KYIV, Ukraine (Chatnewstv.com) — A Russian company using the name and branding of Danish shipping inspection giant Baltic Control has overseen the export of more than 170,000 tons of grain from the occupied Ukrainian port of Berdiansk, according to a new investigation by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP).
Documents reviewed by OCCRP and Ukrainian partner Slidstvo.Info indicate that the Russian firm — known as Baltic Control Novorossiysk — inspected grain shipments in the seized territory between March 2024 and May 2025. Despite Baltic Control’s public silence on the issue, corporate records, shared branding, and past joint business activity suggest the Danish company maintained ties with its Russian namesake well after Moscow’s full-scale invasion.
“The Sea of Azov has become an internal sea of the Russian Federation,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said with a smirk in a 2022 video conference. “Peter the Great fought to gain access to the Sea of Azov.”
That access has enabled Moscow to repurpose Ukrainian ports in Mariupol and Berdiansk to export grain and other resources — a practice Kyiv calls pillage and a violation of international law.
“Occupying powers have no right to export resources from occupied territory,” said Kateryna Rashevska, a lawyer with Ukraine’s Regional Center for Human Rights. “Private actors also have a responsibility to avoid harm and not engage in activities that support the occupation.”
Baltic Control, headquartered in Denmark and acquired in 2023 by the French Apave Group, did not respond to requests for comment. Neither did company founder Hugo Pedersen.
Although the Danish parent firm claims no current links to Baltic Control Novorossiysk, their past relationship is documented. Baltic Control’s own 2021/2022 annual report lists the Russian entity as a “related company.” An archived version of its website from October 2022 included the Novorossiysk branch and an email address still in use by the Russian company.
The firm’s owner, Alexander Shalimov, registered Baltic Control Novorossiysk in 2013. In later years, he jointly owned another company of the same name with Pedersen, according to Russian business records.
Shipping documents obtained by Ukrainian hacktivist group KibOrg include nearly three dozen letters referencing grain exports through Berdiansk. The letters — sent by a Russian agricultural firm in occupied Crimea — list at least nine vessels, including the Nadezhda, Sofia, and Leonid Pestrikov. Some of the ships had their tracking systems disabled, a common tactic used by Russian ships to avoid detection. Several vessels have been sanctioned by the United States.
Each shipment included an explicit requirement: Baltic Control must inspect and certify the grain before loading, evaluating both the quantity and quality of the cargo.
“The theft of Ukrainian grain is well-documented,” Ukraine’s military intelligence agency said in a statement, pointing to satellite images showing grain loading activity in Berdiansk. The Nadezhda, captured in one such image from April 2024, is believed to have delivered grain to Turkey and Bangladesh.
While Baltic Control’s global site no longer mentions any Russian office, the ongoing use of its logo and matching website design by Baltic Control Novorossiysk raises concerns over complicity.
“It’s a violation of the Hague Regulations,” Rashevska said. “Even indirect assistance to the looting of occupied resources is illegal under international humanitarian law.”
Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry said it is preparing diplomatic démarches to raise the issue with Denmark and France.
“Any company linked to facilitating the export of stolen Ukrainian grain must face accountability,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Oleh Nikolenko told reporters. “We call on our partners to thoroughly investigate and sever ties with any entity involved in the economic exploitation of occupied territories.”
The extent to which Baltic Control in Denmark maintains any direct oversight or benefit from its former Russian affiliate remains unclear.
But for Ukraine, the issue is less about ambiguity and more about accountability.
“These are not just business transactions,” Rashevska said. “They are acts that support and sustain an illegal occupation.”
