Key takeaways

• Statistics: 503 cargo-carrying vessels were identified in this study as having been associated to 35 false flags. As of Oct. 1, 73% were still falsely showing as associated with 32 flags.
• Critical role of flag states: Flag states serve as the primary authority for regulating merchant ships, overseeing their commercial, operational, safety and legal activities. The legitimacy of a vessel's flag is crucial for its operational compliance and legal standing in international waters.
• Rise in false flagging practices: The use of false flags has escalated, particularly in response to increasing sanctions on vessels. Tactics include identity manipulation, document falsification and the continued use of identifiers from terminated registries, reflecting a trend of operational subterfuge in the maritime industry.
• Types of vessel identifiers: Vessel identity encompasses three categories: registered identity (official documentation), physical identity (visual characteristics) and digital identity (AIS data). Discrepancies among these identifiers can lead to significant risks in tracking and verifying vessel legitimacy.
• Correlation with sanctions: There is a strong correlation between the number of vessels subject to sanctions and those falsely flagged. As sanctions have intensified, so too has the prevalence of false flagging, indicating a strategic response by vessels to evade regulatory scrutiny.
• Emergence of the shadow fleet: The concept of the "shadow fleet" has evolved, encompassing not just oil tankers but also various types of cargo vessels engaged in deceptive practices to circumvent international regulations. This fleet poses challenges to maritime safety and environmental protection.
• Lack of oversight and compliance: A significant proportion of falsely flagged vessels lack proper insurance and have not been subjected to recent inspections, raising concerns about crew safety and operational standards. The data indicates that 93% of these vessels have no known insurance, highlighting a critical gap in maritime risk management.