The Oman-flagged Suezmax oil tanker Lynx, measuring 274 meters in length, became trapped in icy waters along Russia’s Northern Sea Route on September 6, 2025. The vessel, carrying roughly one million barrels of crude oil from Murmansk, Russia, to China, faced unexpected late-season sea ice that forced it to halt its journey.
Unable to navigate the ice safely, Lynx stopped at 72° northern latitude in the High Arctic. For several days, the ship remained stationary, moving only very slowly while trying to find a route through the ice. To reduce risks, it navigated close to the shoreline, carefully testing possible paths that could allow it to continue.
The tanker does not have an ice-class certification, which is a classification that indicates a ship is specially reinforced to operate safely in Arctic ice conditions. Ice-class ships have stronger hulls, more powerful engines, and design features that allow them to break or navigate through ice without sustaining damage. Without this certification, vessels are more vulnerable to ice-related incidents.
The Lynx also did not have a mandatory Arctic shipping permit. Russian authorities did not include the vessel in their daily Northern Sea Route traffic logs, a practice that has become increasingly common for hiding sanction-busting shipping activities.
America calls on G7 allies to punish Russian oil buyers India and China with tariffs
Risks for Non-Ice-Class Ships on the Northern Sea Route
The Lynx is one of several oil tankers that lack ice-class protection yet are navigating Arctic waters to deliver Russian crude to buyers in China. This highlights a growing challenge: Russia is promoting the Northern Sea Route as a faster alternative to the Suez Canal, but there are not enough ice-class vessels to meet demand. As a result, non-ice-class ships are being pushed into conditions that exceed their capabilities.
Earlier in September, the LNG carrier Arctic Metagaz faced similar delays in the East Siberian Sea. The ship was forced to wait for more than a week due to ice.
Neither Lynx nor Arctic Metagaz had arranged for icebreaker escorts in advance, which is required by Arctic navigation rules. These rules are set by the Northern Sea Route administration and include mandatory permits, pre-planned icebreaker assistance, and guidelines for operating safely in ice conditions. They are intended to prevent accidents, environmental damage, and ensure the safety of crews in the challenging Arctic environment. These vessels eventually relied on nuclear-powered icebreakers operating in the region to continue their journeys.
Venezuela increases reliance on USDT for oil sales as PDVSA seeks alternatives to blocked payments
Another ship, the LNG carrier La Perouse, also without ice-class certification, decided to turn back in waters off Western Siberia and take the longer route around Africa instead. This shows that navigating the Arctic without proper ice protection is extremely risky, even in the late summer or early autumn when ice is expected to be lighter.
Sanctions, Shadow Shipping, and Operational Hazards
The Lynx has been sanctioned by the United States, United Kingdom, the European Union, and other countries. These sanctions are related to the vessel’s violations of the G7 oil price cap and high-risk shipping practices. Despite this, the tanker continues to transport Russian crude, reflecting an increasing use of ships that operate outside established rules.
Using non-ice-class vessels in Arctic conditions presents serious hazards. These ships are not designed for icy waters, which increases the likelihood of accidents, delays, and environmental damage. Operating close to the shoreline or in areas with unexpected ice requires extreme caution, yet sanction-busting ships may take higher risks to avoid detection or meet shipping deadlines.
Russia’s reliance on non-ice-class vessels points to a larger trend in Arctic shipping. With a limited fleet of ice-class ships, authorities are increasingly allowing non-certified vessels to operate, stretching the rules to maintain the flow of crude oil to Asia. This practice emphasizes both the economic pressures of Arctic shipping and the environmental and operational risks involved.