Baltic nations switch off Russian power grid in ‘victory for freedom'
Three Baltic states have cut ties with Russia's power grid to join the European Union's network in 'a victory for freedom.'
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania – all former Soviet republics now in the European Union and Nato – had wanted to block Russia's ability to geopolitically blackmail them via the electricity system.
Zygimantas Vaiciunas, Lithuania's energy minister, told AFP on Saturday: 'We have removed any theoretical possibility of Russia using energy [grid] control as a weapon.'
Kaja Kallas, the EU foreign policy chief and Estonia's former prime minister, hailed the grid switch as 'a victory for freedom and European unity'.
Mr Vaiciunas said the Baltic states had completed the disconnection process at 9.09 local time (07.09 GMT) on Saturday.
'We have been waiting for this moment for a long time,' he told reporters, after speaking with his Estonian and Latvian counterparts.
'The energy system of the Baltic states is finally in our own hands. We are in control,' he added of the 'historic' moment.
Official celebrations are planned across the Baltics. Authorities are on guard for any potential cyber-attacks linked to the grid switch.
Latvia will physically cut a power line to Russia later today and Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president, is expected to attend a ceremony with Baltic leaders in Vilnius on Sunday.
The Baltics have long prepared to integrate with the European grid but they have faced technological and financial issues.
The switch became more urgent after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, which spooked the Baltic states into thinking that they could be targeted.
They stopped purchasing Russian gas and electricity after the invasion but their power grids remained connected to Russia and Belarus, controlled from Moscow.
This left them dependent on Moscow for a stable electricity flow, which is crucial for factories and facilities requiring a reliable power supply.
The Baltic states will operate in 'isolated mode' for about 24 hours to test their frequency, or power levels, according to Litgrid, Lithuania's state-run grid operator, before they integrate with the European grid on Sunday.
Rokas Masiulis., the Litgrid head, previously said: 'We need to carry out some tests to assure Europe that we are a stable energy system.
'We'll switch power stations on and off, observe how the frequency fluctuates and assess our ability to control it.'
The states will then integrate into the European power grid via Poland.
Authorities have warned of potential risks linked to the change.
Lithuania's state security department told AFP: 'Various short-term risks are possible, such as kinetic operations against critical infrastructure, cyber-attacks and disinformation campaigns.'
Poland's power grid operator PSE had said it would use helicopters and drones to patrol the connection with Lithuania.
Edgars Rinkevics, the Latvian president, told LTV1 that the countries could not 'rule out possible provocations'.
In Estonia, police and volunteer defence corps will man critical electrical infrastructure until next weekend because of the risk of sabotage.
Several undersea telecom and power cables have been severed in the Baltic Sea in recent months. Some experts and politicians have accused Russia of waging a hybrid war, an allegation that Moscow denies.
A total of €1.6 billion euros ($1.7 billion) – mostly EU funds – have been invested in the synchronisation project across the Baltic states and Poland.
Gitanas Nauseda, the Lithuanian president, was sure that the switch would go smoothly, telling reporters: 'People won't feel it, either in terms of their bills or any inconvenience.'
Estonia's climate ministry urged everyone to carry on as usual as 'the more regular and predictable the behaviour... the easier it is to manage the power grid'.
But some consumers are worried about power cuts and home improvement stores in Estonia noted a sharp increase in sales of generators.
After the Baltic decoupling, the energy system in the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad will lose its grid connection to mainland Russia.
Kaliningrad has been building up power generation capacity for years and Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin spokesman, dismissed all concerns.
Asked about the cut-off last week, he said: 'We have taken all measures to ensure the uninterrupted reliable operation of our unified energy system.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
30 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
NATO chief calls for ‘quantum leap' in defense and says Russia could attack in 5 years
LONDON (AP) — NATO members need to increase their air and missile defenses by 400% to counter the threat from Russia, the head of the military alliance said Monday, warning that Moscow could be ready to attack it within five years. Secretary-General Mark Rutte said during a visit to London that he expects the 32 NATO members to agree to a big hike in military spending at a summit in the Netherlands this month. Speaking at the Chatham House think tank, Rutte said Russia is outpacing the far bigger NATO in producing ammunition, and the alliance must take a 'quantum leap' in collective defense. 'Wishful thinking will not keep us safe,' Rutte said. 'We cannot dream away the danger. Hope is not a strategy. So NATO has to become a stronger, fairer and more lethal alliance.' Rutte has proposed a target of 3.5% of economic output on military spending and another 1.5% on 'defense-related expenditure' such as roads, bridges, airfields and sea ports. He said he is confident the alliance will agree to the target at its summit in The Hague on June 24-25. At the moment, 22 of the 32 members meet or exceed NATO's current 2% target, which was set in 2014. Rutte said he expects all to reach 2% by the end of this year. The new target would meet a demand by U.S. President Donald Trump that member states spend 5% of gross domestic product on defense. Trump has long questioned the value of NATO and complained that the U.S. provides security to European countries that don't contribute enough. Rutte said he agreed that 'America has carried too much of the burden for too long.' Rutte said NATO needs thousands more armored vehicles and millions more artillery shells, as well as a 400% increase in air and missile defense. 'We see in Ukraine how Russia delivers terror from above, so we will strengthen the shield that protects our skies,' he said. 'Russia could be ready to use military force against NATO within five years,' Rutte added. 'We are all on the eastern flank now.' Rutte also held talks Monday with Prime Minister Keir Starmer and praised the U.K.'s commitment to increase defense spending as 'very good stuff.' Starmer has pledged to boost military spending to 2.5% of gross domestic product by 2027 and to 3% by 2034. Like other NATO members, the U.K. has been reassessing its defense spending since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. European NATO members, led by the U.K. and France, have scrambled to coordinate their defense posture as Trump transforms American foreign policy , seemingly sidelining Europe as he looks to end the war in Ukraine. Last week the U.K. government said it would build new nuclear-powered attack submarines, prepare its army to fight a war in Europe and become 'a battle-ready, armor-clad nation.' The plans represent the most sweeping changes to British defenses since the collapse of the Soviet Union more than three decades ago. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What is the high seas treaty?
The high seas treaty could be law by the end of the year, affording protection to marine life in the vast swathes of ocean that belong to no one. The treaty was adopted by UN member states in June 2023. It has been ratified by 31 nations plus the European Union, and comes into force 120 days after its 60th ratification. But at the UN Ocean Conference this week, hosts France said around 50 countries have ratified the pact, bringing it within reach of enactment. The United States signed the treaty in 2023 under Joe Biden but is not expected to ratify it while Donald Trump is president. Here are the key points of the treaty text: - International waters - The treaty covers international waters, which fall outside the jurisdiction of any single state, and account for more than 60 percent of the world's oceans. Specifically, it applies to waters beyond countries' exclusive economic zones, which extend up to 200 nautical miles from the coast. It also covers what is known as "the Area", shorthand for seabed and subsoil beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. The Area comprises just over half of the planet's seabed. Once enacted, a decision-making body -- a Conference of the Parties (COP) -- would have to work with regional and global organizations that already oversee different aspects of the oceans. These include regional fisheries bodies and the International Seabed Authority, the arena where nations are hotly contesting a proposed set of rules to govern deep-sea mining. Trump's decision to sidestep the authority -- to which the US is not a member -- and issue deep-sea mining permits in international waters has raised tricky questions of jurisdiction. - Marine protected areas - Currently, almost all protected marine areas (MPAs) are within national territorial waters. The treaty, however, allows for these reserves to be created in the open ocean. Most decisions would be taken by a consensus of the COP, but an MPA can be voted into existence with a three-quarters majority, to prevent deadlock caused by a single country. One crucial shortcoming: the text does not say how these conservation measures will be monitored and enforced over remote swathes of the ocean -- a task that will fall to the COP. Some experts say satellites could be used to spot infractions. Individual countries are already responsible for certain activities on the high seas that they have jurisdiction over, such as those of ships flying their flags. - Sharing the bounty? - On the high seas, countries and entities under their jurisdiction will be allowed to collect animal, plant, or microbial matter whose genetic material might prove useful, even commercially. Scientists, for example, have discovered molecules with the potential to treat cancer or other diseases in microbes scooped up in sediment, or produced by sponges or marine mollusks. Benefits-sharing of those resources has been a key point of contention between wealthy and poorer nations. The treaty establishes frameworks for the transfer of marine research technologies to developing countries and a strengthening of their research capacities, as well as open access to data. But it's left to the COP to decide exactly how any monetary benefits will eventually be shared, with options including a system based on specific commercialized products, or more generalized payment systems. - Environmental impact studies - The treaty requires signatories to assess the environmental impacts of planned activities under their control on the high seas before they are authorized in instances when such activities may have more than a minor or transitory effect. It also calls for countries to assess the potential impact on international waters of activities within national jurisdictions that may cause "substantial pollution" or harm the high sea marine environment. Ultimately, states are responsible for giving the green light to any potentially harmful activity -- a role NGOs hoped would go to the COP, to make controversial approvals more difficult. The treaty also requires states to publish updates on an activity's environmental impacts. Approvals can be called into question if unanticipated impacts arise. Though they are not specifically listed in the treaty, activities that could come under regulation include transport and fishing, as well as more controversial subjects such as deep-sea mining or even geo-engineering initiatives to mitigate global warming. abd/np/sms
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Most Russians No Longer See US as Enemy Nation: Poll
The proportion of Russians who view the U.S. as the most hostile country towards Moscow has almost halved over the last year, according to a survey. The poll by the independent Levada Center found 40 percent of respondents agreed that the U.S. was the most hostile nation towards Russia, down from 76 percent in 2024. Aleksei Miniailo, an independent Russian sociologist who founded a separate polling group called Chronicles, told Newsweek Monday that the Levada figures show how fragile the effect of anti-U.S. propaganda in Russia actually is. Newsweek has contacted the Kremlin for comment. The Kremlin and its propagandists have framed Vladimir Putin's full-scale invasion of Ukraine as a proxy war with the West, regularly issuing nuclear threats towards Kyiv's allies. However the Levada center polling shows shows that this antipathy towards the U.S. is not shared by most Russians, which could be a backdrop to a thawing of ties between the countries since President Donald Trump came into office. The Levada Center asked 1,613 Russian adults between May 22 and May 28 about their attitudes to different countries in a poll with a margin of error no greater than 3.4 percent. The share of respondents who named the U.S. as the most hostile country towards Russia was 40 percent-down from 76 percent in 2024. This dip saw the U.S. drop from first to fourth on the list of hostile countries for the first time in two decades and was behind Germany (55 percent), the U.K. (49 percent) and Ukraine (43 percent), against which Moscow has been waging war since 2022. Levada said that attitudes toward the U.S. continue to improve amid the Trump administration's peace-making efforts. It found over one third (37 percent) of respondents had a positive attitude toward the U.S, 21 percentage points since September 2024. Less than half (47 percent) had a negative attitude, down by 25 percentage points in the same time frame. The survey found that the most positive attitude towards the U.S. came from those under 24 years old (49 percent), Muscovites (42 percent), and those who had visited other European countries. The groups with the most negative attitude toward the United States were respondents aged 40-54 (52 percent) and those who have never been to European countries (49 percent). Meanwhile respondents named Belarus (80 percent), China (64 percent), Kazakhstan (36 percent), India (32 percent) and North Korea (30 percent) as Russia's "closest friends and allies." Miniailo, a Russian opposition politician from the research group Chronicles, said the Levada findings show that propaganda against the West had a strong effect but this can fade very quickly when it comes up against pro-U.S. information flows, such as from Hollywood films. He said the key factor is whether Kremlin opinion, stated by propaganda outlets is contested widely, which is why an anti-war position is criminally pursued in Russia. "However, it's hardly possible to criminalize watching Hollywood movies, so the propaganda discourse is challenged by soft power," he added, noting that Chronicles' own polling in 2024 found that Russians wanted to see relations with the West restored, despite Kremlin messaging. Levada Center: "The most hostile countries for Russians are Germany, the U.K., Ukraine, the United States and Poland; For the first time in 20 years of measurements, the U.S. dropped from first place to fourth place on this list." Aleksei Miniailo, Russian opposition politician and sociologist: "This figure shows how fragile the effect of propaganda actually effects decay very fast." Russian media continue to disparage Ukraine's Western allies for their support of Kyiv against Russian aggression. The Levada polling suggests that fewer people are listening to this messaging, as the Trump administration continues to push for negotiations to end the Ukraine war. Related Articles Zelensky Addresses 'Complicated' Aftermath of Oval Office Blowup With TrumpRussian Troops Advance Into Another Ukraine Region: MoscowPutin Warned of Dual Threat to Russian Economy: 'Countdown to a Crisis'Ukraine Destroys 13 Russian Tanks, 100 Armored Vehicles as Locomotive Hit 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
