Did the US seize two scottish boat operators
Executive summary
The United States removed the captain and first officer of the oil tanker Marinera from waters off the UK and transferred them to a U.S. vessel, and they have been taken into U.S. custody to face prospective prosecution — but they were not Scottish nationals and Scottish authorities say they never detained them [1] [2] [3]. Scottish lawyers and the captain’s family say the removal violated Scottish jurisdiction and sought emergency court orders to stop any transfer; the Scottish court granted an interim interdict but could not bind the U.S. [1] [4] [5].
1. What actually happened at sea: U.S. forces boarded and the Marinera was seized
U.S. Coast Guard and special forces boarded the Russian-flagged tanker Marinera (formerly Bella 1) on 7 January in the North Atlantic after a prolonged pursuit and escorted the vessel into the Moray Firth in Scotland, with UK defence assets providing operational support such as use of airfields, according to multiple accounts [6] [7] [5]. The U.S. has said the operation was part of enforcement against what it describes as sanctions-busting shipments of oil, and the vessel was subject to a judicial seizure order that the U.S. says supports prosecution of those aboard [6] [8].
2. Who was taken: captain and first officer — not Scottish operators
Media and legal filings identify the two senior officers removed as the captain, Avtandil Kalandadze, and the first officer; the captain has been described as Georgian by his lawyers rather than Scottish, and reporting consistently treats them as non-UK nationals among a multinational crew [2] [4]. Therefore the factual claim that the U.S. “seized two Scottish boat operators” is incorrect on nationality: the individuals removed were the ship’s top officers aboard the Marinera, not Scottish-flagged operators [2] [6].
3. How they were removed: transfer to US Coast Guard cutter Munro and departure from UK waters
Court hearing transcripts and government statements say the captain and first officer were placed aboard the U.S. Coast Guard cutter Munro and left the United Kingdom’s territorial sea, with Scottish government lawyers telling the Court of Session that the two had departed on the Munro [1] [5]. Reuters and other outlets reported lawyers’ allegations that the removal effectively prevented ongoing Scottish legal challenges from being enforced [2].
4. Legal and political dispute: Scottish court orders, mutual legal assistance, and competing narratives
Lawyers for the captain’s wife sought an emergency interdict to prevent removal; Lord Young granted an interim interdict barring Scottish officials from removing the crew from the court’s jurisdiction, but the court explicitly could not order actions by the U.S. government [4] [1]. The Solicitor General told the court Scottish ministers and the Lord Advocate had never detained the crew and that a U.S. mutual legal assistance request had been made and granted subject to assurances — a point used by UK government lawyers to argue they had complied with legal channels [1] [3].
5. Claims of “abduction” and diplomatic fallout: contested framing
Lawyers and some Scottish politicians described the transfer as an “abduction” and accused the U.S. of bypassing Scottish jurisdiction; pro-government and left-leaning outlets echoed those claims, while U.S. and UK statements emphasise the lawfulness of the seizure and coordination over status and prosecution [2] [9] [3]. Moscow condemned the action and demanded treatment and repatriation for Russian nationals, adding an international diplomatic angle to the dispute [6] [7].
6. Bottom line answer to the question posed
No — the U.S. did not seize “two Scottish boat operators”; it removed the captain and first officer of the seized tanker Marinera from the ship and placed them into U.S. custody aboard a U.S. Coast Guard vessel, departing UK territorial waters, and those individuals are reported as non-Scottish nationals with lawyers contesting the legality of their removal even as U.S. authorities assert lawful seizure and intent to prosecute [1] [2] [6].