Tuesday, October 20, 2026
The news that moves freight
Geopolitics Oct 12, 2026 · 8 min read

Black Sea war-risk costs jump as Russian grain moves to the Baltic

Black Sea war cover for one tanker trip: $2.5m, up from $200,000. War-risk insurance for one tanker crossing the Black Sea has risen to about $2.5m, from roughly $200,000, says Lukoil’s Bulgarian commercial manager Evgeni Simeonov (TokenPost). We think the western Black Sea is now a war zone in pricing terms. Splash reports premiums rose from about 0.1% to 0.5% of vessel value in two weeks. Russian Baltic grain loadings rose from 216,000t to 1.16m t in September (IFCHOR Galbraiths). Constanta, Varna and Danube cargo will cost more. Our call: premiums reach 1% of vessel value by end-November.

Black Sea war cover jumps twelvefold as Russian grain turns to the Baltic
War-risk insurance for one tanker crossing the Black Sea now costs about $2.5m, up from roughly $200,000. Evgeni Simeonov, special commercial manager for Lukoil’s Bulgarian operations, gave the figure. TokenPost reported it on 12 October. He blamed attacks on merchant ships and port infrastructure. The rise happened “in recent months”, the report says, without giving exact dates.
That is one ship, not a market rate. TokenPost is careful on this point: “The $2.5 million figure applies to the vessel discussed by Simeonov and does not establish a single premium for every tanker operating in the Black Sea.”
Still, it tells you which way the market is going. Here is our view. The western Black Sea, including the waters off Romania and Bulgaria that were treated as fairly safe until recently, now prices like a war zone. Forwarders should stop treating Constanta, Varna, Burgas and the Danube as normal European calls with a bit of extra risk. Quote them as conflict-zone cargo, with surcharges, longer transit times and fewer carriers.

What changed in the last four weeks

The insurance map moved first. On 16 September the Joint War Committee updated its JWLA-035 list. The committee is the London market body that tells underwriters which waters count as high-risk. The new list covers almost all of the Black Sea, according to UkrAgroConsult. The only exceptions are the territorial waters of Turkey, Georgia, Bulgaria and Romania. Territorial waters run up to 12 nautical miles from the coast.
Neil Roberts, secretary of the committee and head of marine and aviation at the Lloyd’s Market Association, put it this way to Reuters, as carried by gCaptain on 18 September: “This week, the JWC has expanded the Black Sea reporting requirements to the whole of the Black Sea area.” He added: “However, voyages within the territorial waters of adjacent countries still do not require notification.”
Being on the list is not a ban. It means owners must notify their insurers, and insurers may require separate war-risk cover and an extra premium for the voyage (UkrAgroConsult). UkrAgroConsult notes that “The size of the additional premium will be determined individually.” In practice that means each ship, route and underwriter gets its own price.
Then came the attacks. Security firm Ambrey, quoted by Splash on 7 October, says three merchant ships were struck in the Romanian and Bulgarian exclusive economic zones on 5-6 October, and two sank. An exclusive economic zone, or EEZ, is the sea area beyond territorial waters where a country controls resources. It is inside the listed area. Ambrey judged it highly likely that Russian forces carried out those strikes. “The maritime domain of the conflict has widened, but the targeting profile has not changed,” Ambrey said.
In the same report, Splash said the Aframax tanker Rio was on fire off Sochi on Tuesday 6 October after an attack by unmanned surface vessels, meaning sea drones. All 23 crew were rescued. So the risk now runs both ways across the sea.

The price of cover, in numbers

Splash reported on 12 October that war-risk premiums “have climbed from around 0.1% to 0.5% of vessel value over the past two weeks.” It added: “Some market participants have warned that rates could move towards 1% if conditions deteriorate further.”
War-risk premiums are quoted as a share of the ship’s insured value, per voyage. A fivefold rise in two weeks is steep. Here is our own rough arithmetic. On a ship insured at $40m, 0.1% is $40,000 per trip. At 0.5% it is $200,000. At 1% it is $400,000. Those costs land with the shipowner first. They then flow into freight rates and surcharges.
Ambrey also said, per Splash, that many underwriters no longer offer cover for Ukrainian port calls, even as war-risk premiums have moved into double digits. For Ukrainian calls, some cover is simply not for sale at any price.
History helps here. In December 2025, AgroReview put the extra war risk for “Constanta, Burgas, and Turkish ports” at “only 0.10–0.25%”. Ukrainian deep-water ports were then at 0.45-0.55% per voyage. The same article said 2023 was the peak, “when premiums reached 1.0–1.2%” for Ukrainian ports. That was the year Russia left the UN-backed Black Sea Grain Initiative. Business Recorder, citing Reuters in August 2023, put the war-risk premium then at “tens of thousands of dollars per ship for the voyage.”
So Romanian and Bulgarian calls are moving from a near-safe band toward the level Ukrainian ports paid at their worst. In our view that is the real story behind the $2.5m headline.

Why the Danube is now the pinch point

Ukraine has leaned on the Danube as strikes hit its deep-sea ports. Ambrey says the Danube’s share of cargo at Ukrainian ports rose from about 10% in the first half of the year to 74% in August, as Odesa, Chornomorsk and Pivdennyi were damaged (Splash, 7 October). At least nine merchant ships have been struck on the Danube approaches since July.
“The Danube is no longer simply an alternative route,” Ambrey said. “It is now part of the contested front line of Ukraine’s maritime trade.” And: “Where the volumes go, the strikes follow, from the berth to the open sea.”
The river mouth is jammed. Ambrey said as many as 125 vessels were queued at Sulina on 5 October after weather disruption, with waits of 14-17 days (Splash). Long queues put ships in fixed, predictable spots within drone range. That keeps premiums up.
There is a cost-shift lesson from last time. An unattributed quote in AgroReview’s December piece said that in 2023 the jump in insurance was offset by a sharp rise in short-haul Danube-to-Constanta freight, which reached $100 a tonne. In December 2025 that run cost about €10 a tonne. The same quote went on: “Most likely, this time the increase in insurance will directly impact exporters and shipowners.” We agree, and we would add shippers and their forwarders to that list.

Russian grain is already moving north

Russia is not waiting. Broker IFCHOR Galbraiths, cited by Splash on 12 October, says Russian Baltic and continental grain loadings rose to 1.16m tonnes in September, from 216,000 tonnes in August. Over the same months, Black Sea and Azov loadings fell from 1.39m to 201,000 tonnes. Total monitored Russian grain loadings fell 16% month on month.
The Baltic route is dearer. According to the broker, “moving grain from Baltic Russia to Egypt costs around 30% to 35% more per tonne” than shipping from the traditional Black Sea ports. Splash says Moscow is using subsidised rail, converting terminals and preparing Murmansk for its first grain cargoes. Agricultural consultancy IKAR estimates Baltic wheat exports could reach 1.8m tonnes in October, up from about 1.4m in September.
The Baltic states are pushing back. Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal, Latvian Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs and Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda wrote to António Costa and Ursula von der Leyen asking for an EU-wide ban on Russian grain transit. The aim, per Splash, is to block Moscow from redirecting agricultural exports through European transport networks. Estonia has already approved a ban on Russian and Belarusian grain transit through its ports. Latvia has tightened checks on grain origins at its ports. Michal is expected to raise the idea at the next European Council meeting. For now, “No EU-wide ban on Russian grain transit has yet been adopted.”

What it means for forwarders

Start with Black Sea bookings. Container and breakbulk cargo for Constanta, Varna and Burgas will carry more war-risk cost. Carriers pass that on through surcharges, or they reduce or drop calls. Build that into quotes now rather than eat it later. Keep validity periods short, because a single strike can reprice a voyage within days.
Next, transit times. Danube cargo faces queues of two weeks or more on Ambrey’s figures. Forwarders moving project cargo, steel or agri goods via the river should tell customers plainly and look at rail or road links into Constanta where they exist.
Check cargo insurance too. Hull premiums get the headlines. But AgroReview’s December forecast already pointed to cargo insurance rates rising 3-5% in a base case and 6-10% in a pessimistic case with escalating tensions. Many open cargo policies exclude or limit listed areas. Check cover before shipping, not after a claim.
Bulgaria’s fuel supply is holding for now. “As of today, we have not had a single refused oil delivery,” Simeonov said. TokenPost reports supply is contracted to the start of December. Bulgaria uses 5,000 to 6,000 tonnes of diesel a day. TokenPost says the effect at the pump has not been quantified. In our view, if higher delivered crude costs do reach pump prices, regional trucking rates will feel it too.
In the Baltic, expect more grain moving through Russian ports such as Ust-Luga and Vysotsk. Expect closer scrutiny of anything agricultural moving through EU Baltic ports. Origin paperwork for grain and food transiting Estonia and Latvia will be checked harder. If an EU-wide ban comes, screening rules will change for transit cargo, rail as well as sea.

Our prediction

Here is our call. By the end of November 2026, war-risk premiums quoted for calls at Romanian and Bulgarian ports will reach or pass 1% of vessel value. That would put Constanta and Varna roughly where Ukrainian ports were at their 2023 peak. We also expect at least one more month of Russian Baltic grain loadings above 1m tonnes in October.
On policy, we expect the Baltic leaders to raise the transit ban at the next European Council, as Splash reports Michal plans. We do not expect an EU-wide ban to be adopted before 31 December 2026. More individual national measures, like Estonia’s, are the likelier outcome this year.

Sources