Russia Fleet Pact Strands the Ukraine
Stephen Blank, US Army War College | April 29, 2010
The new deal on the Black Sea Fleet secures Russian dominance at the expense of other countries.++ "Kiev loses because the Black Sea Fleet and its accompanying socio-political-economic-cultural infrastructure enables Russia to keep the Crimea, and thus Ukraine, in a permanent condition of de facto circumscribed and limited sovereignty."++ The deal inhibits Ukrainian democratization by halting economic reforms and decreasing transparency and oversight.++ Furthermore, Russia's military presence maintains pressure on the region.





Wed, May 5th 2010, 23:06
Arthur Zielinski
The Northern fleet, based in Archangel, and the Pacific fleet, in Vladivostok provide the naval part of the strategic deterrent. With global warming the Arctic region will be militarised, and may be the arena of future confrontations with Anglo-America. The Baltic has become a zone of stability, with no-one prepared to upset the status-quo, and with no forseeable strategic or military issues outstanding, although this may change with the future development of oilfields along the Baltic coast. With regard to the Black Sea, even the most committed Russophobe will have to admit that there is a legitimate Russian security issue here. It is close to a highly unstable Middle East, and adjacent to the problematic Caucasus region. Whatever the future composition of the Naval forces will be, they will be constrained by the stranglehold that Turkey, a NATO member, has over the Bosporus.
Keeping the Crimea is not the same as influencing events in Ukraine. It can be legitimately argued that the Russian-speaking, and leaning, East Bank of Ukraine is far more influential in representing Russian interests in that country than any lease on the Crimean peninsula, as also the widely-known issue of gas and oil deliveries to the country. Polish efforts notwithstanding, Ukraine is not ready to become an EU member, and there is a sufficient number of citizens hostile to membership of NATO to make that, at present, unlikely.
On a longer-term basis, and returning to the capital needs of a modern Navy, there are historical precedents to show that Naval expansion, and the resultant financial constraints on a Land force, actively promote civil society in a country. There are numerous examples, outstanding ones being the Netherlands, Britain, and the United States, The connections may not be obvious, and may seem a fantasy, but any demilitarisation of Russian society is to be applauded. However, Russia may, as usual, surprise us all.