• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

New base for Black Sea Fleet?

eddie said:
A move out of the Ukraine, or a move into Syira?

Or neither?
Click to expand...

Maybe move out of Ukraine eventually, but I doubt out of the Black Sea. The Russians are not exactly breaking the bank when it comes to funding their military anymore. They are using equipment that was predominantly made during the Cold War with little added since then. That is especially true of the Navy. Their fleet is a shadow of what it once was.

Now why would they spend the dough to go build a new port facility in a foreign country? There are extensive facilities for maintaining their ships in Crimea and it would take a lot of money to build adequate facilities to replace them. Why build them in Syria when you could build them in Russia? Plus, it is not like Syria is Russia's best friend, drinking buddies maybe but not best friends.
 
^ Well said --- good insight. And I think it's also a question of who needs who (whom?) more: Russia needing Syria ... or Syria needing Russia.

Russia wants to maintain "influence" in the Middle East. Syria doesn't have too many friends left in the region now that we're camped next door and have muddied the "Baath" water .... :)
 
Barnard1425 said:
Because Ukraine is making noises about throwing them out. The Black Sea fleet has technically been stationed in a foreign country since the end of the Cold War. There's an agreement that grants them the right to use Sevastopol until 2017, but after that nothing is guaranteed. There's a lot of hostility between Yuschenko and Putin right now, starting with the fomer being poisoned during the elections and continuing through the Russian natural gas pricing issue. If things continue as such, there's a chance the fleet could be out on its ear in a decade. Ukraine has also expressed interest in joining NATO, and having the Russian military stationed within its borders could be a barrier to that.

So all things considered, it makes sense for Russia to do some window shopping for a new port facility. And as their policies in Lebanon and other regional hotspots come under fire, Syria could benefit from a strong military alliance with an aging superpower.
Click to expand...
Can this guy come to my next squadron?

Brett
 
The Russians have always "interested" me with how they handle their international relations and practice power politics.

Back during the Reagan years and our debacle in the Lebanon Civil War --- 2 or 3 Russian embassy staffers were kidnapped and subsequently killed by one or another of the warring local factions. Or was it Hezbollah?? This was in 1983 during a time of rampant bombings, kidnappings, murders and was, in general, a helter-skelter time in the Levant. Or is it always that way there?

The Russian reaction? They sent down a couple of Spetnaz teams -- took some of the suspected perp's family members and a couple of the perps --- killed them -- badly -- and dumped their bodies on the front door of the responsible Lebanonese factions.

The result? No more Russian hostages taken in Beirut. :)

The Rooskies are threatening to take similar action in Baghdad now, after the murder of three (?) of their people. A much harder proposition than, say Beirut 25 years ago --- but you still have to admire their moxie.
 
Yes but for every story like that there is a story about a recently "liberated" African nation looking to the Soviet Union to prop up their newly created Workers Paradise and the first thing the Russians send is snowplows, cant have a country function if there is snow on the roads......................oh wait.
 
A4sForever said:
The Russians have always "interested" me with how they handle their international relations and practice power politics.

Back during the Reagan years and our debacle in the Lebanon Civil War --- 2 or 3 Russian embassy staffers were kidnapped and subsequently killed by one or another of the warring local factions. Or was it Hezbollah?? This was in 1983 during a time of rampant bombings, kidnappings, murders and was, in general, a helter-skelter time in the Levant. Or is it always that way there?

The Russian reaction? They sent down a couple of Spetnaz teams -- took some of the suspected perp's family members and a couple of the perps --- killed them -- badly -- and dumped their bodies on the front door of the responsible Lebanonese factions.

The result? No more Russian hostages taken in Beirut. :)

The Rooskies are threatening to take similar action in Baghdad now, after the murder of three (?) of their people. A much harder proposition than, say Beirut 25 years ago --- but you still have to admire their moxie.
Click to expand...
I read that story years ago and marveled at their cojones. There's something to be said for a "Don't fvck with us or you'll regret it - a lot" kind of foreign policy.

Brett
 
Brett327 said:
I read that story years ago and marveled at their cojones. There's something to be said for a "Don't fvck with us or you'll regret it - a lot" kind of foreign policy.

Brett
Click to expand...

Severe violence tends to work... just a lot of societies don't accept it.

Don't believe the hippies, violence will almost ALWAYS solve a problem...it has for thousands of years...it just may not be the best solution.
 
Barnard1425 said:
Because Ukraine is making noises about throwing them out. The Black Sea fleet has technically been stationed in a foreign country since the end of the Cold War. There's an agreement that grants them the right to use Sevastopol until 2017, but after that nothing is guaranteed. There's a lot of hostility between Yuschenko and Putin right now, starting with the fomer being poisoned during the elections and continuing through the Russian natural gas pricing issue. If things continue as such, there's a chance the fleet could be out on its ear in a decade. Ukraine has also expressed interest in joining NATO, and having the Russian military stationed within its borders could be a barrier to that.

So all things considered, it makes sense for Russia to do some window shopping for a new port facility. And as their policies in Lebanon and other regional hotspots come under fire, Syria could benefit from a strong military alliance with an aging superpower.
Click to expand...

Yup, they are in a foreign country now but they have a port less than 50 miles away on the Russian Black Sea coast. Like I said before, it is a lot easier and it makes a lot more sense to build new ship facilities for the Black Sea Fleet in a Russian port than a foreign one. Ukraine was their good buddy up until the last two years, they owned it for a long time before the breakup of the Soviet Union, with a 3 or 4 year exception. Why take a risk and build a base, with all of the associated maintenance facilities, for one of their 4 fleets' in another foreign country that may or may not be a friend in a few years? And it is not even in their immediate sphere of influence. Reference back to what I said about limited funding, they ain't got the dough to build a Navy to rival any respectable Navy anymore, much less the US Navy. Base a few ships, maybe. But move an entire fleet, I doubt it (though they could always move its HQ with an Admiral, it would be in name with a small handful of ships though, though they would have to rename it....).

I think you are reading too much into a single foreign article of unknown reliability. I do know a little more about the subject than you, and I will leave it at that. As for A4's and his interest of the Russians, it's a good perspective. But they are a shadow of what they were just 15 years ago and no amount of money is going to get them even halfway to where they were. Corruption is king in Russia nowadays, who cares about a military?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top