircraft cannot operate covertly near NATO or UK territory.
The Defence Secretary praised the professionalism and dedication of all personnel involved in the response to Yantar. He concluded by reassuring the public of the UK’s readiness to defend its sovereignty:
“Russia is dangerous, but fundamentally weak.”
Using an SSN seems like overkill. Bloody delightful overkill 🙂
Overkill is always better than underkill.
That’s some pretty aggressive Cold War tactics, that’s very good.
At some point we have to put our foot in front of their escalators trajectory and say enough is enough.
Otherwise they ratchet up the grey(ish) zone warfare until they start ramming RN vessels accurately on purpose like.
These people only understand power and force – if they sense weakness they pile in.
Why do I suspect that was the final mission for the T boat? It wouldn’t matter if they got a good recording of her signature as she was to pay off – sadly. A very fitting final mission for a T boat.
Agree, when your faced with an aggressive enemy, passivity has never been a recipient for success…some regimes, especially authoritarian ones only respect the realistic threat of escalation back…
Interesting thought about the T boat, yes the fact it was at the end of its life would mean the risk of any data give away was insignificant compared to the benefit of letting Russia know the RN is putting an SSN up the arse of their assets when they come near the Uk.
Also I would imagine a good moral boost for the service and crew getting to do that just before decommissioning.
Only SSN at sea currently is Anson, and I know she was working with St Albans with her newly fitted sonar. HMS St Albans was recently testing her sonar in Loch Goil and she is now heading back to Plymouth…
Leaves a question …. are MP’s being fed lies as Anson/St Albans are NO WHERE near Yantar.
I have 100% faith in what UKDJ (George) is saying however, there is clear mis communication between the facts and what the media are being told. I have family onboard HMS Anson!
Then you are jeopardizing them and their crew mates! Please use some common sense – Loose lips etc,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
hahaha,
You really need to loosen up, it’s all over the internet which sub/s are at sea, I am not breaking any national secrets here. We are not in the 1940’s
Come on Dave, you should know better than that. I’ve seen lads dragged off boats for exactly this!
Information freely available on The public domain
Not sure what has lads being dragged of a boat got to with me? Member of the public observing naval forums and movements – all available in the public domain. Not sure what you are getting at tbh.
To be fair anyone with a pair of binos could figure out where our SSN’s are that are on the wall.
What is in dry dock is also observable.
As most of them are on the wall that doesn’t leave much to figure out!
So whilst I deplore Dave posting any purported operational information regarding SSN activity or involvement in not sure if gives anything away that any enemy couldn’t have figured out by observing a very few obvious things and locations.
I haven’t stated anything wrong to begin with. I have only reposted information that was already in the public domain.. Information, images and details of each unit is very easily avaliable online.
PINAC and being in a public place come to mind!!!
The submarine incident was in November 2024, where you are talking about at sea “currently”. As far as I recall Triumph was still operational until December.
Triumph was alongside – do you not keep up on information ??
On every single ship? No.
(Yes, yes, I know it’s a boat.)
And it wasn’t alongside throughout November anyway. It was reported as returning back to the Clyde on the 29th after conducting training.
If you actually read this (and the other article) as you claim then you will see it named TWO Astute boats and nothing whatsoever to do with Triumph (she was working with a minesweeper doing Perisher at the time of the following) and was nowhere near the vessel in question – again all this information was / is within the public domain … maybe educate yourself on this before making bold statemenents and accusations !
Are you for real?!
Information is freely available and its in the public domain – are you from the 1940’s? Its not like those in the know DONT know and go on forums like here for information!
Be careful what you say Dave 😷
Information is freely available and its in the public domain – are you from the 1940’s? Its not like those in the know DONT know and go on forums like here for information!
No one’s lying, if you read the article it says the SSN incident happened in November. It was separate to the current one.
Dave take that comment down please
Information is freely available and it’s in the public domain – are you from the 1940’s? It’s not like those in the know DONT know and go on forums like here for information! Get a life!
Personally, I think we should be more to actively drive these ships out of our waters instead of just observing them.
And to ” Dave ” please, please stop posting the whereabouts of our navsl assets on a public forum. Loose lips sink ships.
Information is freely available and its in the public domain – are you from the 1940’s? Its not like those in the know DONT know and go on forums like here for information!
Dave, no where and never will HM Government or the Royal Navy say where they have a SSN or SSBN opertaional. All the information you will get is somewhere in the seven seas. I am not even sure if the crew or for that matter the Prime Minister knows, all they will know is when they get there and that is possibly where they came from.
So please stop trying to sprout BS as it does no good.
Oh dear Ron…..
Where did I state “HM Government or the Royal Navy” have stated anything???
I stated THE PUBLIC DOMAIN ie Websites, internet sites, forums, Instagram, Facebook.. to name but a few… there are dozens of images of the boats within seconds of them leaving their various bases – some can even ID them by their tile layouts..
As for me “sprouting BS” I think you need to take a long hard look at yourself as you have already falsely accused me of saying something I have NEVER said.
Maybe go educated yourself and look up what the Public Domain is .. it certainly is not as you think “HM Government or the Royal Navy” However for the record The RN did state Triumph was exercising with the minesweeper – so your statement has been proven wrong AGAIN!!
And here is ANOTHER article from yes The Royal Navy about a submarine:https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news/2024/december/12/20241212-triumphant-triumph-returns-home-ahead-of-decommissioning
Clearly you have no idea and you are the one with the BS!
Also curious….. are you aware of AIS and the public domain? – it shows where our ships are and various naval forums state where the units are… I havent done anything wrong regarding our “navsl assets”.
Maybe take a chill pill and lighten up!
Granted for ships but not for SSNs or SSBNs. Noting that you have family aboard named boat wasn’t clever…
Good luck trying to find any member of the ships crew’s name (yet alone any of my family – whether its direct, indirect, in law, out law etc, I wish you good luck going down that route …. and sometimes the ships/boats are on AIS, sometimes they aren’t and are surrounded by tugs – so you can see there is a vessel in between them.
If they are merely in our EEZ then we can’t really do that without violating the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (the same one we use to justify FON exercises).
Warning this spy ship off will be interpreted by the Russians a sign of weakness. A demonstration of British naval power and determination was required. Healey should have sunk the ship without compunction. And then sent RN divers down to salvage the ship’s electronics
You realise your scenario would be classed as an act of war and would start WWIII?
Absolute rubbish. The Turks shot down a Russian warplane that entered its airspace a few years back – and Putin crapped out and grovelled. We have every right to defend our critical underwater infrastructure. And we are already at war with Russia.
If you want some respect on this website, post under your real name so we can all see that your not Russian
It was not in our airspace or national waters this time it was in the EEZ and the November incident it was transiting the channel …it’s allowed to transit..sinking a ship in transit through a recognised strait when not at war and when it’s not a valid target of war ( commissioned warship or auxiliary) is a war crime and the UK would essentially become a rogue state.
You many not be aware but the RN does freedom of navigation manoeuvres all the time through other nations straits…should they be sunk ?
Sinking another nation’s ship is an act of war.
Do you want to start World War 3? Especially with our armed forces at an all-time low?
Not clever.
Like I said above, if you want to engage with me on the clear acts of war that the Russians have already undertaken, post under your real name
Honestly why do you even bother commenting on this website, daily mail comments section would suit you better.
The ship is in international waters. We don’t control shipping in our EEZ, thats against the law.
And you can piss off, you fcuking drug crazed coward. A complete weaking, crawl off into a gutter somewhere and throw up
I wonder what are the rules of engagement for the RN these days?
What would happen if say a RN SSN directly sees a Russian ship cutting data cables/’leccy interconnects etc.? Let Admiralty know/stiff talking to Russia in the Media, or a quick brace of Spearfish admidships for the miscreant?
The boat in question would report back to UK and request further orders, highly unlikely there would be any further action apart from keep watching and reporting back
It would very much depend if they were UK Teritorial waters, or out in international waters.
I would imagine in UK waters, the Royal Navy would first gather crucial evidence, give a strong warning, fire warning shots, disable the vessel and then sieze it. Depending on the situation then, the use of force could be authorised as a last resort.
If the situation was out in international waters however, it would be more down the line of issuing a lot more verbal warnings, then manouvering to obsctruct the vessel.
That makes total sense. Observing the rules but with a firm hand. Thank you.
The current policy is to deny the ability to deny. Catch them red handed and gather all the information available.
If it’s a UK registered data cable they can directly intervene in the same way as they would with an act of piracy.
Another load of complete bollox. Why you bother getting up in the morning beats me
You dont have talk a lot of rubbish @Jim!!!
Law of the sea.. essentially they are allowed to board the vessel and review paperwork, then write a report to the flag vessels nation so the ships master can be prosecuted for criminal damage and pay costs… if it’s within the international waters of the UK it would come under UK law and the police could be called to arrest the ships master under UK laws around criminal damage….. but essentially cutting cables is and always has been essentially a criminal law issue.
Lots of comments around dire actions for the destruction of cables..sinking and impounding ship etc. sorry but that’s not happening…cables are essentially private property and essentially protected in the same way as private property in law..so we have two levels
The international law, governing cables in the high seas and EEZ..essentially this says that breaking cables is naughty and if you do it on purpose that nation your ship is registered with should prosecute you…it’s all essentially still governed by the 1884 Paris agreement on telegraph cables.
“a punishable offense to break or injure a submarine cable, willfully or by culpable negligence, in such a manner as might interrupt or obstruct telegraphic communications, either wholly or partially.”
If you accidentally break a Cable essentially it’s on your back to pay the owner the cost of repair..
“on laying or repairing his own cable, breaks or injures another cable, must bear the cost of repairing the breakage or injury,” without prejudice to the application of Article II of the Convention. “
The only power nation states actually have in collecting information on the crime and reporting it back to the nation the ship is flagged under…
“When the officers of a warship or a ship specifically designated by a Party to the Paris Convention have reason to believe that another vessel has committed an infraction of the measures provided for by the Convention, those officers “may require the captain or master [of that vessel] to exhibit the official documents furnishing evidence of the nationality of said vessel” and prepare a report which must be transmitted to the vessel’s flag state for appropriate action, “whatever may be the nationality of said vessel.””
In all the history of undersea cables this has only ever been done once… 1959 when personnel of the U.S.S. Roy O. Hale boarded a Soviet trawler suspected of breaking several submarine cables…so even at a point where the US and Russia were essentially fighting a proxy war and shooting each other’s aircraft down for a pass-time they did almost nothing in regards to cables…because of the restrictions of international law which are essentially useless.
Wow. What a thread! Thoroughly enjoyed.
I’m surprised the DS went so far as confirming the involvement of the Silent Service.
I didn’t seem to have worked, if that was last November and the Russians are off the Isle if Wight today.