News

The Resolution reaffirms steadfast support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and underlines the need for stronger collective action against hybrid threats, including attacks on undersea infrastructure and disinformation campaigns. It also calls for closer NATO-EU cooperation and a long-term maritime security presence in the Baltic Sea. Commitments to protect critical energy and communication networks, accelerate the green transition, and safeguard the fragile Baltic Sea ecosystem are equally central. The Resolution highlights urgent measures for restoring fish stocks, advancing green shipping corridors, and clearing sea-dumped munitions. Beyond security and ecology, the parliamentarians stress the importance of a sustainable bioeconomy, cultural and educational ties, and youth participation. A two-year Working Group on cyber and information resilience has been established, and the Parliament of Schleswig-Holstein will host the 35th BSPC in Lübeck from 30 August to 1 September 2026. 👉 Read the full Resolution (PDF)

Mariehamn, 26 August 2025 – The 34th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC) concluded today in Mariehamn, Åland Islands, bringing together more than 100 parliamentarians and representatives from across the region under the theme “The Baltic Sea – Our Lifeline: Cooperation, Security and Sustainability.” A highlight of the meeting was the keynote address by Finnish President Alexander Stubb, who placed Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine at the centre of his remarks. In his address, President Stubb described the invasion of Ukraine as “a turning point in world history – a 1918, 1945 or 1989 moment of our generation,” stressing that there can be no return to the old order. “Russia has violated the basic principles of international law, and that must not go without consequence,” he underlined. Stubb welcomed the unprecedented unity among the Baltic Sea states, reinforced by Finland and Sweden’s accession to NATO, and urged joint efforts to defend critical undersea infrastructure against hybrid threats, including Russia’s so-called shadow fleet. Alongside President Stubb, the conference also heard keynote statements from Yulia Navalnaya, widow of the late Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny; Egils Levits, former President of Latvia; and Toomas Hendrik Ilves, former President of Estonia. Their participation underscored the broad engagement of leading voices in Europe with the central questions of security, democracy and cooperation in the Baltic Sea region. Delegates focused on four thematic priorities: youth and intergenerational dialogue, sustainability in fisheries, shipping and climate action, energy resilience and security, and the defence of democracy and stability. The debates highlighted the interdependence of these issues and the importance of joint parliamentary action. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Assembly unanimously adopted the 34th BSPC Resolution, which sets out a shared political agenda for the coming year and reaffirms the commitment of parliaments to strengthen cooperation, sustainability and democratic resilience in the Baltic Sea region. The presidency of the BSPC was formally handed over from the Parliament of Åland to the Schleswig-Holstein Parliament. In her inaugural address, President Kristina Herbst presented the guiding motto of the new Presidency: “Youth.Set.Sail – For a Thriving Baltic Sea Region.” The conference also marked the transition of the Secretary-General’s office: Bodo Bahr concluded his long tenure and was succeeded by Jan Diedrichsen. The BSPC expressed its gratitude to the Parliament of Åland for its warm hospitality. With Schleswig-Holstein now assuming the Presidency, the Conference enters a new phase of reform and renewal, aiming to strengthen cooperation and political dialogue in the Baltic Sea region.

Mariehamn, Åland Islands, 24–26 August 2025 The Baltic Sea – Our Lifeline: Cooperation, Security and Sustain ability The 34 th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC) will take place from 24 to 26 August 2025 in Mariehamn, Åland Islands, bringing together parliamentarians, experts, youth representatives, and international guests from across the Baltic Sea Region to address some of the most pressing challenges and opportunities for regional cooperation. Under the overarching theme “The Baltic Sea – Our Lifeline”, this year’s conference will focus on energy resilience, maritime sustainability, youth engagement, and democratic security. The conference will open on Monday, 25 August, with a welcome speech by Alfons Röblom, President of the BSPC and Member of the Åland Parliament, and a keynote address by H.E. Alexander Stubb, President of the Republic of Finland. Key conference sessions will include: - Intergenerational Dialogue on Baltic Sea Cooperation, featuring contributions from ReGeneration 2030 and the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum (BSPYF); - Shared Stewardship for a Sustainable Baltic Sea, with reports from BSPC rapporteurs and international experts on climate, fisheries and maritime policy; - Securing the Future, a session on energy resilience and infrastructure protection with insights from NATO, Hybrid CoE, OX2, and the Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners; - Safeguarding Democracy and Stability in the Baltic Sea Region, with keynote interventions by Egils Levits, former President of Latvia, and Pekka Haavisto, former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Finland. The conference will culminate in the adoption of the 34 th BSPC Resolution, incorporating key findings and recommendations – including those developed by the BSPC Working Group on Energy Security, Self-Sustainability, Resilience and Connectivity (ESSRC) – and paving the way for coordinated action in the region. 👉 For more information, please click here..

Final Report of the BSPC Working Group on ESSRC published The BSPC is pleased to announce the publication of the Final Report of the Working Group on Energy Security, Self-Sustainability, Resilience and Connectivity (ESSRC) . Following a two-year mandate launched at the 32 nd BSPC in Berlin, the Working Group presents its conclusive set of political recommendations to enhance energy security, regional resilience, and cross-border connectivity in the democratic Baltic Sea region. The report is the result of a thorough and forward-looking process, shaped by six meetings held across the region — in Riga, Helsinki, Greifswald, Bergen, Stockholm, and Tallinn — and informed by the contributions of more than 45 invited experts. In a time of rising geopolitical tensions, the Working Group addressed challenges such as fossil fuel dependency, hybrid threats, critical infrastructure protection, digital connectivity, and sustainable transport. Among the key recommendations are: Accelerating the transition to renewable and climate-neutral energy sources; Advancing hydrogen strategies and regional energy interconnections; Enhancing civil preparedness and digital resilience; Supporting large-scale cross-border infrastructure projects; Promoting regional stockpiling and rapid repair capabilities for critical systems. The Working Group's findings and recommendations will be presented at the 34 th BSPC Annual Conference in Mariehamn and will be reflected in the forthcoming Conference Resolution. The full Final Report , along with the Factsheet featuring an infographic and summary of the Working Group’s activities and conclusions can be downloaded here and on the Working Group’s webpage . We invite all interested parties to review the report and contribute to the ongoing dialogue on energy security and resilience in the Baltic Sea region.

The Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC) is pleased to present the seventh Report on Sustainable Tourism in the Baltic Sea Region, authored by the BSPC Rapporteur on Sustainable Tourism, Birgit Hesse , President of the State Parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Highlights and Focuses The 2024–2025 edition provides a comprehensive update on the latest political, strategic and practical developments in sustainable tourism across the Baltic Sea region. It highlights progress made in cross-border cooperation, innovation and climate-friendly travel – while underlining the challenges posed by climate change, overtourism and social inequality. A strong focus is placed on the Interreg Baltic Sea Region and South Baltic Programmes , which have seen more than 20 innovative projects launched or continued in this period – from the development of green hydrogen infrastructure in aviation (BSR HyAirport) and regenerative food tourism (BASCIL), to initiatives in cycling tourism such as Bike Across the Baltic and Baltic Biking Upgrade . The report also reflects current EU developments, including the European Declaration on Cycling , the strengthening of the Policy Area Tourism under the revised EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region, and the new EU Commissioner’s mandate for Sustainable Transport and Tourism . It examines current scientific research and offers a broad literature review on key issues such as heritage tourism, resource management, climate impacts, and critical reflections on growth models in tourism. Particular attention is given to social inclusion, the perspectives of young people and children , and the need for better indicators to measure progress. Through this work, the BSPC continues to promote a just transition towards a climate-neutral tourism sector , in line with the climate goals enshrined in the Paris Agreement and reaffirmed by the Glasgow Climate Pact. The BSPC expresses its sincere gratitude to Ms Birgit Hesse for her dedicated work and commitment to sustainable development in the region . 📘 You can access the full report here: We encourage all stakeholders to engage with the findings and join the ongoing dialogue on sustainable tourism in the Baltic Sea Region. For more background information on the BSPC’s work on sustainable tourism, visit the Rapporteur on Sustainable Tourism page.

On 17 June 2025, the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC) Standing Committee convened in Mariehamn to prepare the 34 th BSPC. A presentation from the Åland Peace Institute provided deep information about how the islands achieved and maintained their autonomous status, with lessons on how to achieve such stability even in periods of transformation. The same was reflected in the Standing Committee continuing its preparations for the Annual Conference, the end of one working group and the start of another as well as further ties to regions in Poland. About 30 participants, representatives and delegations of the BSPC members from the Åland Islands, the Baltic Assembly, Denmark, Finland, the German Bundestag, Hamburg, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Schleswig-Holstein and Sweden participated in the meeting. Introduction BSPC President Alfons Röblom welcomed the Standing Committee to the Åland parliament. Only a week after celebrating the self-governing region’s Autonomy Day, he underlined that this autonomy had always been about creating and safeguarding a framework for peace, identity, dialogue, and cooperation. This spirit reflected the very foundation of the BSPC’s values. Presentation by Ms Susann Simolin, Director of the Åland Peace Institute Director Simolin acknowledged that she had only assumed her position the previous year but had been working at the Institute for a long time before. During the current period of uncertainty, she considered it fruitful to consider long-standing institutions born in their own phase of transition. Speaking about Åland and its history thus would allow broader reflections to challenges prevalent worldwide in the present day. She noted that the early 1990s had been a time of transformation after the end of the Cold War, with the Baltic Sea region re-imagining itself as a space of cooperation. One element of that was the birth of the BSPC, as was the Åland Peace Institute a year later, in 1992. Rooted in the Nordic peace movement of the 1980s, the Institute had focused on research into democratisation, minorities issues, and territorial autonomy as well as practical conflict management, all of that based on the Åland situation. Small in geography and population, places like Åland could still be influential. Today, it was demilitarised, neutral, autonomous, and had special protections for the Swedish language and culture. This development had begun 169 years earlier, accommodating the needs of many different actors. Throughout much geopolitical change, Åland’s condition had remained stable, making it an example of how complex situations could be stabilised through legal innovation. Ms Simolin presented a timeline of the region’s history, first as part of Sweden, then held by Russia along with Sweden and Finland. After the Crimean war ended in 1856, Åland became demilitarised. The revolution in Russia and Finland’s independence in 1917 brought about a popular movement to shift Åland over to Sweden. The tense issue had been brought to the League of Nations which decided in 1921 on a new demilitarisation treaty, guarantees for the Swedish culture and language as well as neutrality. Further treaties were signed, cementing the region’s conditions, among them with the EU and NATO. Ms Simolin depicted the three core components of the Åland solution, noting that each dispute had its own list of problems. One was the self-determination movement of the islands, resolved through power-sharing within Finland and democratic participation. Security had been addressed through demilitarisation and neutralisation. Minority protection provisions tackled the issues of identity and local culture, such as Swedish being the school language. Broadening the view to the international arena, the status of minorities was relevant across the globe. While hardly inevitable, there were often tensions alongside calls for self-determination or autonomy. Out of 50 ongoing conflicts around the world, nearly half of them were at least partially caused by such territorial issues. Power sharing was often part of the resolution, whether through political resolution or geographical decisions. Ms Simolin cited a study finding 236 territorial autonomy cases in 66 different peace processes from 1990 – 2019. The case of Åland had at least been considered in conflicts such as Aceh in Indonesia, the Falkland Islands, Okinawa in Japan, Tamil Eelam in Sri Lanka, averaging out to 10 contacts per year. She understood territorial autonomy to deal with a specific geographic area within a state, transferring political powers to local populations, and to be characterised by asymmetry. As for Finland, Åland’s autonomy was stipulated in the constitution through the Autonomy Act which regulated the powers of the islands as well as those of the Finnish state in the territory. Ms Simolin noted that this act could only be changed jointly by the Åland and Finnish parliament. To her understanding, the combination of demilitarisation, autonomy, and minority protection devices was unique to Åland while further characteristics could also be found in other arrangements, such as international guarantees, regional “citizenship”, and a long evolving process. She described demilitarisation as a process of reducing weapons. In the case of Åland, there was a legal obligation not to station military troops or facilities there. There were ten similar arrangements in Europe. Neutralisation was an even more complicated issue, which generally meant that parties in conflict were legally prevented from undertaking military activities within the territory. Various similar terms were used here. Ms Simolin noted that, due to customary law, even parties not bound by any of the various treaties were obligated to respect both the neutralisation and demilitarisation. She noted that the reason for demilitarisation was to prevent a given physical area from becoming either the source or the site of armed conflict. In summary, she underlined that innovations and frameworks born out of turbulent times could be long-lasting, adjusted and reshaped over time, not least in further transitional periods. Complex challenges required multi-dimensional solutions. Mr Enn Eesmaa wondered if the example of Åland could also be applied to other regions, such as Georgia, Moldova or even Ukraine. Director Simolin found any questions about the future difficult but noted connections to Moldova, in particular with regard to the Gagauz population in that state and implementing institutional relief. Here, it was important to remember that the intention behind institutions mattered rather than the institutions themselves. Autonomy required a delicate balance, giving satisfying independence while maintaining the state’s overall cohesion. Catalonia was an example of an autonomous region with a strong independence claim. There had also been the hope of the EU interposing a new layer, raising the profile of regions at the expense of states. Mr Himanshu Gulati commented on the fast-changing geopolitics of the present day. He asked if any of these had impacted the sentiments of the Åland people. Ms Simolin replied that the islands had been very much affected, pointing to daily demonstrations in front of the Russian consulate. Åland these days was embedded in the ongoing events of Europe, such as the pandemic or the migration discussion. In particular, the issues of demilitarisation and neutralisation had become more prevalent in political discussions. Mr Henrik Møller referred to the Danish ongoing discussion regarding the Faroe Islands and Greenland as autonomous regions and their desire for independence. These were very different situations to what suited the people of Åland. Ms Simolin commented that the autonomy arrangement in Åland had only been fully accepted in the 1950s, after some 30 years. Mr Staffan Eklöf pointed out that Sweden was re-establishing garrisons on Gotland. As a result, Russia was claiming that Sweden was no longer respecting a demilitarisation zone on Gotland, comparing it to Åland. He wondered if the speaker could clarify the matter. Ms Simolin conceded that she was no expert on Gotland and could not determine what status applied there. She further commented that even international law could be used to make one or the other argument. Often, disinformation contained a small kernel of truth that was used for the misleading argument. Prof Jānis Vucāns wondered if discussions about how to deal with certain territories after a war could begin while the conflict was still ongoing. Regarding Finland, he asked about the thinking of autonomous regions for the Sami people. Director Simolin acknowledged that discussions did often crop up about the aftermath of a war and how to manage that, both among politicians and researchers in their distinct approaches. All wars came to an end eventually, and some kind of plan or a prepared position was needed. Moving on to the Sami people, she noted that their historical treatment had not been as consistent as that of Åland but had been improving. Furthermore, there were different perspectives on the issue among the Finnish population. Mr Girts Kristovski saw more of a militarisation process in the present day at work. Ms Simolin replied that the Peace Institute was not an association for peace but rather a research institution. Åland was a demilitarised region within a militarising environment. This raised research questions of e.g., how Finland’s NATO membership would affect that demilitarisation. Understanding the island’s status was her task rather than promoting it. Mr Bodo Bahr asked how interparliamentary bodies like the BSPC could aid autonomous regions. Referring to the various treaties governing and securing Åland’s status, he wondered how much these mattered when aggressor countries ignored laws. Director Simolin assigned an important role to parliamentary diplomacy as parliamentarians were free to go beyond the state’s agenda and develop other contacts. The BSPC was part of this multi-level governance structure, in her view. Moving to the second question, she believed that small states benefitted from rules and regulations, making the world a bit more predictable and allowing these some say. Even though international law might be flawed, she considered it vital to keep that web as intact as possible. She went on to note that the perception of security mattered as well; for the people of Åland, demilitarisation was a part of their customary, perceived safety. Moreover, she said the world did not become safer the more weapons there were. However, specific situations demanded difficult decisions how to move in the continuum between demilitarisation and militarisation. It was necessary to work at all levels to find solutions. Follow-up to the 33 rd BSPC President Röblom noted that statements on implementing the adopted resolution had arrived from the governments of Åland, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hamburg, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Norway, Poland, Schleswig-Holstein, and Sweden. This provided a detailed and far-reaching compendium of governmental actions and developments in the Baltic Sea Region, in other words a unique resource for parliamentary deliberation, scientific research, and cross-border coordination among our governments. The statements of the governments had been made available to the public. Furthermore, he pointed out that three parliaments had held plenary debates on the resolution. He hoped that more parliaments would pick up on this. Working Group on Energy Security, Self-sustainability, Resilience, and Connectivity (ESSRC) The President noted that comprehensive reports on the most recent meetings of the Working Group had been published on the BSPC website. The survey conducted by the Group had received responses from Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Poland, Schleswig-Holstein, and Sweden. The Åland Islands and Hamburg did not participate, as the issues raised fell primarily outside their constitutional remit. A summary of key findings and policy considerations will be included in the final report. Moreover, a Fact Sheet summarising the group’s achievements would also be published. The recommendations had already been integrated into the 2025 BSPC Resolution. The complete final report would be published on the BSPC website over the summer. Prof Jānis Vucāns praised the working group’s efforts to investigate issues of sustainability and cooperation in energy networks in many BSPC member countries. What was most important, he stressed, was to take lessons from the gathered information. Accordingly, he urged his colleagues to study these materials and provide feedback to the working group chair. New BSPC Working Group after the 34 th Annual Conference President Röblom explained that a proposal from the Presidium of the Baltic Assembly to establish a new BSPC Working Group on Strengthening Cyber and Information Resilience had been unanimously decided to be forwarded to the Annual Conference for formal consideration. Mr Henrik Møller reiterated his approval of the proposal. Yet he found the threat of democracy, not least through cyber approaches, to be a topic that he hoped could be integrated into the new working group. Prof Jānis Vucāns believed that strengthening cyber and information resilience, as per the title, already included the defence of democracy. It might be suitable, though, to adjust the title. President Röblom agreed that such a change would be a good idea, given how democracy was under threat in all of their regions. Mr Bodo Bahr said that this change could be implemented via the draft resolution. That found the agreement of the Standing Committee. Rapporteurs Mr Röblom stated that the BSPC Rapporteur on Integrated Maritime Policy, Mr Jörgen Pettersson , had filed his annual report for the conference, entitled “Shipping in the Baltic Sea: Where We Stand and What Comes Next.” It would be published on the BSPC website shortly. The meeting was informed that further reports were considered in the preparation of the conference. Finances The president confirmed that all contributions to the Joint Financial Mechanism for 2025 had been received. BSPC Presidencies after 2026/Rotation Principle After the proposal for a rotation principle for the BSPC presidencies had been endorsed by all delegations, the presidencies and executive committees of both the Parliament of Iceland and the Parliament of the Free Hanseatic City of Bremen had officially confirmed their readiness to assume the BSPC presidency as per the envisaged rotation. The 34 th BSPC and the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum (BSPYF) in Mariehamn, 24–26 August 2025 The Standing Committee reviewed the latest developments in the preparation of the upcoming 34 th BSPC Annual Conference and the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum (BSPYF) , to be held in Mariehamn from 24 to 26 August 2025 . President Röblom reported that the invitations had already been sent out and the draft programme reflected the outcome of the Secretariat meeting held in April. The first conference session would highlight Intergenerational Dialogue , designed as the culmination of the BSPYF. Fifty young participants from across the Baltic Sea Region will attend the entire conference and present their own recommendations in a dedicated session. The Committee exchanged views on various aspects of the conference preparation. Suggestions were made to ensure flexibility in the agenda and to accommodate high-level contributions. The Standing Committee was also briefed on the status of the draft Resolution , which continues to evolve based on ongoing BSPC debates. Topics under consideration include geopolitical challenges, energy security, maritime demilitarisation and the protection of critical infrastructure. Observer Status of the West Pomeranian, Warmia-Masurian, and Pomeranian Regional Parliaments The president noted that three regional parliaments in Poland had applied for observer status within the BSPC: West Pomerania, Warmia and Mazury as well as Pomerania. All three met the formal criteria for observer status. The Standing Committee expressively welcome and unanimously accepted the applications. Mr Röblom noted that the three parliaments would already be invited to attend the upcoming conference. Events, Reports, and Invitations The meeting also considered the outcome of conferences with participation of BSPC members particularly the conference o n “Borders of Diplomacy and Diplomacy Beyond Borders” in Riga. Prof Jānis Vucāns pointed out that Ithe conference had successfully explored how far diplomatic solutions could be taken and when other means had to be employed. Indeed, the borders of diplomacy were much wider than e.g., 30 years earlier, and the tools now available had to be exploited much better. President Röblom concurred, adding that parliamentarians were freer in representing the opinions of the people than government officials. Address by the Speaker of the Lagting In his address to the Standing Committee, the Speaker of the Åland Lagting, Mr Jörgen Pettersson, emphasised that it was with great joy and appreciation that Åland welcomed so many parliamentary friends back to the islands. He underlined that true cooperation was always built over time, through trust and repeated dialogue, and that the BSPC itself embodied this spirit. He stated that only among genuine friends could difficult discussions take place in a constructive atmosphere, even when views diverged – and that this ability to “agree to disagree” was, in fact, the true definition of friendship and diplomacy. Mr Pettersson reflected that while in calm waters no one noticed the lifeboats, in turbulent times their presence became vital. He described the BSPC as such a lifeboat: reliable, prepared, and called upon not in triumph but in turmoil. He stressed that, especially in today’s unsettled geopolitical climate, the role of the BSPC was more essential than ever. He further reminded the Standing Committee that the BSPC had been founded in the aftermath of the Cold War, a moment filled both with hope and uncertainty. Referring to Finland’s then-Speaker Kalevi Sorsa, who had played a key role in its establishment, he argued that the duty now lay with current generations to continue in the same spirit of openness and dialogue. Turning to Åland, Mr Pettersson underlined that the islands knew what neutrality meant and what it required to maintain peace. For over a century, Åland had been a symbol of demilitarisation and peaceful conflict resolution. This, he said, made Åland a particularly fitting place to reaffirm the Baltic Sea region’s commitment to dialogue, even when discussions were challenging. Finally, the Speaker expressed his heartfelt thanks and profound appreciation towards outgoing BSPC Secretary General Bodo Bahr for his many years of dedicated service. He highlighted that Mr Bahr had consistently reminded the Conference that dialogue must never fall silent, and that real progress often began with the courage to open closed doors. According to Mr Pettersson, Mr Bahr had been the one to open many of these doors over the years, demonstrating that inter-parliamentary cooperation depended not only on structures but also on individuals willing to take initiative. He stressed that Mr Bahr’s insistence on in-person meetings, regardless of the topic, had been instrumental in creating mutual trust, and he thanked him warmly on behalf of the entire Åland Parliament for these achievements. At the same time, the Speaker noted with confidence that the appointment of Mr Jan Diedrichsen as the new Secretary General would ensure continuity and renewal in equal measure. He said that the strong foundation laid by Mr Bahr would provide a firm basis for Mr Diedrichsen to build upon, and he assured him of the Lagting’s full support. In conclusion, Mr Pettersson encouraged all members of the Standing Committee to continue on this path of friendship, dialogue and commitment, adding that although the road ahead might not always be smooth, the shared values of peace and cooperation would guide the way forward. Visit to the Lagting and Museums In addition to the formal meeting, the Standing Committee members also visited a plenary session of the Åland Lagting, gaining first-hand impressions of parliamentary life on the islands. During a subsequent visit to the Åland Cultural History Museum and the Åland Art Museum, the participants received a profound insight into the history, heritage, and identity of the Åland Islands.

Compilation of Statements Available Here: The Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC) – gathered in Helsingør – unanimously passed on 27 August 2024 the following 33 rd BSPC resolution: In keeping with a long-standing tradition, national and regional governments across the Baltic Sea Region have submitted their official responses to the 33 rd BSPC Resolution , adopted unanimously at the 33 rd Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference in Helsingør on 27 August 2024 . Once again, the Standing Committee expresses its sincere appreciation for the governments’ commitment to reviewing and supporting the BSPC’s calls for action. Their contributions reflect a broad spectrum of initiatives, policies, and measures that align with the shared goals of the 33 rd Resolution – which focused on advancing democratic resilience, maritime security, critical infrastructure protection, climate neutrality, and sustainable development in the region. The compilation of statements offers valuable insight into ongoing governmental efforts, providing a unique overview of regional and national activities in response to the parliamentary recommendations. These statements serve not only as a reference for monitoring progress but also as a catalyst for further parliamentary engagement and intergovernmental cooperation. The publication, now available for download, encompasses contributions from: Åland, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hamburg, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Norway, Poland, Schleswig-Holstein, and Sweden. 📌 For reference: Materials and Outcomes of the 33 rd BSPC Conference – Helsingør 2024

As maritime trade, climate pressures, and geopolitical challenges converge, the Baltic Sea region faces a critical turning point. In his new report “Shipping in the Baltic Sea: Where We Stand and What Comes Next” , BSPC Rapporteur on Integrated Maritime Policy and President of Ålands Lagting, Jörgen Pettersson , outlines the strategic choices ahead for the region’s policymakers. Presented in preparation of the 34 th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference in Mariehamn on 24-26 August, the 2025 report provides a compelling, data-driven overview of the major transformations under way — from emerging energy demands and shadow fleet operations to digital port innovation, green shipping corridors, and the integration of carbon capture solutions. Structured into six thematic chapters and grounded in both local realities and global forecasts, the report highlights how the Baltic Sea can remain a model of resilience, sustainability, and innovation — but only if current momentum is sustained. Five clear and practical recommendations urge BSPC members to: Put security first, Make sustainability the standard, Think in systems, not silos, Accelerate the modal shift, and Champion digital innovation. With climate goals tightening and maritime infrastructure under growing pressure, the report calls on all actors to align national and regional strategies — to future-proof shipping, ensure energy resilience, and reinforce the Baltic Sea as a zone of cooperation, not confrontation. Access the Full Report: We invite policymakers, maritime industry stakeholders, environmental organisations, and the public to download and explore the complete “Maritime Rapporteur’s Report” to consider the strategic measures and collaborative efforts essential for the ongoing transformation of the Baltic Sea maritime sector. The Report can be downloaded here and on the Rapporteur’s webpage . Stay tuned to our website and follow our exclusive content related to various BSR-relevant policy fields.

BSPC Working Group addresses naval defence, cyber deterrence and the potential of AI for securing vital maritime assets The sixth and final meeting of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC) Working Group on Energy Security, Self-sustainability, Resilience, and Connectivity (WG ESSRC) convened in Tallinn, Estonia, from 18-20 May 2025, drawing more than 30 participants from across the Baltic Sea region. Delegates from the Åland Islands, the Baltic Assembly, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hamburg, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Norway, Poland, Sweden, and Schleswig-Holstein joined officials and experts to explore the possibilities for addressing digital vulnerabilities and strengthening energy resilience in the region. Chair of the WG ESSRC, Mr Andris Kulbergs , expressed his sincere gratitude to all delegations, experts and the secretariat for their continued contributions to the WG. Reflecting on the substantial progress made since the Bergen meeting in March 2025, he underscored the present risks posed by cyber threats, stressing the need for swift, coordinated governmental responses. Emphasising the unity within the WG, he highlighted how this format has proven the ability of Baltic Sea countries to align on shared goals, exchange expertise and resources, as well as act collectively. Spotlight on Maritime Security, Cyber Resilience and Digital Innovations The participants engaged in a series of high-level site visits, including the e-Estonia Briefing Centre, Estonian Navy, CR14 and International Centre for Defence and Security (ICDS) : e-Estonia Briefing Centre : As a cornerstone of the digital leadership of Estonia, the e-Estonia Briefing Centre offers an immersive overview of how the country has become one of the most advanced digital societies in the world. Established in 2009 as an NGO, it is today part of Enterprise Estonia and plays an integral role in promoting the know-how and expertise in digital services. Participants were introduced to the digital transformation journey of Estonia by Digital Transformation Adviser Ms Johanna-Kadri Kuusk , who highlighted how digital identity, e-governance and AI-driven solutions are enhancing national resilience, public services and infrastructure management. Estonia was the first country to introduce i-voting in 2005, which now accounts for more than half of all votes cast, offering a secure, cost-effective and flexible voting method. The visit demonstrated that digital success is built on a citizen-centric approach, strong public-private and academic partnerships and digital-minded leadership. Estonian Navy : The Estonian Navy protects the territorial waters of Estonia and, in case of crisis, defends harbour areas, sea lines of communication and by-sea approaches to the coastline. Ships of the Estonian Navy regularly participate in major international exercises and operations that are carried out in the Baltic and the North Sea. Hosted at the Miinisadam naval base, the visit offered a comprehensive overview of the naval operations and defence responsibilities of Estonia. Deputy Commander Mr Johan-Elias Seljamaa emphasised that maritime surveillance is complicated by legal ambiguities, cross-border data sharing limitations and hybrid threats merging civilian and military interests. Improved coordination and clearer frameworks for information exchange are urgently needed, especially as the region continues to face evolving security threats. CR14 : Foundation CR14, established by the Ministry of Defence of Estonia in 2021, is based on more than 10 years of military-grade cyber range experience. It offers cyber ranges, cyber exercise automation, a digital library and cybersecurity simulation tools, as well as solutions that allow for the simple and effective planning and implementation of cyber defence exercises and activities. More than 3500 cyber experts are trained within a year. Head of International Relations of the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence (CCDCOE) Ms Angelica Tikk presented the Centre’s mission to support NATO and its member nations with interdisciplinary expertise in cyber defence, spanning technology, strategy, operations and law. Established in 2008 following the 2007 cyberattacks on Estonia, the CCDCOE has since become a global leader in cyber resilience. Its flagship exercise, Locked Shields, is the world’s largest live-fire cyber defence drill. The work of the Centre highlights the importance of partnerships, national capability-building, and ensuring everyday cyber hygiene practices, such as two-factor authentication, as a first line of defence. Head of Marketing at CR14 Mr Martin Hanson briefed the participants about the work of CR14 and offered the participants the possibility to see the NATO Cyber Range – a platform and data centre enabling NATO to conduct its largest cyber defence exercises and training, such as the Cyber Coalition and the Coalition Warrior Interoperability exercise (CWIX). International Centre for Defence and Security (ICDS) : ICDS is the leading think-tank in Estonia, specialising in foreign policy, security and defence issues. Founded in 2006, it aims to be the regional knowledge hub of first choice for the security and defence communities of Estonia, its allies and partners. The ICDS team of experts – Head of Studies Mr Tomas Jermalavičius , Head of Defence Policy & Strategy Programme Mr Tony Lawrence and Research Fellow Mr Henrik Praks – shared their analysis on the protection of critical maritime infrastructure, regional naval cooperation and responses to hybrid attacks. Drawing on recent research, they addressed the evolving security environment in Europe, offering policy-oriented solutions for resilience and deterrence in the Baltic Sea region. The presentations highlighted the need for forward-looking cooperation to counter complex threats. Energy Security, Maritime Resilience and Regional Preparedness in the Baltic Sea Security and international relations expert Mr Raivo Vare outlined the growing vulnerabilities of Russia, highlighting its reliance on manipulated economic data, structural dependence on raw material exports and limited technological development. Additionally, Russia faces deepening demographic challenges, such as workforce shortages and a brain drain of educated professionals, all of which hinder its long-term economic stability and capacity for modernisation. Despite sanctions, Russia continues to fund its war effort through commodity exports, using mechanisms like the shadow fleet to bypass restrictions, posing both geopolitical and environmental risks. Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Defence of Estonia and former Ambassador to Ukraine Mr Kaimo Kuusk shared first-hand insights on the energy resilience of Ukraine during wartime. Drawing from his experience in Kyiv, he described how Russia deliberately targeted critical energy infrastructure while avoiding nuclear plants. He emphasised the importance of resilience and rapid repair capacity, noting that Ukraine’s ability to quickly restore power was vital to maintaining basic services. Critical infrastructure must be designed with redundancy in mind and protected through both physical defences and cyber preparedness. His core lesson was that, to ensure the survival of energy systems, countries must not only defend against attacks but also be ready to rebuild and adapt quickly under pressure. Director General of the Legal Department at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Estonia Ms Kristi Land emphasised the critical importance of protecting underwater maritime infrastructure within the framework of international maritime law, particularly UNCLOS, which serves as the foundational legal instrument for the seas. While recent incidents have sparked calls to amend UNCLOS, she noted that reopening or amending this nearly universal treaty is impractical due to the complexity and length of negotiations involved. Instead, she advocates for focusing on clearer interpretations and harmonised implementation of existing UNCLOS provisions, alongside improving national laws to criminalise damage to underwater infrastructure, as well as developing non-binding regional codes of practice. Chairman of the Board at Eesti Energia Mr Andrus Durejko reflected on the lessons learned from the recent desynchronization of the Baltic States from the BRELL energy system , emphasising the importance of regional cooperation and forward-thinking. He stressed that small nations cannot afford to act in isolation – coordinated planning, unified decision-making and fair cost-sharing principles are essential. Highlighting Eesti Energia’s role as a vertically integrated energy provider with a focus on cleaner production, he underlined the need to strengthen collective resilience in the evolving regional energy landscape. Lastly, Senior Researcher at Tallinn University of Technology Dr Tarmo Korõtko explored the transformative role of digitalisation and AI in enhancing energy security . As energy systems become increasingly complex due to rising global demand and the integration of variable renewables, traditional engineering methods are no longer sufficient. AI offers powerful tools for managing this complexity by processing multidimensional data to improve stability, reliability and efficiency. However, challenges remain, including data integration, system transparency and scalability. Thus, AI should not be seen as a solution in itself, but as a vital enabler for achieving energy resilience, self-sustainability and improved system performance. Looking Ahead Chairman Mr Andris Kulbergs closed the meeting by emphasising the need for a detailed, regional strategy that strengthens the resilience of energy supply, communications and transport networks, including a specific action plan to prevent threats, and it should be coordinated with national initiatives and all EU institutions, NATO legal acts related to the protection of critical infrastructure. It was agreed that the WG would conclude its work during the summer and present the final results at the 34 th BSPC in Mariehamn in August.

BSPC Working Group addresses emerging geopolitical challenges, energy security risks, and the future of interconnected transport systems in Stockholm The fifth meeting of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC) Working Group on Energy Security, Self-sustainability, Resilience, and Connectivity (WG ESSRC) convened in Stockholm, Sweden, from 16-18 March 2025, drawing 30 participants from across the Baltic Sea region. Delegates from the Åland Islands, the Baltic Assembly, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hamburg, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Norway, Poland, Sweden, and Schleswig-Holstein joined officials and experts in addressing the possibilities for developing sustainable and resilient land and maritime transport solutions. The working group also further reinforced the importance of safeguarding critical infrastructure and ensuring maritime security amid growing geopolitical uncertainties. Chair of the WG ESSRC, Mr Andris Kulbergs , pointed out that since the last meeting of the WG in Bergen in November 2024, significant progress has been made in various areas of discussion. However, the geopolitical situation has changed fundamentally and is still changing daily. Therefore, the WG ESSRC is required to coordinate and communicate on the issues to be able to come up with the necessary action, as strengthening cooperation across the Baltic Sea region is more important than ever, and this commitment will be crucial for shaping joint policies moving forward. He also emphasised that the Baltic Sea countries should be the pillars of democracy and legality and continue to fight for the rule of law and freedom of speech. Spotlight on Transport and Resilience The participants engaged in a series of site visits, including the KTH Royal Institute of Technology , Candela , and the Swedish Coast Guard : KTH Royal Institute of Technolog y : Founded in 1827, KTH has grown to become a leading technical university worldwide. As the largest institution in Sweden for technical education and research, it brings together students, researchers, and educators worldwide. Its activities are grounded in a strong tradition of advancing science and innovation, focusing on contributing to sustainable societal development. KTH conducts basic and applied research, currently ranking 73 rd among 1,500 universities worldwide in the QS World University Rankings. Their research structures enable interdisciplinary and external collaborations that contribute to new knowledge, technologies, products, and services. Thus, during the visit, leading researchers shared insights on some of the recent research topics, such as sustainable transport development, power grid evolution, and industrial expansion in the Baltic Sea region. A demonstration at the Integrated Transport Research Lab (ITRL) showcased cutting-edge research in transport automation and electrification. The visit emphasised the role of technological innovation in shaping the future of mobility while ensuring energy efficiency and environmental sustainability. Candela : Candela was founded in 2014 by Gustav Hasselskog, who was determined to find ways to make electric boats with both range and speed that would ensure a better performance than the fossil fuel competitors. At the end of 2016, a full-scale prototype was launched, reaching the target of more than 50 nautical miles per charge at a speed of 22 knots. Serial production of the world’s first electric hydrofoil boat started in 2019, but in 2020, Candela C-7 became the best-selling electric boat in Europe. During the visit to Candela headquarters, participants had the opportunity to practically experience the potential of electric hydrofoil boats to revolutionise maritime transport. The innovative Candela P-12 is the world’s first high-speed and long-range electric shuttle ship. Cruising at 20+ knots on computer-controlled hydrofoils, it consumes 80% less energy than conventional ships. These vessels offer an energy-efficient alternative to traditional ferries and could play a key role in reducing emissions in the Baltic Sea region. Swedish Coast Guard : The Swedish Coast Guard surveils, rescues, and provides assistance at sea 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, along the entire Swedish coastline. It is a civilian government agency under the authority of the Ministry of Defence of Sweden. The Coast Guard also coordinates civilian needs for maritime surveillance, disseminates maritime information, and carries out the day-to-day maritime surveillance for many government agencies. The visit to the Swedish Coast Guard station in Djurö further reinforced the importance of safeguarding critical infrastructure and ensuring maritime security in the face of growing geopolitical uncertainties. Security in the Baltic Sea, energy security, and civil preparedness Professor at the Swedish Defence University and Maritime Systems Researcher at the Royal Institute of Technology, KTH, Mr Hans Liwång, informed that the underwater domain of the Baltic Sea presents unique and complex challenges. Thus, it requires specialised knowledge. Unlike incidents on land, where causes are quickly identified, maritime incidents can remain uncertain for long periods, leading to unnecessary speculation. A more structured approach to incident reporting and learning is needed to improve resilience. He also emphasised that increasing diversity in infrastructure, such as multiple cables with different technologies and operators, would enhance resilience against coordinated attacks. Lastly, maritime security should be approached from an international perspective rather than a purely national one. Deputy Head of Security, Svenska kraftnät, Mr Fredrik Gustavsson, provided an overview of the Svenska kraftnät, which is the authority responsible for ensuring that Sweden’s transmission system for electricity is safe, environmentally sound and cost-effective. They also conduct and support research projects to manage critical challenges to the national electricity grid and possible risks in the power system. He also informed about the threats that the electricity sector is facing, including cyberattacks, physical damage and sabotage, unreliable supply chains, and different kinds of hybrid activities. To deal with these challenges, the Svenska kraftnät is taking different measures to maintain the electricity supply in all social conditions, such as remedial measures, preparedness, security, and dialogue with stakeholders. Analyst at the Swedish Energy Agency, Ms Rebecka Bergholtz, informed about the Swedish Energy Agency, which is the national authority for energy policy issues charged with promoting sustainable and resilient energy use and supply in Sweden. It supports research, innovation, policies, and actions to enable the energy transition while increasing the overall resilience of the energy system. She also emphasised that efforts are being made to ensure energy resilience in times of conflict by analysing supply and demand gaps and ensuring robust energy availability for critical sectors. Cooperation of the Baltic Sea states in international organisations The members of the WG ESSRC also had been updated about the current activities of the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS) and learned about the work of the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions of Europe (CPMR) Baltic Sea Commission. Director General of the CBSS, Mr Gustav Lindström, informed that the CBSS was established in 1992 as an inter-governmental political forum for cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region. It currently consists of 11 members: the 10 Member States of Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland and Sweden, plus the European Union. Today, the CBSS serves as a primary platform for political dialogue, encompassing international cooperation in areas agreed on by its members. He highlighted that the CBSS focuses on its current three long-term priorities – Regional Identity, Safe & Secure Region, and Sustainable & Prosperous Region. On 13 January 2025, Toomas Hendrik Ilves and Gabrielius Landsbergis were appointed as the high-level rapporteurs of the CBSS following their nomination by the Estonian Presidency. They are now working on a report on the future of the CBSS, which will be launched in May 2025. President of CPMR Baltic Sea Commission, Mr Tomas Mörtsell, informed that the CPMR Baltic Sea Commission is an international, independent organisation of Regional Authorities across the Baltic Sea Region. Established in 1996, it serves as a forum for policy-oriented cooperation and lobbying amongst Regional Authorities. The organisation supports the main goals of the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and works for a stronger involvement of regional stakeholders in the governance and implementation of the EU Strategy of the Baltic Sea Region. Looking Ahead Chairman Mr Andris Kulbergs closed the meeting by emphasising the urgency of cooperation across the Baltic Sea region to ensure preparedness for any future risks. It was agreed that the WG will reconvene in Tallinn in May 2025 for its sixth and final meeting, focusing on maritime cybersecurity and accelerating the transition to a single digital market resilient to internal and external threats.

The BSPC Standing Committee gathered in the European Parliament in Brussels to look into the European Commission’s recent achievements in the bioeconomy, fishery and oceans, shipping and response, and the ongoing threat of hybrid and cyber-attacks. Representatives of the European Parliament, particularly the Vice-Presidents of the European Parliament, Ms Christel Schaldemose and Mr Roberts Zīle , former EU Commissioner MEP Virginijus Sinkevičius and MEP Rasa Juknevičienė,the European Commission, namely EU Commissioner Mr Costas Kadis, representatives of the GD Environment, HELCOM, the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats and NATO discussed the current challenges in Europe, former and current main activities of the EU Commission regarding the Ocean Policy, shipping and response as well as benefits of the bioeconomy for the Baltic Sea Region. Further preparations were made for the annual conference in Mariehamn on 24-26 August. More than 40 participants, representatives and delegations of the European Parliament, the European Commission, the Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission (HELCOM) and the BSPC members from the Åland Islands, the Baltic Assembly, the European Parliament, Denmark, Estonia, the German Bundestag, Finland, Hamburg, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the Nordic Council, Norway, Poland, Schleswig-Holstein and Sweden participated in the meeting. Introduction BSPC President Alfons Röblom welcomed the Standing Committee to the traditional winter meeting at the European Parliament in Brussels. Welcome Word by Mr Roberts Zīle , the Vice-President of the European Parliament, responsible for the Baltic/Nordic/Arctic countries, including the Conference of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region, the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference, the Barents Parliamentary Conference, the Northern Dimension Parliamentary Forum, the Nordic Council and the West Nordic Council Current Challenges in Europe and the Future of Europe Mr Zīle stressed that, amidst all the changes, security remained a top priority on which decisive action was required for the survival of the region as a democratic and prosperous area. He acknowledged the threat of the Russian shadow fleet and other vessels in the Baltic Sea. In light of the recent US-Russian agreement to talk about Ukraine without European involvement, Mr Zīle said that strong action was needed. He then pointed to the upcoming presentations which would highlight further important areas. President Röblom noted that his homeland of Åland was called the “Islands of Peace”, underlining that the world needed more examples of peace. Presentations Presentation on Recent accomplishments and future plans in the Baltic Sea area by Former Commissioner, MEP Virginijus Sinkevičius, European Parliament Mr Virginijus Sinkevičius saw the importance of the Baltic Sea on the rise in recent years, propelled not least by challenges requiring pan-European solutions, such as Brexit and the pandemic. He regretted the poor condition of the Baltic Sea, lauding the work of HELCOM in improving this. The greatest achievement of the first von der Leyen Commission had been overhauling the energy situation, pointing to the Baltic States integrating into the European power grid, the European Wind Power Charter, and Greece joining the Three Seas Initiative. In environmental concerns, he stressed the Baltic Initiative bringing together all the environment and agriculture ministers from the Baltic Sea states. But clearing the Baltic Sea of the dumped munitions posing a dire threat was also high on the agenda. With the geopolitical situation changing every day, he said that much of what they would hear at this meeting would have seemed science fiction five years ago but was the reality they had to cope with. The Baltic Sea would be the front to withstand imperial ambitions and defend the international rules of law established after World War II. Security was a paramount concern. Already in 2022, the EU had adopted a coordinated approach to strengthen the resilience of critical infrastructure, driven by the sabotage on the Nord Stream pipeline. He underlined that security also included the fragile environment of the Baltic Sea, which could affect nations dependent on the sea. In 2025, NATO would launch the Baltic Sentry Initiative to enhance its military presence. The various, increasing acts of sabotage were usually carried out by the Russian shadow fleet. In addition, the fleet was circumventing sanctions and in such poor conditions as to pose a constant ecological threat. Monitoring was therefore vital. Mr Sinkevičius considered the Baltic Sea effectively a second theatre of the Russian war against the West. Meetings like this of the BSPC Standing Committee were vital to better understand the situation and align positions—much like the impromptu meeting of European heads of state in Paris on that same day. With more and more doubt cast on the transatlantic relationship, emboldening Russia, the Baltic Sea region would likely remain the front between imperialism and the free democratic world. Mr Sinkevičius summarised that the security situation had heightened attention paid to the region, and the countries around the Baltic Sea had to understand they were on the front line and had to ensure their future was solely in their own hands, cooperating in economy, energy independence, defence, and the environment. Secretary General Bodo Bahr emphasised the significance of these concerns, which had been at the core of BSPC discussions for more than a year. Underlining the severe risk posed by a potential oil spill from a Russian shadow fleet tanker, he recalled the critical achievements of BSPC and HELCOM in preventing large-scale environmental disasters in the Baltic Sea. Through close collaboration and concerted efforts, both organisations had successfully initiated far-reaching, legally binding international measures 25 years ago. The implementation of these regulations has, to date, effectively prevented a major tanker accident in the Baltic Sea despite a continuous increase in maritime traffic. However, he stressed that the current situation had drastically elevated the likelihood of such an accident. The risk level was now higher than ever, with a large-scale tanker disaster in the Baltic Sea becoming an increasingly real and imminent possibility. Should one of these ageing supertankers spill 100,000 litres of oil into the Baltic Sea, every litre of the Baltic Sea water would be contaminated 4,600 times. The catastrophic consequences would be almost unimaginable, with entire coastal economies facing devastation. The tourism industry in affected regions, for instance, could be completely wiped out for the next decade. He further noted that the January NATO Baltic Sea heads of state meeting had made significant progress in addressing this urgent issue. He questioned how preventive measures could be prioritised and saw the necessity of an enhanced role of the European Parliament in contributing to effective solutions. Reinforcing preventive frameworks, expanding surveillance mechanisms, and fostering deeper international cooperation were imperative to mitigating the risk of an environmental catastrophe in the region. Mr Sinkevičius replied that putting more shadow fleet ships on the sanction list was critical since that would forbid them from entering and going to port in the Baltic Sea. Preventing disasters and sabotage meant protecting communities and was cheaper than monitoring and cleaning up. In addition, the shadow fleet was evading sanctions to funnel money into Russia to fuel its war machine. Mr Sinkevičius warned that Russia’s ambitions likely extended beyond Ukraine to the Baltic States and other democratic nations in the Baltic Sea region. Presentation on How embracing the bioeconomy could benefit the Baltic Sea region by Mr Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea, Director for Circular Economy, DG ENVI, European Commission Mr Ciobanu-Dordea stated that the Bioeconomy Initiative was still being elaborated by the European Commission. He stressed that the EU had to think more competitively, as part of strengthening its resilience in the geopolitical situation. The current bioeconomy initiative from 2018 has focused mainly on research and innovation. Its successor initiative – set to be adopted at the end of 2025 – was now in the responsibility of the Commissioner for the Environment. The bioeconomy had to move from pioneering work into the mainstream, boosting its manufacturing and market benefits, much like the circular economy. With input from research, agriculture, biodiversity, and industrial policy fields as well as many economic stakeholders, the first important building block dealt with creating a sustainable source for bioeconomy production while avoiding conflicts with food and energy (biomass) production. 59 % of the biomass production in the EU was devoted to energy. So, a system of traffic lights should alleviate the permanent quarrels about the protection of nature as well as agriculture concerning biomass, establishing priority uses and rules to promote the intertwined growth of food, energy, and resource production. Mr Ciobanu-Dordea recommended using lesser-known sources, such as the municipal organic waste fraction, as well as organic wastes from agriculture and industrial processes, such as wood. Their usage would further reduce the aforementioned conflicts. The second vital building block was identifying the principal demand areas. Only packaging was presently targeted. A planned regulation could target biowaste plastics. Yet the bioeconomy was much larger and should extend beyond alternatives to hazardous chemical substances: It might yield alternatives to critical raw materials. In general, the market opportunities from a strategic perspective had to be pinpointed to offer business incentives. Mr Ciobanu-Dordea moved to the third building block as the possible incentives aside from legally mandatory requirements, the former stimulating innovation and scaling up production. The fourth building block was the global dimension of the bioeconomic policies in the EU. As one of the world’s largest interconnected markets, the EU was a coveted partner for bioeconomy champions such as Brazil, Canada, and Thailand. European policies had to reflect the EU’s domestic interests, creating a policy inspiring the EU’s trade policies as well. Finally, he noted that aquaculture and green production in the sea were also factors in scaling up production from the laboratory to the factory. Mr Staffan Eklöf remarked that genetically modified organisms might reduce said conflicts, creating additional alternatives. Most Swedish parties considered genetic modification a central tool to make the bioeconomy successful. He asked whether this was reflected in the European Commission. Mr Ciobanu-Dordea did not believe this relevant for the bioeconomy strategy but for the upcoming European Biotechnology Act. This hotly debated issue fell into the Health Commissioner’s purview. Ms Delara Burkhardt , a member of the EU Parliament Environmental Commission, underlined that coherence was vital, appreciating that Mr Ciobanu-Dordea had reflected this. To avoid the greater use of biomass in the EU having spillover effects on the global south, she stressed that the bioeconomy needed to take a comprehensive and fully sustainable approach. Mr Ciobanu-Dordea confirmed that his side was aware of this issue and were working on a coherent concept. At the end of the year, they would publish their results. Presentation on the current Commission’s ocean policy, fisheries and the Oceans Pact by Commissioner for Fisheries and Oceans, Mr Costas Kadis, European Commission EU Commissioner Mr Costas Kadis assured the Standing Committee that it was a top priority for the Commission to address the multiple challenges in the Baltic Sea. Reflection, dialogue, and understanding every aspect was critical for good policies, wherefore he would host Fisheries and Oceans Dialogues, Youth Dialogues, and Implementation Dialogues. Visiting coastal communities would provide direct feedback. This would feed into the 2040 Vision for a resilient, competitive, and sustainable fisheries and aquaculture sector, based on a wide range of studies and the EU’s own CFP evaluation. The latter would take into account economic, health, and social sustainability. The poor state of the Baltic Sea was affecting coastal communities, shrinking fish stocks – some had collapsed, e.g., cod and western herring, while others were fragile, such as Bothnian herring. System recovery would be slow and lengthy, but inaction was not an option, Mr Kadis warned. Collaboration was crucial. The existing fisheries had to be protected, and strict adherence to regulations was needed to equally protect the remaining stocks. He noted that a conference on the Baltic Sea was to be organised as soon as possible, with the remit to review the implementation progress of already taken decisions and the Baltic Sea’s multiple challenges, in particular the decline of biodiversity. Maritime security was just as important in the Baltic Sea, especially through the shadow fleet. Monitoring the marine infrastructure and environment was vital. Crucial here was the Common Information Sharing Environment for the Maritime Domain, enabling real-time information exchange between both civilian and military maritime authorities. The EU was strengthening efforts to protect undersea cables through enhanced information sharing, new detection technologies, and undersea repair capabilities. The Commission was also seeking to clear the vast dumped munitions from the Baltic Sea, providing more than 24 million euros in funding for the coastal state over the past decade to assess risks and map contaminated areas. In the spring of 2025, a new project – funded at 5.6 million euros – would develop new technologies for munition removal. In the Ocean Agenda, Mr Kadis pointed to the European Oceans Pact, envisioning a holistic and coherent ocean policy approach. The Pact’s five strategic objectives were ensuring a healthy and productive ocean with good biodiversity, boosting the EU economy, consolidating the EU Marine Framework, reinforcing international ocean governance, and developing resilience for coastal communities. Knowledge and best practice sharing were also vital. He considered awareness, commitment, and shared responsibility crucial for achieving their goals. The Pact would be announced at the 2026 Oceans Conference. The Commission’s main priorities for 2025 included the ratification of the BBNG Agreement and further shaping the international platform for ocean sustainability (IPOS). Mr Staffan Eklöf noted that the BSPC had called for lower fishing quotas in its latest resolution, asking the Commissioner about the current status. Mr Kadis conceded that misreporting on fishing was affecting the scientific advice on which the quota decisions were based. Yet scientific advice would continue to be at the heart of these decisions. Ms Sabrina Repp wished to strengthen the participation and collaboration of the regions in the Baltic Sea, noting the importance of Interreg to rural and coastal areas. Mr Kadis replied that Interreg was not in his portfolio. However, synergies with other Commissioners were being pursued to support remote coastal and island communities. This would lead to initiatives in the near future. Mr Een Eesmaa wondered about the Commission’s analysis of the Gulf Stream, here in respect to a threat to the eel population. Mr Kadis was aware of the fragility of the eel population, noting conservation efforts in some involved countries. He offered to send more information. Mr Bahr asked for concrete reflections about enhancing ocean governance to strengthen infrastructure resilience in cooperation with, e.g., NATO. He further wondered about possible changes to the law to allow interventions in critical situations. Mr Kadis said that the general approach had been announced in December 2024. Measures on security, defence, environment, and other aspects had been proposed by Commissioners. Mr Kadis had proposed increased monitoring, including undersea drones. Discussions about these proposals were ongoing internally, with the goal of a holistic approach. Presentation on HELCOM, Shipping and Response by Mr Rüdiger Strempel, Executive Secretary of the Helsinki Commission Mr Strempel began by citing the HELCOM Vision of a healthy Baltic Sea environment with diverse biological components functioning in balance, resulting in a good ecological status and supporting a wide range of sustainable and social activities. The Baltic Sea was a young but fragile ecosystem; in its current composition, it was younger than the pyramids of Giza. HELCOM estimated that there were some 50,000 ships entering or leaving the Baltic Sea annually, with at least 1,500 large vessels on the sea at any time. This made shipping of considerable concern to HELCOM. As vital as shipping was, it carried problems such as anti-fouling paint, sewage or operational discharges, airborne emissions, underwater noise, and oil discharges – deliberate or not. One of the thematic segments of the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) was dedicated to sea-based activities, such as shipping. Two of the eight HELCOM Working Groups, Maritime and Response, were dealing with this issue. Mr Strempel noted that, due to its international nature, shipping was primarily regulated through the IMO. Still, HELCOM was proactive in amending IMO regulations in their implementation, such as sewage and navigational safety. As such, HELCOM was the voice of the Baltic Sea countries within the IMO. Regarding response coordination, the Helsinki Convention obliged keeping the necessary equipment available and conducting regular exercises on sea and on land. There was also a HELCOM manual on response to marine pollution, detailing cooperation coordination, operational procedures, cooperation harmonisation, financial arrangements and the like that HELCOM was handling. The manual covered spills at sea, on shore as well as oiled wildlife. The most recent surveillance report had been published in August 2024, showing that the number of observed spills had steadily declined, with most of them very small. 24 % were mineral oil, 76 % other types, such as fish oil, greywater, or novel fuels. The latter were problematic as there was little knowledge on how to best combat such spills. Furthermore, HELCOM was working on risk assessments, the so-called BRISK Analysis, covering 2009-2012. The follow-up project BRISK 2 had recently been launched, with EU funding, covering 2025-2026. It was aimed at enhancing disaster prevention and preparedness, focusing on a multi-hazard approach at sea and on land. This also included the shadow fleet. On the busy Baltic Sea, with narrow shipping lanes and an increasing large number of vessels, the under-insured shadow fleet was in poor repair, the ship ownership unclear. The massive risk posed by the fleet also included the oft-neglected one of ship-to-ship transfers of e.g., oil. Respective recommendations were currently being overhauled. Mr Strempel noted that HELCOM was presently under Lithuanian chairmanship. Its first priority was to strengthen HELCOM’s role in geopolitical challenges. The shadow fleet, a product of these challenges, on the one hand undercut sanctions. That was far outside HELCOM’s remit. The massive environmental impact, on the other hand, very much was within. Mr Strempel opined that HELCOM should be better involved in the various formats dealing with the shadow fleet, in particular the NBA+ activities, since HELCOM handled preventative and remediation efforts. Finally, he noted that HELCOM’s social media presence had switched from X/Twitter to Bluesky. Presentation on Addressing the EU’s vulnerabilities to cyber and hybrid attacks, strengthening resilience, and bolstering the EU-NATO partnership by Mr Jukka Savolainen, a Director in the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats Mr Jukka Savolainen focused on the recent maritime incidents, started by the Nord Stream sabotage. Unfortunately, the facts ended with the pipeline having been cut, while a narrative blaming Ukraine had spread, even as Russia claimed the USA were responsible. These narratives were negatively affecting public opinion. In October 2023, the Balticconnector gas pipeline had been severed. The vessel in question, which had hailed from China, had been identified, thus ending conspiracy theories. In November 2024, the Yi Ping 3 had cut telecommunication cables between Finland and Germany as well as between Sweden and Lithuania. Over Christmas 2024, the Eagle S had cut several cables, including a power supply from Finland to Estonia, and was stopped by Finnish authorities in the act of severing another line. Mr Savolainen stressed that this had been the first time a ship had been impounded, allowing a thorough investigation. Since then, another ship had been temporarily impounded by Swedish authorities after attacking a cable. The countries around the Baltic Sea were vulnerable in various respects. He noted that publishing the cable locations made sense since most sea captains were keen to avoid them. Yet a single ship could cause serious harm to society, in particular in the eastern part of the Baltic Sea. As for the probability of these incidents being accidents, Mr Savolainen noted that nothing like this had happened in the past three or four decades in Finnish waters. With that, he countered so-called expert statements claiming that 40 % of severed cables were due to anchor accidents. Yet none of the circumstances of those accidents applied to the Baltic Sea, such as heavy oceanic winds or little known cable locations. In his view, these incidents were clearly deliberate. In the aftermath of the Eagle S incident, the Baltic Sea states and NATO had come together to launch a new operation, Baltic Sentry. Yet within a week, newspapers like the Washington Post were quoting unnamed European intelligence agents that all the incidents had been accidents. Mr Savolainen condemned these reports as misinformation for two reasons, the first being the high improbability and the second that the intelligence services would not undermine their governments right after Baltic Sentry having been started. The head of the Finnish intelligence service had gone on record that deliberate action could not be excluded. Mr Savolainen believed that the purpose of these attacks had been to refine the methods and to test the Western response. The actual target would be the North Sea where incidents could black out vast areas, both in electricity and gas supply. Mr Algirdas Razauskas asked if a ship entering the Baltic Sea would have to pass through national waters and could thus be boarded if suspicions had been raised. Mr Savolainen answered that this was the case. Entering from the Atlantic, a vessel would have to go through at least Danish or Swedish territorial waters. However, one of the main principles of the UN Convention on the Laws of the Sea (UNCLOS) was the Freedom of Navigation which guaranteed so-called transit passage through territorial waters from and to international waters. This was granted to all ships, even military vessels and aircraft. As such, there was no right to intervene in the Danish Strait. President Röblom asked if there were any initiatives to change or amend the UNCLOS to enable interventions in suspicious cases. In particular, he wondered if the BSPC could support such initiatives. Mr Savolainen was aware of such aspirations from the environmental point of view. This was worth trying, not least to curtail the Russian avoidance of sanctions. Yet he warned that any serious blockade of the shadow fleet would be interpreted as an act of war by Russia. Therefore, a single country could not enact such a blockade. Instead, it had to be coalition-wide – across the EU or NATO. Actually changing the UNCLOS would take tens of years to negotiate. Yet international law was conditional, he noted, so that justifications for stopping ships could be found by legal experts. One such clause had been applied by Finland in the case of the Eagle S , for instance, because it had been the target of the attack. Mr Strempel noted that measures of this kind were beyond HELCOM. Working Groups and Rapporteurs The president noted that the next meetings of the Working Group on Energy Security, Self-Sustainability, Resilience, and Connectivity (ESSRC) would be in Stockholm in March 2025 and in Tallinn in May 2025. Mr Staffan Eklöf said the Stockholm meeting would focus on connections, transportation, and security, with visits to the Royal Institute of Technology regarding self-driving vehicles, to a company building electric vessels, and to the Swedish Coast Guard about maritime infrastructure monitoring. At the meeting proper, presentations would deal with security, the electric grid as well as the Swedish energy agency and government. Prof Jānis Vucāns noted that the Baltic Assembly would be represented by the working group chairman, Mr Andris Kulbergs, and a representative from each Baltic country. The meeting in Tallinn was still being prepared so that the programme would be presented at the Stockholm meeting. As a new working group would be formed at the annual conference, Prof Vucāns provided more information about the proposal from the Baltic Assembly about Strengthening the Cyber and Information Resilience of the Democratic Baltic Sea Region. He remarked that digital technologies had become the backbone of their political and social systems. They provided greater connections and efficiency. However, disinformation and cyber attacks have proved a tremendous challenge, spreading mistrust that could destabilise societies. This demanded a strategic and comprehensive response, to be elaborated in this new working group, building on findings of the current working group. Another focal point would be artificial intelligence and digital rights. Furthermore, the Baltic Assembly nominated Mr Meelis Kiili from the Estonian parliament as chairman, given his extensive experience in this field. Mr Henrik Møller agreed that this context posed a severe threat to democracy and thus approved of the proposal. The meeting agreed to forward the proposal to the annual conference. BSPC Presidency after 2026/Rotation Principle President Röblom noted the preliminary approval of instituting a rotation principle by the Standing Committee in Tallinn to introduce greater stability. The Secretariat had refined the suggested schedule to avoid election cycles and international obligations. Flexibility was built so that each presidency could exchange its position with the preceding or succeeding presidency if necessary. Mr Bahr informed the meeting that the Iceland delegation was still in the process of obtaining their parliament’s approval to take over the BSPC presidency. All the delegations present agreed to the current proposal for a rotation procedure, aiming to result in a final decision by the Standing Committee at its June meeting and approval by the Annual Conference in Mariehamn. BSPC Budget and Financial Planning BSPC President Alfons Röblom laid out the key points from the 2024 budget. Expenditures slightly exceeded income, well within the approved framework, maintaining a healthy reserve of € 213,442. For 2025, the Standing Committee meetings and Working Group sessions would remain core budgetary priorities; additional resources allocated to the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum (BSPYF) and the BSPC communication strategy. Secretary General Bodo Bahr reflected on the budget’s background and details, noting that the overspend was within the approved budget flexibility, covering the travel costs of the BSPYF youth participants. The reserves would guarantee operational stability for one year, even in unforeseen circumstances. The budget management had been successfully transferred from Mecklenburg-Vorpommern to Schleswig-Holstein. The Standing Committee unanimously agreed to the financial report for 2024 and confirmed the previous agreement on the budget plan proposal for 2025. The Current Geopolitical Situation and its Impact on the Baltic Sea Region BSPC President Röblom gave a brief overview of recent developments, such as the new European Commission and Parliament terms, changes in transatlantic relations, and the ongoing shift in the threat landscape. Incentive contribution by MEP Rasa Juknevičienė Ms Rasa Juknevičienė hoped that future historians would not write about the present day like the 1930s and 1940s. Yet, one had to be prepared for the worst in order to avoid the worst. Well-founded warnings had to be heeded, like those of the eastern countries against cooperation with Russia. The most crucial action these days was uniting in support for Ukraine, even without the USA. Too much time had been wasted talking and worrying, and the situation had worsened. She noted that Putin was representing a new totalitarian ideology with ambitions far beyond Ukraine. Unfortunately, the same values had now risen to the top of the USA. Ms Juknevičienė considered this a fight between autocracies and democracies, in which she saw the democratic side failing. She highlighted President Zelenskyy’s speech at the Munich Security Conference as that of a great European leader. One question was whether NATO still existed. She stressed that it was a delusion Western states would have a secure little corner of the world amid the expansive forces of the new fascism. Mr Henrik Møller referenced the US president’s demand to purchase Greenland from Denmark and how that had affected the debate in the country. He further noted the increasing expansionist ideas from the US president, extending to Mexico, Canada, Panama, and most recently, the Gaza Strip. This debate would continue, but in dealing with the US, more cautious language might be better advised. As for the BSPC making a statement on the situation, he proposed to wait until after the elections in Greenland on 11 March to learn of their position. Ms Kristina Herbst agreed that President Zelenskyy’s speech was highly praised. Yet she wondered if there could be a path forward together in light of countries such as Hungary. Ms Juknevičienė maintained hope, such as that the far right would not win the German elections. Action was needed. She also underlined the importance of Greenland and the Arctic. She expected greater seriousness in matters of defence, pointing to a calculation that an EU citizen had only paid the equivalent of 1 ½ cups of coffee to support Ukraine. She compared it to Russia spending 10 % of its GDP on its armed forces while Europe was not even reaching 2 %. They could not wait for Hungary or Slovakia to change their minds. Action had to be taken right away to defend Europe, in every respect, also e.g., banking. Yet, without the US, Europe was very weak. She called the continent hostages of decades of US dependence. Mr Mikko Polvinen commented on US Vice President Vance’s remark that Europe and the US no longer shared values. Mr Polvinen found this quite dangerous. He also noted that Musk’s X was promoting those parties sharing the current US regime’s values. He asked about Ms Juknevičienė’s opinion regarding these value differences. Furthermore, he said that people and companies were moving away from regions bordering Russia, such as his home region. He wondered if the EU’s MFF was a tool to help in this matter. Ms Juknevičienė did not believe the Vance speech was about values. It had been only in support of the far-right AfD in Germany. He was adopting Russian narratives. In addition, the only time Article 5 of NATO had been invoked had been to help the USA. Yet the US were now threatening to cancel their solidarity with Europe. She quoted famous historian Timothy Snyder, who had written on Bluesky that everybody had been asking him to decode Vance’s speech at the Security Conference. Snyder had explained that “free speech” to Vance meant letting Musk run elections, and “democracy” meant letting Russia run elections. 2025 was about what Europeans did, not what Americans said. As for regions bordering and threatened by Russia, she said it was the European Union’s task to help these. Yet the economy was not the only thing that mattered, she warned. She remarked that in the recent European elections, the former East Germany had shown on the electoral map their strong support for the AfD. The influence of social media was an important topic. She worried that artificial intelligence would be the primary topic of upcoming elections. Prof Jānis Vucāns noted that the Baltic states had begun their decoupling from the Soviet Union in the Gorbachev era but had only completed it two weeks earlier by integrating their power grid into the European network. He further noted to ongoing transit of goods through the Baltics into Europe. That flow had to be stopped for good to ensure that Russia would receive no money. In light of the new US regime, Europe had to guarantee its autonomy. Prof Vucāns also touched upon Russia-bordering regimes and a lack of investment there, highlighting the influence there from Russian media affecting the minds and values. Economic investments meant shoring up their values as being part of Europe. Another point was financing military production, which was still being run on peacetime parameters. Solutions were needed, and the BSPC was a forum to initiate and reinforce these discussions. Preparation for the 34 th BSPC Annual Conference and Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum in Mariehamn President Röblom explained that the conference theme—“The Baltic Sea—Our Lifeline: Cooperation, Security, and Sustainability”—reflected the BSPC work of the past year. The draft programme focused on core maritime challenges, security and hybrid threats, energy security, and intergenerational dialogue. High-profile speakers had been invited. Prof Jānis Vucāns said that the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum (BSPYF) had proven a very important component. He noted a quite active representative from the Baltic delegations keen to take part in the forum. Ms Sabrina Repp explained that she had been part of the BSPYF in 2023, an experience she highly valued. Now a European parliamentarian, she very much wanted to be involved in this year’s forum. Mr Röblom noted the engagement and underlined the forum’s importance. The exact practical implementation will be discussed in the near future with the CBSS and Regeneration 2030. Other Matters In the follow-up to the 33 rd BSPC Resolution, BSPC President Alfons Röblom informed the Standing Committee that the state parliaments of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Schleswig-Holstein had formally debated and approved the resolution. The goal remained to receive the governmental statements by 15 April 2025. Ms Anita Kucharska-Dziedzic announced that the Polish region of West Pomerania was planning to apply for observer status in the BSPC. She noted that the regional parliament was already active in several supraregional organisations. Mr Himanshu Gulati lauded the representatives from the European Parliament taking part in the meeting for their interesting contributions. BSPC President Alfons Röblom thanked all distinguished speakers for their valuable contributions, the excellent support from the hosts at the European Parliament, all who have been involved in preparing this meeting for their dedicated efforts, namely Secretary General Bodo Bahr for his planning, intensive efforts and engagement in preparing and managing this meeting and all delegations for their engagement and insights and ongoing productive conversation during the further programme. —— Evening Discussions at the BSPC Standing Committee Meeting in Brussels As the formal proceedings of the BSPC Standing Committee meeting concluded, participants gathered for an evening of in-depth discussions, reflecting on the pressing themes of the day. Against the backdrop of the European Parliament’s twelfth-floor venue, offering a panoramic view of Brussels, speakers engaged in an intense exchange of ideas on geopolitical security, cooperation, and resilience in the Baltic Sea region. Vice-President of the European Parliament, Ms Christel Schaldemose , extended a warm welcome to all attendees, underlining the significance of cross-border cooperation in these unprecedented times and emphasising that collaboration among like-minded nations was now more critical than ever. She assured participants that their discussions would play an essential role in strengthening regional security and stability. Acknowledging the setting, she invited participants to appreciate the exceptional view from the venue, though she highlighted that the evening’s focus should remain on fostering a meaningful dialogue. BSPC President Alfons Röblom then took the floor, introducing Ambassador Jean-Charles Ellermann-Kingombe, NATO’s Assistant Secretary General for Innovation, Hybrid, and Cyber. He expressed his gratitude for the Ambassador’s presence, particularly in light of his unavailability earlier in the day due to unforeseen commitments. He underscored the relevance of the Ambassador’s expertise in NATO’s cyber and hybrid security measures, particularly as they pertain to the Baltic Sea region. Röblom reiterated the BSPC’s long-standing emphasis on enhancing regional cooperation within NATO, particularly following the accession of Finland and Sweden. He referenced the Helsingør resolution, which outlined key policy recommendations for governments regarding NATO’s role in safeguarding the region. Among these, he stressed the need for integrating maritime surveillance, strengthening regional defence mechanisms, and enhancing NATO’s presence in the Baltic Sea. He concluded by inviting Ambassador Ellermann-Kingombe to share his insights on the evolving security landscape. Addressing the gathering, Ambassador Jean-Charles Ellermann-Kingombe provided a strategic overview of NATO’s current approach to hybrid and cyber threats, emphasising that recent years had witnessed a sharp increase in hostile activities—both in frequency and intensity. He highlighted that hybrid warfare tactics had evolved significantly, encompassing acts of sabotage, cyberattacks, and disruptions to critical infrastructure. He warned against viewing such incidents in isolation, as they formed part of broader strategic efforts to destabilise NATO member states. He further noted that Russia’s military doctrine specifically incorporated hybrid threats as an early-stage tactic to weaken adversaries before escalating to more direct confrontations. The Ambassador elaborated on NATO’s forthcoming hybrid strategy, set to be unveiled at the Hague Summit in June. He underscored the need to shift from a purely defensive posture to a proactive deterrence strategy, aimed at reducing the likelihood of hybrid threats materialising in the first place. Central to this approach was the enhancement of situational awareness, with a greater emphasis on identifying patterns and trends rather than reacting to isolated incidents. NATO, he stated, was committed to intensifying its presence in the Baltic Sea through the newly launched Baltic Sentry initiative, which involved an increased deployment of naval and aerial assets for real-time surveillance and rapid response capabilities. A crucial aspect of NATO’s evolving strategy, the Ambassador explained, was the integration of asymmetric responses to hybrid threats. Given the constraints imposed by international legal frameworks and NATO’s commitment to upholding democratic values, traditional military retaliation was often not feasible. Instead, NATO sought to impose costs on adversaries through non-conventional means, such as increased military deployments, economic sanctions, and targeted cyber operations. He noted that recent incidents in the Baltic Sea, including the sabotage of undersea infrastructure, had demonstrated the urgent need for better coordination between NATO, the EU, and private sector stakeholders. Enhanced cooperation, particularly with private entities that manage critical infrastructure, would be essential in strengthening resilience against future threats. Ambassador Ellermann-Kingombe concluded by stressing that hybrid threats could not be countered solely through military means. A comprehensive, multi-faceted approach was required—one that combined cybersecurity measures, intelligence sharing, economic countermeasures, and strategic communication. He urged parliamentarians to play an active role in shaping policies that would bolster national and regional resilience, advocating for enhanced legislative frameworks to address emerging security challenges. The evening’s discussions provided an invaluable platform for an open and candid exchange of views , reinforcing the BSPC’s commitment to fostering cooperation in the face of evolving security threats. The insights shared during the session would undoubtedly inform ongoing deliberations within both NATO and the Baltic Sea parliamentary community as they worked towards a more secure and resilient region. More photos of the Standing Committee can be viewed at the following link: Standing Committee of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference – Multimedia Centre

The full report from the 33 rd Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC in Helsingør, Denmark, is now available on the BSPC website . The compilation can be downloaded her e and on the 33 rd conference webpage . The report comprehensively reviews the three-day conference, which focused on “Safety in the Baltic Sea Region.” It includes speeches and contributions from high-ranking speakers, such as the Speaker of the Danish Parliament, Søren Gade, BSPC President Henrik Møller, parliamentarians, ministers, and other regional experts. The publication is complemented by a rich collection of photographs capturing the event’s vibrant discussions and key moments. The image collection also documents the reception at Kronborg Castle , where the Danish King honoured the conference as a distinguished guest. Key topics addressed include: • Defence cooperation and strengthening regional security, • Measures for energy security and the protection of critical infrastructure, • Environmental and climate initiatives , and • Enhancing collaboration among democratic Baltic Sea countries . The report highlights the importance of the BSPC as a central platform for dialogue among parliamentarians and stakeholders across the Baltic Sea region. Explore the report to access the full content and learn more about the outcomes of this pivotal conference.