• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Russian Navy Escorts NATO Ships in Black Sea on Way to Ukraine

So the Russian military have started collaborating with NATO in rebuke of Putin/Kremlin? Is that what this article is stating? I'll have to get back to it later when I've the time.
 
Rogue Valley said:
The Ukraine frigate Hetman Sahaydachniy is sailing with Canadian (Toronto) and Spanish (Santa Ana) frigates in the Black Sea.

Waiting for any Russian bravado to board these vessels and force them to Sevastopol.
Click to expand...

Well, they haven't tried to go through Kerch Straight, have they?

Nobody is being driven by "bravado" there. Smarter people on both sides are making decisions there, thank God...

Abbazorkzog said:
So the Russian military have started collaborating with NATO in rebuke of Putin/Kremlin? Is that what this article is stating? I'll have to get back to it later when I've the time.
Click to expand...

No, just says they been observing the NATO ships movements in the area. Nothing out of ordinary, really.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Does Russia exclusively own the Kerch Strait?
Click to expand...

From international law POV? I have no idea. Since Crimea is not de jure recognised, probably not.

But, my point was, the governments in question recognise the reality on the ground and don't want to start a war. No "bravado", in this whole thing, on any side, everyone is being careful.

Pence actually DID try to talk Merkel into sending German warships through Kerch Straight, back in February, but, she refused, of course:
Pence Asked Merkel to Provoke Russia by Sending Warships to Crimea
World War 3: Angela Merkel snubs US’s demand for show of strength against Russia in Crimea | World | News | Express.co.uk

Nobody wants to gamble with the lives of their people...
 
Rogue Valley said:
Does Russia exclusively own the Kerch Strait?
Click to expand...

No but it is mutual sovereign water which means both russia and ukraine must agree for any other military to pass through it, meaning if nato passed through it being also russia waters without russia approving, it would be a direct invasion of russia and by international standards willingly doing such is a direct act of war.

The only military legally allowed to enter the kerch without permission besides russia is ukraine.
 
beerftw said:
No but it is mutual sovereign water which means both russia and ukraine must agree for any other military to pass through it....
Click to expand...

No. The 2003 Treaty delineates Kerch Strait passage corridors for Ukraine and Russian maritime traffic.
 
Rogue Valley said:
No. The 2003 Treaty delineates Kerch Strait passage corridors for Ukraine and Russian maritime traffic.
Click to expand...

foreign militaries are not permitted through the straight without both nations agreeing. That is simply how it is before and after the treaty, that is simple international law.

Most of everything I can find on the treaty specifies both ukraine and russia, and mercantile and non commercial boats.

https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/rada/anot/en/1682-15but here it a big one, even though it does not say military it specifies all foreign ships.


ships of other states will be able to enter the Azov Sea and pass the Kerch Strait only on invitation of one of the Parties and on permit of the other one
 
beerftw said:
foreign militaries are not permitted through the straight without both nations agreeing. That is simply how it is before and after the treaty, that is simple international law.

Most of everything I can find on the treaty specifies both ukraine and russia, and mercantile and non commercial boats.

On Ratification of the Tr... | on April 20, 2004 ? 1682-IV (Abstract text)but here it a big one, even though it does not say military it specifies all foreign ships.


ships of other states will be able to enter the Azov Sea and pass the Kerch Strait only on invitation of one of the Parties and on permit of the other one
Click to expand...

I was never here referring to ships of other nations, as evidenced by the links I supplied specifying the Azov/Kerch Treaty between Ukraine and Russia.

Below is how the mutual treaty delineates navigation lanes through the Kerch Strait.....

kerchblock.jpg


Ukrainian shipping stays to the left (west) of the center-line, Russia shipping stays to the right (east) of the center-line.
 
Your diagram is out of date and fails to reflect the new safety and security requirements imposed to keep shipping safe following the build of the Kerch Strait bridge.


Your people want to blow up the bridge. Such people are mad haters.


Ukraine should blow up Putin's Crimea bridge


Ukraine should now destroy elements of the bridge.

Fortunately Ukraine has the means to launch air strikes against the bridge in a manner that would render it at least temporarily unusable. Because of its significant length, the Ukrainian air force could strike the bridge while mitigating the risk of casualties by those traversing it.
 
Rogue Valley said:
I was never here referring to ships of other nations, as evidenced by the links I supplied specifying the Azov/Kerch Treaty between Ukraine and Russia.

Below is how the mutual treaty delineates navigation lanes through the Kerch Strait.....

kerchblock.jpg


Ukrainian shipping stays to the left (west) of the center-line, Russia shipping stays to the right (east) of the center-line.
Click to expand...

yes ukrainian ships are fully allowed with or without the treaty per international law, russia had no right to halt ships unless they could prove a valid reasoning like acting too suspicious like pirates or refusing to identify or radio. In cases like pirates false flags are common but a simple radio identification often exposes pirates anyways unless they were masters of ukrainian naval doctrine.

One other dumb thing that bothers me is the bridge, I can understand building a bridge, but why could they not engineer a draw bridge that could open up to allow large vessals through, they use those types of bridges around the world.
 
beerftw said:
yes ukrainian ships are fully allowed with or without the treaty per international law, russia had no right to halt ships unless they could prove a valid reasoning like acting too suspicious like pirates or refusing to identify or radio. In cases like pirates false flags are common but a simple radio identification often exposes pirates anyways unless they were masters of ukrainian naval doctrine.

One other dumb thing that bothers me is the bridge, I can understand building a bridge, but why could they not engineer a draw bridge that could open up to allow large vessals through, they use those types of bridges around the world.
Click to expand...

Because the whole point of that bridge (one of the points, anyway) is to give Russia the ability to restrict traffic through Kerch, on a whim... That's why. In an nutshell...
 
DarkSpirit2019 said:
Because the whole point of that bridge (one of the points, anyway) is to give Russia the ability to restrict traffic through Kerch, on a whim... That's why. In an nutshell...
Click to expand...

I would think so given there was enough gap to put multiple draw bridges to allow large vessals through in both directions, and the travel delays would be minimal instead being restricted by size and only having a single entry point.
 
DarkSpirit2019 said:
Because the whole point of that bridge (one of the points, anyway) is to give Russia the ability to restrict traffic through Kerch, on a whim... That's why. In an nutshell...
Click to expand...

You're talking nonsense.

The main point is to improve transport links with Crimea.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Russia's Kerch Bridge is illegal. Anchored on occupied Ukrainian territory.

U.N. General Assembly declares Crimea secession vote invalid

General Assembly Adopts Resolution Calling upon States Not to Recognize Changes in Status of Crimea Region
Click to expand...


Your diagram is still woefully out-dated no matter how many obfuscating links you post.


You might live in a parallel universe of denial, but the bridge exists and shipping has to negotiate it. Hence your diagram is worthless.
 
Westphalian said:
Your diagram is still woefully out-dated no matter how many obfuscating links you post.


You might live in a parallel universe of denial, but the bridge exists and shipping has to negotiate it. Hence your diagram is worthless.
Click to expand...

NATO Foreign Ministers agree to enhance security in the Black Sea region

20190404_190404b-015_rdax_375x250.jpg


4/4/19
Meeting in Washington D.C. on Thursday, NATO Foreign Ministers agreed to a package of measures to improve NATO’s situational awareness in the Black Sea region and strengthen support for partners Georgia and Ukraine. Ministers also reiterated their call on Russia to release the Ukrainian sailors and ships seized near the Sea of Azov.
Click to expand...

There are also some unpublished measures relating to Ukraine and Black Sea navigation operations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom