In thinking about the triviality of such US military doctrines, one wonders if it is possible even in theory for the US to cure itself of the cultural death virus spread to us by the failed British empire. Some special relationship.
Holding Black sea access restriction is the key. In addition, IMHO, Black sea is not suitable for large warship. 10,000 ton Slava class heavy cruiser is already too big. Russia's inland ship building can easily cover the 1000 ton class missile corvettes needed in the black sea area. Crimea itself has to become the unsinkable missile base, much like the Kaliningrad. Without a land bridge, Kaliningrad can be resupplied only through sea lane, that implies blockade is possible and deep storage is necessary. Barents Sea access should be focused on icebreaking ships and strategic nuclear subs. I guess that is why the aircraft carrier has been put into lower priority. The real opportunity and where unrealized potential is Vladivostok. I would argue Russia needs to relocate a portion of its traditional North Sea and Baltic Sea centric naval establishment, including capacity to build modern warships to the Far East. Maybe a 6-month open season every year for cargo passage and all year round naval passage. When the icebreaker fleet is modernized, then maybe full year cargo passage.
Is there any possibility that Turkey will modify the Montreux Convention? And what would be the legal basis for doing so? What's in it for Turkey?
>>"Patrushev said that Russia is comprehensively modernizing its fleet and building many new high-tech vessels."
Seems like the Russian Navy, with the exception of the strategic deterrent component, is last priority for Russia. Is this "modernization" really ongoing or is it more aspirational? When the Black Sea Fleet has new ships that can ward off anti-ship missiles and air/surface/subsurface drones, THEN it will be meaningfully modernized. And not until.
In thinking about the triviality of such US military doctrines, one wonders if it is possible even in theory for the US to cure itself of the cultural death virus spread to us by the failed British empire. Some special relationship.
Holding Black sea access restriction is the key. In addition, IMHO, Black sea is not suitable for large warship. 10,000 ton Slava class heavy cruiser is already too big. Russia's inland ship building can easily cover the 1000 ton class missile corvettes needed in the black sea area. Crimea itself has to become the unsinkable missile base, much like the Kaliningrad. Without a land bridge, Kaliningrad can be resupplied only through sea lane, that implies blockade is possible and deep storage is necessary. Barents Sea access should be focused on icebreaking ships and strategic nuclear subs. I guess that is why the aircraft carrier has been put into lower priority. The real opportunity and where unrealized potential is Vladivostok. I would argue Russia needs to relocate a portion of its traditional North Sea and Baltic Sea centric naval establishment, including capacity to build modern warships to the Far East. Maybe a 6-month open season every year for cargo passage and all year round naval passage. When the icebreaker fleet is modernized, then maybe full year cargo passage.
Is there any possibility that Turkey will modify the Montreux Convention? And what would be the legal basis for doing so? What's in it for Turkey?
>>"Patrushev said that Russia is comprehensively modernizing its fleet and building many new high-tech vessels."
Seems like the Russian Navy, with the exception of the strategic deterrent component, is last priority for Russia. Is this "modernization" really ongoing or is it more aspirational? When the Black Sea Fleet has new ships that can ward off anti-ship missiles and air/surface/subsurface drones, THEN it will be meaningfully modernized. And not until.