|
|
Post by Alexandrus on Dec 6, 2007 7:22:55 GMT -5
Russian navy to start sorties in Mediterranean
|
|
|
|
Post by Lonevolk on Dec 7, 2007 2:54:58 GMT -5
It could be just a coincidence, but these exercises are happening at the time of the Kosovo decission on independence and very close to the Balkans.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lonevolk on Jun 20, 2007 1:33:57 GMT -5
Venezuela to buy Russian submarines, air defense systems - source en.rian.ru/world/20070618/67363794.htmlMOSCOW, June 18 (RIA Novosti) - Venezuela is planning to procure up to 10 modern diesel submarines and several Tor-M1 air defense missile complexes from Russia, a source at a Russian think tank said Monday. Russian business daily Kommersant said last week that during his visit to Russia, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez could finalize a deal to purchase Russian diesel submarines for the Venezuelan Navy. The contract reportedly is for the supply of: 5 x Project 636 Kilo-class diesel submarines and 4 x Project 677 Amur four state-of-the-art submarines. "Most likely, [Venezuela] will buy five Project 636 submarines with missile systems..., but it could end up buying nine [submarines]," said Konstantin Makiyenko, Deputy Director of the Center for the Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST). The expert said the multi-billion dollar contract could be split into two or three parts, and include construction of submarine bases and training of submarine crews. He also said the future deal would not be limited to procurement of submarines, but could include the purchase of advanced Tor-M1 air defense missile systems. "It might be a multiple-deal contract...and in addition to submarines Venezuela will purchase Tor-M1 systems," Makiyenko said, adding that the country has long been seeking to acquire coastal anti-ship and air defense complexes "that the country desperately needs at present." The South American country has been vigorously pursuing modernization of its naval fleet and coastal defenses to counter a possible U.S. blockade of its oil fields and prepare for direct military confrontation with Washington. Russia has repeatedly stated that it would actively participate in the modernization of the Venezuelan armed forces until 2013. In 2005-2006, Venezuela ordered weaponry from Russia worth $3.4 billion, including 24 Su-30MK2V Flanker fighters, Tor-M1 air defense missile systems, Mi-17B multi-role helicopters, Mi-35 Hind E attack helicopters and Mi-26 Halo heavy transport helicopters. The country also purchased 100,000 AK-103 Kalashnikov assault rifles from Russia in 2005. With the addition of arms contracts signed in 2006-beginning 2007, Venezuela has become the world's second largest importer of Russian weaponry after Algeria, which signed arms deals with Russia worth $7.5 billion. The submarine contract or any other bilateral arms deals, if concluded, could become an additional irritant in the already testy relations between Moscow and Washington. U.S. authorities have been increasingly concerned about the intensifying partnership between Russia and Venezuela, the world's leading oil producers. Washington has accused their leaderships of failing to uphold democratic values ------------------ Good info on Russian non-nuclear subs (including the ones mentioned in the article) www.ckb-rubin.ru/eng/project/submarine/noatompl/index.htm
|
|
|
|
Post by Orao on Jun 20, 2007 23:24:25 GMT -5
Ahh this whole thing with Chavez and Venezuela reminds me of Cuba and Castro.
Right now Castro is saying "Cuba will never fall to the US", which is quite foolish to say considering that it is imminent once he dies that Cuba will, as a communist country in the Western Hemisphere, cease to be.
Few things are hard to foresee in the future as is this happening. But I guess he is just trying to calm and convince himself of something else as he lives out his last days.
Florida's tourist industry should watch the sitation closely as Cuba will probably give it competition when it comes to a vacation destination. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Lonevolk on Jun 21, 2007 0:28:25 GMT -5
Chavez is the successor to Castro. And if recent political changes in South America mean anything (left wing governments in several countries) he might prove to be even more of a headache.........and he's loaded with cash
|
|
|
|
Post by Orao on Jun 21, 2007 1:00:54 GMT -5
We shall see.
The US is preoccupied with Iraq, eventually Iran and North Korea for right now.
I find it ridiculous, that a country like North Korea, is by all means determined to have an atomic bomb, yet its people are underfed and isolated. If any of the stuff they show here about the country and life is true, then the govt. should not by all means be developing nuclear weapons but rather feed its people.
|
|
|
|
Post by White Cossack on Jun 23, 2007 15:22:25 GMT -5
I know why Russia does it - to oppose the US - but I don't really think Russia should be keeping close ties with these commie idiots from South America.
It's for these reasons that some in the west see Putin's goverment as a continuation of commie bureacracy and power. Some of those neocons even put on Russian's shoulders the responsability to be feeding leftist goverments and NGOs through out the world.
Of course a part of these neocons are a mental case, but still Russia boosts such suspicious acting like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lonevolk on Jun 24, 2007 13:51:36 GMT -5
I know why Russia does it - to oppose the US - but I don't really think Russia should be keeping close ties with these commie idiots from South America. It's for these reasons that some in the west see Putin's goverment as a continuation of commie bureacracy and power. Some of those neocons even put on Russian's shoulders the responsability to be feeding leftist goverments and NGOs through out the world. Of course a part of these neocons are a mental case, but still Russia boosts such suspicious acting like that. Like you said, it's part of an overall strategy. Venezuela is the biggest oil producer in Sth. America and supplies a sizeable portion of US oil supplies. Bolivia is a big gas and other minerals exporter and so on. If access to these resources by western corporations is limited (or even blocked), it weakens the geopolitical clout of the US in general. The weapons supplies on the one hand is good business and on the other hand it makes it harder for the US to contemplate a military intervention......for example these submarine sales to Venezuela are a smart move IMO. They are meant to patrol the offshore Venezuelan oil riggs. It's better to have a fleet of subs than to spend money on expensive surface vessels, which can be much more easily dealt with by the US Navy. To hunt down the subs will require a much bigger effort. Venezuela also recently bought 24 x SU-30 long-range fighter-bombers which can be armed with supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles.....combined with the Sub purchase, that makes a pretty credible threat ........... Also, I don't think Chavez is the crazy commie "dictator" described in media. Yes he's a excentric character, but IMO knows very well what he's doing. I don't see nothing wrong with redistrubiting at least part of the countries oil wealth to the people instead of having a small elite (supported by western multinationals) siphoning it out of the country. |
|
|
|
Post by Яромip on Jun 29, 2007 11:11:46 GMT -5
It just never works. Correct solution would have been to nationalize the oil rigs and pass ownership to the people who actually work on them.
Collective ownership of means of production AT VERY LOCAL level can work (Anarcho-Syndicalism), government ownership does not. In the end, funds will be embezzeled, mis-allocated, squandered on pointless (but popular-feel-good) programmes. Industry is run to the ground, people unhappy, a way for Western imperialists to return is paved anew.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lonevolk on Jun 29, 2007 16:36:44 GMT -5
It just never works. Correct solution would have been to nationalize the oil rigs and pass ownership to the people who actually work on them. Collective ownership of means of production AT VERY LOCAL level can work (Anarcho-Syndicalism), government ownership does not. In the end, funds will be embezzeled, mis-allocated, squandered on pointless (but popular-feel-good) programmes. Industry is run to the ground, people unhappy, a way for Western imperialists to return is paved anew. Interesting idea about local ownership... Chavez is preparing for a potential war with the US and his moves should be looked at through that prism. |
|
|
|
Post by gligorow on Jan 15, 2008 7:30:56 GMT -5
It circulates on Youtube in various edited versions, but I think that this is the closest to the original: youtube.com/watch?v=r-nNFdOqSoMRussian Navy on ManeuversMoscow, Jan 13 (Prensa Latina) The first Rusian navy maneuvers of two fleets, in the Atlantic Northwest and the Mediterranean, since the dissolution of the Soviet Union involve dozens of units, affirmed Sunday an official source. In this way, the Russian Federation renews its presence in world oceans, assured the Minister of Defense, Anatoli Serdiukov. Rocket carrier Cruiser Moscow, flag ship of the Black Sea Fleet left Sebastopol to join by the coast of Malta the North Fleet forces. Headed by aircarrier Admiral Kuznetsov, this naval detachment currently accomplishes missions in the Mediterranean and includes two antisubmarine ships and auxiliary boats which left Russian ports in December. Joint maneuvers will begin with the arrival of the Moscow which will launch two missiles, one of them ship-air, informed the chief of the Black Sea fleet, Alexander Kletzkov. In the joint maneuvers of the Black Sea and North fleets take part 47 planes and 10 helicopters of the Admiral Kuznetsov. Under the command of Vice Admiral Vladimir Maximov, the fleet will travel 15 thousand miles and will visit 11 ports of 6 countries in 71 days, while carrying out three tactical maneuvers with target practices, added the sources. The exercise will highlight the presence of the Russian navy in international waters and will reinforce the security of maritime navigation, concluded Serdiuikov. |
|
|
|
Post by Lonevolk on Jan 17, 2008 19:25:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by CHORNYVOLK on May 26, 2008 9:03:12 GMT -5
Speaker says Russia likely to contest ownership of Sevastopol
16:28 | 26/ 05/ 2008
MOSCOW, May 26 (RIA Novosti) - Sergei Mironov, speaker of the upper house of Russia's parliament, said on Monday Russia could claim back Sevastopol, a Russian naval base on Ukraine's Crimean peninsula.
Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko recently ruled not to extend lease terms for Russia's Black Sea Fleet in Ukraine after May 28, 2017.
"Undoubtedly, we must raise the issue ourselves, and if necessary, with the Ukrainian authorities," Mironov told reporters commenting on Yushchenko's decision.
"We should study the issue more closely. If Yushchenko is making such statements, we can also start looking into the issue properly," the senator said, describing Yushchenko's instructions as "illogical and untimely."
Mironov pledged to give instructions to a number of Federation Council committees to consider drafting a bill on Russia's Black Sea Fleet.
There have been frequent disputes between Russia and Ukraine over the lease of the base. In the latest dispute, Moscow Mayor Yury Lyzhkov was barred from entering the former Soviet republic over similarly provocative statements.
According to Luzhkov, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev gave the Crimea to Ukraine in 1954 as "a token of brotherly love," but under a 1948 decree Sevastopol was assigned special city status "under the governing central authorities," and, therefore, could not be included in the list of territories transferred to Ukraine.
On Thursday Russia's Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying that in response to Ukraine's decision to prohibit Luzhkov from entering Ukraine, Russia announced a number of Ukrainian politicians would not be allowed entry into Russia.
The Crimea, now an autonomous region within Ukraine, is a predominantly Russian-speaking territory. Since the 1991 breakup of the Soviet Union, the Crimea has unsuccessfully sought independence from Ukraine. A 1994 referendum in the Crimea supported demands for a broader autonomy and closer links with Russia.
|
|
|
|
Post by CHORNYVOLK on May 28, 2008 15:31:07 GMT -5
Russia says won't be pushed from Ukraine base
REUTERS
Reuters North American News Service
May 28, 2008 05:45 EST
MOSCOW, May 28 (Reuters) - Russia said on Wednesday it could continue to base its Black Sea fleet in NATO-aspirant Ukraine after a lease deal runs out in 2017, defying Kiev which says it does not want to extend the deadline.
Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko last week ordered his government to prepare a draft law on ending the Russian navy's presence in the port of Sevastopol in 2017, prompting complaints from Moscow that he was being hasty.
"We have never concealed our willingness to keep our presence in Sevastopol after 2017," Russian foreign ministry special envoy Vladimir Dorokhin, who has been involved in Black Sea Fleet talks with Ukraine, told a news conference.
"It has been there for 225 years, and it's only natural ... that this area is ideal for its deployment."
"We don't understand this haste," he said. "Why do they think we need nine years for the fleet's withdrawal? Why not 15 years or five, or four? In the end, this is our fleet, yes? So this must be our headache."
Russia's 18th century Empress Catherine the Great established the base at Sevastopol.
When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 and Ukraine became independent, the Black Sea fleet remained there and in 1997 Moscow and Kiev signed a lease deal.
The dispute over the continued presence of Russian warships in Sevastopol has led to Ukraine barring entry to Moscow's powerful mayor Yuri Luzhkov after he said Russia should take ownership of the port
"The main message I want to deliver is that yes, Ukraine has the legitimate right to adopt any decisions it deems important, but they should not run counter to our national interests or make us give them up," Dorokhin said. (Reporting by Dmitry Solovyov; Editing by Richard Balmforth)
Source: Reuters North American News Service
|
|
|
|
Post by medo on May 29, 2008 19:28:00 GMT -5
I believe Russia should do its best to calm down its tensions with Ukraine. It is obvious that the West tries very hard to introduce quarrels between two fraternal Slavic peoples since their interference in the Ukrainian election campaign in late 2004 and installation of the orange government the westerners have strong influence on.
I am certainly not saying that Russia should forget Crimea or ethnic Russians in Ukraine or majority of Ukrainians who are very fond of Russia but only that there is no need to escalate problems for something that is simply not relevant today, but only for 10 years like is the case for in theory possible withdrawal of Black sea fleet from Crimea. This is simply not on the agenda. Until then, considering pace the governments in Ukraine are changed, I believe we shall see at least 5 different governments in Kiev ;D
However I also believe that clever, mature and intelligent (all that is impossible to see among "elite" in South Slavic countries) Russian leadership already knows all this and is already pacifying the tensions between the countries and actually controls the situation.
This clever Russian policy is applied with other countries too. For example I was pleasantly surprised when I recently read that on the numerous but void and pointless provocations from Georgia, which didn't yield any benefits to Georgia, Russian leadership responded with relaxed and peaceful words reminding Georgia that Russia removed (some of the) sanctions it imposed on Georgia a year before and that Georgia should do its best to calm down the tensions -> Constructively and efficiently at the same time!
After all Russia is not a banana country like most of the other Slavic countries, especially those in the Balkans. Otherwise, considering numerous challenges, it simply wouldn't exist. Russia produces results and at the same time enjoys great respect in the international community.
|
|
