The ministry said it summoned US Deputy Chief of Mission Jason Meeks to lodge “a strong protest” over what it called continuing attacks by US naval forces on commercial vessels carrying Indian mariners.The attacks had resulted in the “tragic and avoidable loss of three Indian lives,” the ministry said in a statement.

Meeks was first summoned on Wednesday after a US strike hit the Palau-flagged tanker MT Settebello off the coast of Oman, killing three Indian crew members.The incident followed a June 8 strike on another Palau-flagged tanker, MT Marivex, from which Omani authorities rescued 24 Indian sailors.

On Thursday, a Guinea-Bissau-flagged tanker was also hit in a US strike, according to Indian officials. New Delhi said the vessel’s crew, including 20 Indian sailors, were rescued.A US State Department official said Washington was in direct contact with the Indian government regarding the matter.

India is among the world’s largest sources of merchant seafarers, with more than 320,000 active sailors in 2025, according to the country’s shipping ministry.The shipping ministry has advised Indian sailors operating on Indian and foreign-flagged vessels travelling through conflict-affected waters to exercise the highest degree of caution.

“The continuing attacks on shipping in the region are deeply worrisome,” Indian foreign ministry spokesman Randhir Jaiswal said, adding that such attacks must stop.India’s navy said on Thursday it had conducted a high-risk operation to remove an unexploded missile warhead from the Marshall Islands-flagged tanker MT Olympic Life after it was struck off Oman on May 26.The vessel later reached India’s southern port of Kochi safely.

The navy said the projectile had entered the hull, passed through several structural compartments and became lodged inside a fuel tank.Shipping routes through the Strait of Hormuz have faced disruption since Iran restricted maritime traffic after attacks by the United States and Israel began on February 28. The United States has also imposed a naval blockade on Iranian ports.

The dispute follows the EU’s decision on Monday to expand the mandate of Operation IRINI, a naval mission established to enforce the United Nations arms embargo on Libya. Under the revised mandate, EU military vessels operating in the Mediterranean will be able to stop and inspect foreign ships suspected of circumventing sanctions through the transport of Russian oil.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said the move represented a threat to maritime security and accused the EU of attempting to intimidate civilian shipping under the guise of sanctions enforcement.

“The European Union’s deployment of ships from the IRINI naval operation in the Mediterranean to inspect or seize, as they now say, vessels carrying oil products would constitute a flagrant violation of international law,” Zakharova told a briefing in Moscow.

Zakharova rejected the EU’s characterization of a Russian-linked “shadow fleet,” describing the term as a political construct rather than a recognized legal category under international law. She argued that the planned inspections lacked a valid legal basis and risked undermining established principles governing international navigation.

She said Russia reserved the right to employ “the full arsenal of political, legal, and other instruments” to safeguard maritime security and protect the interests of shipowners and commercial operators involved in the transportation of oil products.

The EU has increasingly targeted vessels it believes are helping transport Russian oil outside Western sanctions frameworks imposed following Moscow’s actions in Ukraine. European officials have argued that tighter monitoring of tanker activity is necessary to strengthen sanctions enforcement and reduce opportunities for evasion.

The latest disagreement highlights growing tensions between Moscow and Brussels over the implementation of sanctions and the policing of maritime trade routes, particularly in areas where commercial shipping intersects with broader geopolitical disputes.

The Swedish Coast Guard boarded the 182-meter vessel Jin Hui on Sunday amid suspicions it was operating under a falsified Syrian flag, in what officials described as part of ongoing enforcement actions targeting ships believed to be circumventing Western sanctions on Russia.

The Swedish Prosecution Authority said the captain was detained on suspicion of using forged documents and breaching maritime safety regulations, specifically relating to inadequate seaworthiness. Prosecutor Adrien Combier-Hogg said the individual would be interrogated during the day, adding that coordination had been initiated with other national and international authorities.

Sweden’s Civil Defense Minister Carl-Oskar Bohlin said the vessel appears on sanctions lists maintained by the European Union, Britain and Ukraine, underscoring concerns that it may be linked to networks used to bypass restrictions imposed on Moscow following its invasion of Ukraine.

Western officials have increasingly focused on what they describe as a “shadow fleet” of aging, poorly insured vessels with opaque ownership structures, used to transport Russian oil and other commodities outside formal regulatory frameworks. These ships have raised safety and environmental concerns due to their condition and lack of oversight.

Sweden has conducted several recent boardings of vessels in its surrounding waters as part of broader efforts to enforce sanctions compliance and maritime safety standards in the Baltic region.

The ongoing reduction in Arctic sea ice is beginning to reshape global maritime trade patterns, with shipping companies and governments increasingly evaluating northern sea routes as viable alternatives to traditional corridors such as the Suez Canal.

According to data from the International Maritime Organization, seasonal navigability in Arctic waters has improved over recent decades, allowing limited commercial transit during summer months.

The Northern Sea Route, running along Russia’s Arctic coastline, has drawn particular attention due to its potential to shorten travel distances between Asia and Europe by up to 40% compared with southern routes.

This reduction in distance translates into lower fuel consumption and shorter delivery times, although operational constraints remain significant.

Shipping activity along this corridor remains modest but is increasing incrementally, with vessels requiring ice-class certification and often escort by icebreakers. Russian authorities have expanded infrastructure investments in Arctic ports and navigation systems to support growing traffic.

The expansion of Arctic navigation is directly linked to rising global temperatures and declining ice cover. Scientific assessments indicate that the Arctic is warming at a rate significantly faster than the global average, contributing to longer ice-free periods.

However, variability in ice conditions continues to pose risks, including unpredictable weather patterns and limited search-and-rescue capabilities.Environmental concerns have also emerged as a key constraint.

The Arctic ecosystem is highly sensitive to disturbances, and increased shipping raises the risk of oil spills, black carbon emissions, and disruption to marine biodiversity.

Regulatory frameworks under the International Maritime Organization, including the Polar Code, set standards for safety and environmental protection, but enforcement and monitoring remain complex.

The strategic importance of Arctic routes has heightened geopolitical competition among major powers. Russia maintains the most developed Arctic infrastructure and asserts regulatory control over the Northern Sea Route, while countries including China have described the region as part of a broader “Polar Silk Road” strategy.

The Arctic Council continues to serve as a platform for cooperation on environmental and scientific issues, though it does not govern commercial navigation. Analysts note that the intersection of economic opportunity, environmental risk, and sovereignty claims is likely to shape policy debates in the coming years.

Despite the potential advantages, industry adoption remains cautious due to high insurance costs, limited infrastructure, and legal uncertainties.

As a result, Arctic shipping is expected to complement rather than replace established global trade routes in the near term.