Jump to content

September is coming


Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, akd said:

Looks like typical British answer with undertone "your farts at us were so paltry, that we even didn't spot it". This is very sensitive hit on Russian conceit. On their military forums now celebrating a great victory over "petty-britt" (such Russians misinterpret the word "Great Britain"). But probably video will come soon. If both sides will not agree to hush up this incident

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sgt Joch said:

yes, it has been confirmed that HMS Defender deliberately entered Russian territorial waters.

Confirmed by whom? By Russia? Who in the world recognized this territorial waters belongs to Russia?

Russia claims the illegally-annexed peninsula and its waters are its territory, but Britain says its ship was passing through Ukrainian waters.

1 hour ago, Sgt Joch said:

Not sure what the point was unless it was a one off publicity stunt. Is Boris trying to prove the Royal Navy is still relevant?

In last time UK signed several memorandums with Ukraine about military shipbuilding (missile boats and minesweepers) and two naval bases equipping . Probably Britain wants to use opportunity to became influent player in the BlackSea region again to contest Russia and Turkey. Probably British companies have some future interests on Black Sea shelf... So, on the background of impotent politic of eternally deeply concerned EU, such active position of Britan is good for us. Putin laugh at western diplomacy and consider it like weakness. He understands only words of force even it will be such "provocations". 

Large international maneuvers Sea Breeze-2021 will start at 28th June. So, we can expect new such sort of incidents.

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Haiduk said:

Confirmed by whom? By Russia? Who in the world recognized this territorial waters belongs to Russia?

Russia claims the illegally-annexed peninsula and its waters are its territory, but Britain says its ship was passing through Ukrainian waters.

The fact that most of the international community does not recognize the annexation is pretty much irrelevant, what counts is the facts on the ground. Crimea is "de facto" part of Russia and it looks like it will be that way for a long time to come. 

To maintain any kind of international credibility, Russia has to enforce the borders they claim around Crimea. They can't allow NATO ships or aircraft to just ignore its borders.

That is why I don't see this as being anything other than a one-off. The last thing NATO wants is to get into a shooting war with Russia over the status of Crimea.

Given the fact that the NATO naval exercise will be next week, I wonder if this was part of it to see how the Russians would react?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russian Foreign Minister during the summon of UK amabasador:

Russian Foreign Ministry: Moscow warns everyone who goes to provocations like the incident with the British Defender that the consequences could be dire

We can appeal to common sense, demand respect for international law, and if this does not help, we can bomb. Not only on the way, but also on the target, if colleagues do not understand

Incident with British destroyer may lead to escalation, the Black Sea region becomes an arena of military confrontation

In the event of a repeat of provocations, responsibility for their possible consequences would rest entirely on the British side.

Agreessor and occupant demands for respect of international law - ahahah

 

British response:

The prime minister spoke as Britain pledged to defy the Kremlin and continue sailing through the region to defend international waters.

"Britain didn't recognize Russian sovereignty over Crimea, which according to international law belongs to Ukraine".

"Royal Navy always will be comply with international law and nothing will be prevent us from inocent passage"

"This is territorial waters of Ukraine"

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/you-wont-stop-our-ships-defiant-britain-tells-putin-hr3jcn7c5

Reportage of BBC journalist from the HMS Defender during incident - gunfire heard, but no bombing, just low-pass of Su-24

 

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filming from Russian Coast Guard ships "Ametist" and "Provornyi". On 4:44 commander of "Provornyi" gives order to "Ametist" to make warning shots on course of Defender, but to exclude hits in the ship. On 5:24 "Ametist" 1x6 30 mm gun makes 3 shots

 

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, akd said:

not the same issue, those subs were outside UK territorial waters. UK and USA would react differently if a Russian vessel entered the 12 miles limit.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/russian-bombers-intercepted-miles-us-airspace/story?id=71171943

Remember Turkey shot down a Russian jet and it was over its territory for only 17 seconds.

Edited by Sgt Joch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Sgt Joch said:

not the same issue, those subs were outside UK territorial waters. UK and USA would react differently if a Russian vessel entered the 12 miles limit.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/russian-bombers-intercepted-miles-us-airspace/story?id=71171943

Remember Turkey shot down a Russian jet and it was over its territory for only 17 seconds.

So Russian warships never transit the English Channel via innocent passage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, akd said:

So Russian warships never transit the English Channel via innocent passage?

Again, not the same thing.

Under the convetion of the law of the sea, the right of "innocent passage" is subject to many restrictions, for example, it can't be done for propaganda purposes or pose a threat to the territorial integrety of the coastal state or be done for intelligence gathering purposes and has to abide by all the laws and regulations of the coastal state.

The HMS Defender mission did not meet any of those criterias to qualify as an "innocent passage".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sgt Joch said:

Again, not the same thing.

Under the convetion of the law of the sea, the right of "innocent passage" is subject to many restrictions, for example, it can't be done for propaganda purposes or pose a threat to the territorial integrety of the coastal state or be done for intelligence gathering purposes and has to abide by all the laws and regulations of the coastal state.

The HMS Defender mission did not meet any of those criterias to qualify as an "innocent passage".

Thanks for the clarification. It is a lot clearer to me now. Considering the " lets blame Russia for everything " approach prevalent right now in the West, I don't think Russia would have taken the action they did without reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UK made clear statement. Defender passed through UKRAINIAN waters. The opinion of occupiers is not interesting to anyone. Russia, of course, in own right to protect occupied territory, but in that case any NATO ship has a right to answer, because they juridically passed through Ukrainian waters with agree of Ukrainain government and under attack ot third state. And as showed the hystory, all what BSF can is heroicaly sink own ships in Sevastopol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/25/2021 at 9:58 AM, Sgt Joch said:

Again, not the same thing.

Well, the key difference is that the only factor making the Defender transit provocative is Russia’s illegal claim to the waters, which is not recognized under international law, therefore it cannot be a violation of innocent passage rules. It is provocative only to Russia and only because of their illegal claim.

Quote

All ships, including warships, enjoy a right of innocent passage through the territorial sea under UNCLOS, Article 17. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal state. An exhaustive list of activities considered to be prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal state is contained in UNCLOS, Article 19. There is no evidence that the British destroyer was engaged in any prohibited activity at the time of the alleged incident. Rather, British authorities indicated that the HMS Defender was conducting a routine transit from Odesa to Georgia using an internationally recognized traffic separation corridor in the Black Sea.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/déjà-vu-russias-illegal-restrictions-innocent-passage-black-sea

 

Edited by akd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well HMS Defender entered Russian territorial waters with all weapons loaded, everyone at action station, prepared to defend itself, ignoring all orders from Russian authorities and not recognizing that Russia even has jurisdiction. That is not "innocent passage" by any stretch of the imagination.

The much better legal argument is the one made by Haiduk that Crimea is still Ukrainian territory and HMS Defender had the legal consent of Ukraine to enter the territory.

But even that is a legal fantasy which ignores the reality of the ground. Crimea is now part of Russia and will be for the foreseeable future. Trying to analyse this from a legal point of view misses the point. Russia seized Crimea by force and now must use force to hold on to it  until the fact is eventually recognized by the rest of the world.

The issue for Russia is more how to act or react. Firing on or seizing Ukrainian vessels is one thing, sinking a RN ship would be a major escalation which could trigger WW3. OTOH Russia has to enforce its borders if it wants the rest of the world to respect them. This is a major game of chicken and the question is who will blink first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24th of June, the next day after incident with Defender, about 20 Russian jets, some with loaded ammunition Kh-31 antiship missiles dangerously maneuvered around Netherland frigade Eversten, which passed in internarnational waters in 70 n.miles from Crimea coast. Pairs of Su-30SM twice approached on 100 m and pased on low altitude along the course, simulating attacks.

Netherland MoD only today issued official statement about this incident

Russian MoD claimed Eversten suddenly changed own course toward Kerch strait and all maneuvers of aircrafts and ships were aimed at avoiding border violation. By the words of Russian MoD all passes of Russian jets were at a safe distance.

E5Dl5ovXIAY4MWa?format=jpg&name=medium

https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/defensie-nederlands-fregat-urenlang-geintimideerd-door-bewapende-russische-vliegtuigen~b6029a27/?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2F

 

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/26/2021 at 9:48 PM, Sgt Joch said:

Crimea is now part of Russia and will be for the foreseeable future.

Having control of an area is just that, and though that may have consequences under international law, the legal entity that is the Russian state does not contain Crimea nor the eastern parts of Ukraine.  No nation recognises Crimea as part of Russia, and that is important too if you want to talk realpolitik.

One of the principles under which Britain continued WWII after Europe had come under German control was that national boundaries should not be changed by force.

You may argue that might makes right, but the might of the world in general wants a system under international law based on principles reached by consensus, it's the only way with a future.  Systems that deny this will eventually find it eating them from the inside.

Just watching the Ukraine game btw!  Still in the balance!

Edited by fireship4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

This news would be more appropriate for CMSF2 topic, but potentialy can influence on Russian intentions in Ukraine. 

Representatives of Taliban movement arrived to Moscow for negotiations despite this organisation officially recognized in Russia as terroristic and prohibited. After negotiations with Lavrov, Taliban representatives arranged the briefing. On the background of Taliban offensive in Afganistan and taking control over borders with Iran, Tadzhykistan and Turkmenistan, Lavrov made a statemant that Russia will not go to war until Taliban will threat Russian allies (to Tadzhykistan first of all). From own side Taliban said they will fight with attempts of ISIS to expand own influense on territory of Afganistan. 

Interesting that many Russian experts and politics say that Taliban advance agreed with USA in order to distract attention of Russia and involving it to the new war in Afganistan. 

 Зображення

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not a new development. Russia is not worried about the Taliban and Afghanistan as such, but they are worried about rising islamic radicalism among the muslim populations along their southern borders. There is a large number of migrant workers from that area that regularly come to work in Russia so the potential for political unrest/terrorism is high.

I see they are also planning to activate a base in Tajikistan.

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/07/07/russia-says-ready-to-activate-tajik-military-base-amid-us-pullout-taliban-advance-in-afghanistan-a74450

Edited by Sgt Joch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...