European Union member states that are trying to soften the EU's rules on timber imports are themselves direct recipients of illegal timber from Russia or Belarus, by way of so-called friendly intermediaries. Russian and Belarusian timber continues to flow into the European Union, effectively making a mockery of the sanctions imposed on the aggressor states.
This conclusion, based on new data, has been published by the organisation Earthsight, which has found that between November 2024 and April 2025 so-called blood birch timber worth 273 million euros was “laundered” into the European Union through “friendly intermediaries” in China, Kazakhstan, Turkey and Georgia. It should be stressed and remembered that trade in timber assortments with these countries either did not exist at all, or was negligible, before the sanctions imposed in 2022.
The new data confirm a report published in January, which revealed that more than 20 lorries carrying Russian and Belarusian birch plywood were arriving at European ports every day – around 700 cubic metres a day – with the bulk of it coming from countries that, at the beginning of July, lobbied the European Commission hard for a further simplification of the European Union's Deforestation Regulation.
“The proposals call for the creation of a new category of “negligible risk” or “no risk” producer countries, alongside the existing low, medium and high risk categories already set out in the EU's forest use regulation,” says the Earthsight press release. A “no risk” rating would be granted to countries where the risk of deforestation is negligible and where national legislation already restricts deforestation and forest degradation.
“Although this proposal looks relatively harmless, it is nothing of the sort. Companies would not have to submit geolocation data – the cornerstone of the EU's forest use regulation – for goods brought in from the new “no risk” countries,” the statement says. Enforcement authorities in European Union member states would be under no obligation to check those goods.
The agriculture ministers' proposal also calls for the removal of the EU forestry regulation's current requirement that authorities carry out a minimum number of checks to detect illegal or deforestation-linked goods in the new no-risk category of countries.
Back in March, the European Commission's sanctions unit warned that Russian and Belarusian timber producers were relabelling goods and reshipping them through third countries in order to evade EU trade restrictions.
Although in June Brussels imposed anti-dumping tariffs on hardwood plywood, birch included, from China, non-governmental organisations argue that the duty fails to distinguish between birch and less risky hardwood species, and so does not stop the exports.
The latest investigative data show that since the European Union imposed sanctions on Belarus's one-billion-euro timber industry, Belarusian imports into Poland via Kazakhstan have increased fivefold.
In February and April this year, Spain – which has not asked for exemptions from the EU's rules on establishing the origin of timber – was the largest importer of “suspect” birch plywood in the European Union. The retail value of the shipments came to more than 15 million euros, says Earthsight. Portugal follows with more than 12 million euros, while Estonia imported goods worth almost 10 million euros, mainly from Kazakhstan. Poland, the largest importing country between 2022 and 2024, has since stepped up its checks considerably, and as a result its imports have fallen sharply since February this year. Spain's timber and furniture association has warned that continued Russian imports put the domestic processing industry at risk, echoing similar concerns voiced by producers in Latvia and Poland.
The new data have been published at a time of mounting political pressure to weaken the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) – the European Union's central piece of legislation, intended to keep products linked to deforestation out of the single market. Wood Central has already reported that the European Parliament adopted an EPP-backed resolution rejecting the risk classification proposed by the European Commission and calling for a new “no risk” category for countries that have deforestation laws in force. Vast volumes of sawn timber traded in the West and shipped through the port of Hong Kong may have come from illegally logged forests – that is the conclusion to be drawn from Forest Trends research.
Under the EUDR, Russia and Belarus are recognised as high risk countries, whereas Kazakhstan, China, Turkey and Georgia are currently classified as low risk, exactly like every European Union member state. Thomas Waitz, an Austrian Member of the European Parliament and a forester by profession, warned that a no-risk category and delays in implementing the Deforestation Regulation would undermine the special sanctions regime against Russia. “The EPP must stand up for Ukraine,” he stressed, referring to the centre-right European People's Party (EPP). Pascal Canfin, the lead negotiator from the liberal Renew group, said that calls to weaken the EU's timber regulation were “a gift to Russia” and a threat to the European Union's sovereignty.
The EUDR contains stricter traceability rules than the existing timber trade laws. The regulation is designed to close known loopholes. Yet Earthsight argues that the proposed “no risk” category, backed by 18 agriculture ministers and the European Parliament, could leave the EUDR weaker than the current rules.
EPP MEP Alexander Bernhuber, who is leading an initiative to exempt some EU member states from their EUDR obligations by means of the new risk category, said the regulation must not be used as a means of imposing sanctions. “Circumventing sanctions is already a criminal offence and must be investigated with every available means,” he told Euractiv, adding that what is needed is “tighter control at Europe's external borders and enforcement of the existing sanctions rules”. “It cannot be that, with the European Union's strict rules on timber harvesting, we end up punishing those who practise sustainable and responsible forestry,” Bernhuber stressed.