Russia to keep Syria secure?

[Mr.Flint]

MOSCOW, June 2 (RIA Novosti) - Russia has started dredging at a Syrian port where it maintains a logistical supply point with a possible eye to turning it into a full-fledged naval base, a respected Russian business daily said Friday.

Tartus, the second most important Syrian port on the Mediterranean, could be transformed into a base for Black Sea Fleet warships when they are redeployed from the Ukrainian port of Sevastopol, Kommersant daily said, quoting sources in Russia's diplomatic service and the Defense Ministry.

The Defense Ministry source told Kommersant that a Russian naval base in the Mediterranean would not only help Moscow strengthen its position in the Middle East - where it is currently also involved in negotiations on the Iranian nuclear crisis and the Israel/Palestinian issue - but also ensure Syria's security.

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20060602/48956476.html

So Russia intends to play its old role in the ME again?
Troublesome isnt it?

[RusskiSoldat]

You didn't expect us to just give up, did ya?

[Mr.Flint]

You didn't expect us to just give up, did ya?

Nope, but i expected more finesse

[Bwaho]

So Russia intends to play its old role in the ME again?
Troublesome isnt it?

you think this will lead to big trouble in little israel?

[Dromikaites]

You didn't expect us to just give up, did ya?

Provided "you" have a navy in working condition to begin with

What good would do to Russia to have some second-rate warships in Mediterana while in the same time being associated with a country like Syria? To me that's another "brilliant" foreign-policy move of the government in Moskow.

[Freddie]

You didn't expect us to just give up, did ya?

For a while there........ yes I did.

[RusskiSoldat]

Like what?
Don't forget, you Americans are the evil warmongerers, while we're promoting peace and stability

[Bwaho]

Like what?
Don't forget, you Americans are the evil warmongerers, while we're promoting peace and stability

hehe, yeah :original:


Israel might try to bomb all nuclear reactors in Russia to neutralize the threat

[IamthePope]

Like what?
Don't forget, you Americans are the evil warmongerers, while we're promoting peace and stability

I don't think the world has forgotten that whole Afghanistan thing just yet. This doesn't really trouble me. Did anyone expect the russians to simply remain isolationist forever? they certainly have the right to exert international influence if circumstance allows it. We'll just have to exert our own as we did in the Cold War.

[Da Skinna]

Yes, but both powers are now trying to exert control over the freaking POWDER KEG we know as the Middle East.
Does this make sense to anyone else, both powers might try to take up that Cold War attitude and make pawns of nations and regimes, but this time, their main field of play is over the most volatile and least West friendly place on Earth, this includes Russia, we don't Afghanistan, neither do they. They're playing with something much different than nukes this time, if indeed they are going to play, but what they're playing with now is just as effective in its destruction.

[JP226]

please, Russia is a thrid world country that used to have a first rate military... atleast they pretended their military was first rate anyway.

[_GunneR_]

Russia is not a third world nation, poor in parts yes but not third world. To whoever mentioned it, who has the right to exert power on other nations?? No-one really, but that's not the point here. In my opinion let Russia do what they wish they are not the threat. The threats are wars between Palestine/Iran v Israel. Having Russia in the area will if anything prevent war as their presence will be a major issue to anyone in the Middle Eastern area, the Russians don't want war either, remember they are trying to prevent a nuclear-capable Iran.

[Hansa]

Russia acting as a protector of certain states could provide for more stability in the region, you cant invade a state that ras Russi guaranteeing its safety, dont think they wil do that, but still a strong Russian presence wil act as a detorrant to would be invaders. Once Russia get their act together their natural resources will awake the sleeping bear anyway.

[Gaius Baltar]

Does Russia even have a credible Navy? This announcement is largely symbolic. The current mission is to protect home waters. On paper, there appears to be enough material for a carrier group, but in reality there is not enough trained seamen, funds, or even naval aircraft to staff them. The Russian submarine fleet is in even worse shape. Technologically, Russia has always lagged behind the West. With the fall of Communism and the restructuring of the Soviet block, this gap has become even more pronounced.

Strategically, any move of naval resources into a Syrian port would be suicide, there are no credible defenses there to protect them. No air umbrella, no missle batteries of any type, etc.

Dredging of the port, if that does happen, is likely more a humanitarian gesture on their part. Since there is no Russian naval vessel that would be able to make use of the improved anchorage.

Due to continued political, economic and societal chaos in Russia, the Fleet is in a badly deteriorated state. Even those ships that remain in commission and theoretically operational are generally unable to deploy, due to lack of trained crews and lack of funds to buy fuel and stores. In general maintenance is minimal or nonexistent, and there are no funds to conduct much-needed overhauls, even for major fleet units. Many ships have been abandoned when repairs or refits came due.

Many ships, especially auxiliaries, have been operating in commercial or charter freight or passenger service to raise operating funds. These are listed as active units, as they could rapidly return to naval roles if required.

http://www.hazegray.org/worldnav/russia/surface.htm

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/s...rus/index.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3304377.stm

http://www.janes.com/defence/naval_f...0815_1_n.shtml

[RusskiSoldat]

Not surprising.
The Russian navy was hardly ever first rate, and given the corruption and poverty of today (the latter resulting from the former) it's no wonder our navy is horribly deteriorated.

Yes, but both powers are now trying to exert control over the freaking POWDER KEG we know as the Middle East.

Austria-Hungary, Russia and Turkey all tried to exert power over the Balkans for a very long time.

[John I Tzimisces]

The term used to describe russia and the former soviet states is Second-World. Don't denegrate them and put us on the level of Sudan, thanks...

[RusskiSoldat]

The second world was actualy the Soviet states, while the third world was states that have not picked a side (since most of these were highly undevelopped, the term came to mean poor, underdevlopped lands, but in reality Switzerland was a third world country).
And Russia was doing really badly, but we're doing better thanks to Putin.

[_GunneR_]

I ask how is Putin viewed by most Russians? From what i hear and read he is doing good things over there.

[Mangalore]

Don't see the Russian move any different than the US bases in Saudi Arabia and the Emirates, the Russians want a supply base in the Mediterran to extend the reach of their black sea fleet, which also is possibly also meant to put a protection over Syria as a sovereign country as they consider them their friends. I can see that this move is entirely in the interest of Russia, who wants at least some of its old allies protected, extend the capabilities of its sized down navy.

In and by itself this move is not moved against anyone in particular either, as said, the US, UK and France have foreign military bases in various countries (not all clean nice democracies) as well so I find it strange that it is suddenly despicable that Russia does it as well.

What good would do to Russia to have some second-rate warships in Mediterana while in the same time being associated with a country like Syria? To me that's another "brilliant" foreign-policy move of the government in Moskow.

Moscow does not (and is not forced to)evaluate its international position based on western opinion. In their view Syria always has been a friend to Russia in the Near East for decades, as such if Russia decides that if it wants to have some bearing on the regions development it needs a military base in the vincity it is natural for them to do it there.

In my eyes this change would indicate that Russia pretty much accepts the loss of its former ring of satellite nations and dependencies which allowed the Soviet Union to project its force on pretty much all of Eurasia by land and thus and thus needs to establish military bases in friendly countries to extend the reach of their naval forces to still have influence on certain issues.

The caucasus is closed to them, Central Asia has loosened its connections (even though it has not severed it) and Eastern Europe has turnt west.

Although in that context, Russia also negotiated with a central asian ex-Soviet country the reopening of a military base some months ago, it was speculated to get back a bit of the influence vacuum that was quickly filled by the US during the Afghanistan operation. All in all the current development is however in my eyes not really expansionistic or aggressive, they simple want to reestablish a certain degree of capabilities and influence, and thus options in the international politics.


PS: Also, some important oil pipelines run through Syria (and other ones closeby to the North through Turkey) to ship off oil to the west and possibly to a lesser extent Russia, as such a stabilizing influence by the nation that traditionally supported Syria might be not that bad an idea. It's not like Russia has suddenly the finger on the trigger to do anything with it.

PPS: Have to check that but I think the increasing oil prices and the prices of other raw materials have filled Russia with foreign money so that it's economical situation is actually not that tight anymore and I believe (as said, have recheck that) that this allowed Russia to spend increased money in restarting various of their military projects, e.g. maintaining and modernizing their equipment.


@Gaius Baltar: checked your sources but all of them are at least 3-6 years old and the one projection of the development of the Russian navy actually shows a stabilization of the force levels from now on into the future.

[Tony83]

I think it would be unrealistic not to expect Russia to try and reestablish herself on the world stage. She is incredibly rich in natural resources and let's hope it's only a matter of time before the internal problems are dealt with as she walks down the road to democracy.

In fact it would probably be very unhealthy in the long run if America remained as the only superpower, and there are plenty of historical examples where the lack of effective competition has led to complacency and decline.

Wouldn't it be great if our leaders could for once learn the lessons of history; where you could have America, Europe, Russia, the Indian sub-continent and China working together in friendly competition instead of trying to undermine off each other!