Preserving this Greek carve-out sends precisely the wrong signal. It tells companies that sufficiently valuable commercial interests may eventually secure exemptions. It tells member states that delaying agreement can produce favourable outcomes. And it tells Moscow that Europe’s political unity remains negotiable when influential industries are affected.
Nezir Sinani
The European Union deserves credit for adopting its 21st sanctions package against Russia. Every new measure that limits the Kremlin’s ability to finance its war against Ukraine matters.
But this latest package also contains a dangerous precedent.
To secure unanimous agreement, the EU reportedly granted Greece a renewable exemption allowing European shipping companies to continue transporting Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) to third countries under contracts signed before Russia’s full-scale invasion.
The concession is expected to benefit Dynagas, the Greek shipping company controlled by billionaire George Prokopiou, whose specialised vessels play a critical role in servicing Russia’s Yamal LNG project.
Dynagas owns or manages five specialised Arc7 LNG carriers serving Yamal LNG, Russia’s largest LNG export facility.
These are not conventional vessels that can easily be replaced. Designed to operate year-round in Arctic conditions, Arc7 carriers are highly specialised assets that enable Russia to move LNG from one of its most important energy projects to global markets.
In other words, these ships are not merely transporting Russian gas. They are part of the infrastructure that makes Russia’s Arctic LNG exports possible.
That is precisely why they matter. LNG has become one of the Kremlin’s most valuable remaining export sectors, and Yamal LNG sits at its centre.
Europe had identified a pressure point that Russia cannot easily replace. Instead of fully exploiting that leverage, it negotiated around it.
Athens’ position
Supporters of the Greek position argue that restricting European operators would simply transfer business to competitors from China or elsewhere without significantly reducing Russian revenues.
At first glance, this appears pragmatic. In reality, it is an argument against almost every meaningful sanction.
Removing European maritime expertise and specialist Arc7 vessels from Russia’s LNG supply chain would not have ended Russian exports overnight.
It would, however, have increased the operational challenges facing one of Russia’s most strategically important energy industries.
That is exactly what sanctions are supposed to do. Instead, the compromise reportedly allows existing business to continue.
This exemption is particularly difficult to justify because it concerns LNG exports to countries outside the European Union. The issue is not whether Europe needs Russian gas to keep homes heated or industries operating. The concession protects commercial shipping services supporting Russia’s global LNG trade beyond Europe’s borders.
That distinction is fundamental.
Europe is not choosing between energy security and solidarity with Ukraine. It is choosing whether European companies should continue earning revenue by providing essential services to Russia’s LNG industry. The answer should be straightforward.
The Dynagas controversy also reflects a broader pattern. According to analysis by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), Greek-controlled vessels have transported approximately €248bn worth of Russian fossil fuels since the beginning of the full-scale invasion, more than vessels controlled by any other country.
Greek-controlled tankers have carried roughly €135bn worth of Russian oil products, while Greek-linked ships have transported approximately €23bn worth of Russian LNG.
These figures illustrate the scale of Greece’s commercial relationship with Russia’s fossil-fuel exports.
Preserving this carve-out sends precisely the wrong signal. It tells companies that sufficiently valuable commercial interests may eventually secure exemptions. It tells member states that delaying agreement can produce favourable outcomes. And it tells Moscow that Europe’s political unity remains negotiable when influential industries are affected.
There is another risk that deserves far greater attention. If European operators eventually leave this business, Russia will look for ways to retain access to these specialised assets.
That creates an obvious danger that Arc7 vessels could be sold, transferred or restructured through intermediary companies before restrictions fully take effect.
Europe should not allow today’s exemption to become tomorrow’s circumvention mechanism.
The EU should immediately establish strict controls preventing the sale, transfer or reflagging of Arc7 LNG carriers to Russian companies or third-country entities acting on Russia’s behalf. Any attempt to preserve these services through changes in ownership or corporate structure should trigger additional sanctions.
‘Temporary’ must mean temporary
Equally important, the current exemption should remain exactly that: temporary. A limited transition period may sometimes be justified to unwind existing contractual obligations. But renewable exemptions that preserve the underlying business risk becoming permanent loopholes. The burden should rest on those seeking to extend them to demonstrate that doing so advances a compelling European interest, not merely the commercial interests of individual companies.
Dynagas also has a choice. The company can continue relying on political compromises to maintain business supporting Russia’s LNG exports. Or it can recognise that its unique capabilities have become strategically important to Europe’s collective security and announce a clear timetable for ending its involvement in the Yamal LNG trade.
Greece, too, faces a choice.
Athens has consistently expressed support for Ukraine and for European unity in responding to Russian aggression. It should match those commitments by helping Europe close sanctions loopholes rather than negotiating exceptions that preserve commercial ties to Russia’s energy sector.
That mistake should now be corrected. The exemption should be allowed to expire, it should not be renewed, and Europe should ensure that no specialised vessels, contracts or ownership structures are used to circumvent its sanctions.
