US Arctic ambitions. Washington dreams of the Northern Sea Route

The U.S. Department of Defense has presented the new United States Arctic Doctrine to Congress. The main place in it is assigned to the weakening of Russia's positions in the Arctic region, including through competition in the military sphere.

Arctic dispute

Global warming makes the Arctic and Arctic seas an increasingly attractive region for international shipping. After all, the Northern Sea Route, which runs along the Russian coast, is the shortest way to get from Europe to East Asia. Until recently, the main problem on the path of Arctic shipping was ice, but now, due to climate change, the northern seas are becoming more accessible.

If the Northern Sea Route becomes an international artery, the significance of the Suez Canal, which has repeatedly caused major international conflicts and contradictions, will sharply decrease. The NSR as a route for the transit of goods is beneficial to the United States, countries of Western Europe, and China with Japan and South Korea.

Another reason for interest in the Arctic is the colossal reserves of natural resources that are hidden under the Arctic ice. Russia rightfully considers these reserves to be its own, but this does not affect the appetites of American corporations. Currently, it is the Arctic that produces a quarter of the world's gas and a tenth of the world's oil. Unexplored stocks can be even more impressive.

According to some reports, it is the Russian Arctic that hides almost all the reserves of Arctic gas and up to 80% of the oil reserves of the Far North. Naturally, the Americans are simply jealous of such luck in our country - it turns out that Russia actually controls all the most valuable resources that the Arctic is rich in.

Do not forget about the military-political significance of the Arctic. Access to the Arctic is access to the northern borders of Russia; it is an opportunity to deploy the latest types of weapons and conduct tests. Already, the United States is actively building up its military presence in the region, conducting constant military exercises together with its “northern” allies like Norway, and developing tactics for fighting in the Far North in the event of an armed conflict with a likely enemy in the person of Russia.

The debate between the great powers of the Arctic has become quite a long time. But there were also much more significant regions for the Americans, where the confrontation was fierce. Middle East, Asia-Pacific, African continent, Eastern Europe ... Americans simply did not have time for the Arctic, but now in Washington they think that it is time to tackle the northern seas as well.

US Navy Secretary Spencer Decides

The US military also does not hide its global plans for the Far North. Understanding perfectly what strategic opportunities the USA will provide for “internationalization” of the Arctic space, the Pentagon expects not only to concentrate more and more troops and weapons in the Arctic region, but also to achieve the possibility of Russia navigating its warships along the Northern Sea Route, that is, along the Russian coast .

The current task of the US Navy is to build up power in the Arctic by creating new strategic naval bases in the Bering Sea region and expanding its military presence in Alaska,

- said US Secretary of the Navy Richard Spencer.

By the way, not only Russia is the object of US Arctic appetites. Washington claims Canada, stressing that it must forget about its exclusive right to use the Arctic spaces. Donald Trump announced his desire to buy Greenland from Denmark. That is, in the USA they are seriously concerned about expanding their presence in the Arctic and want to establish control over the largest Arctic territories in terms of area and extent.

However, while the United States can still dictate certain conditions to Canada or Denmark, Russia is a different case. And the Americans are well aware that they will face very serious resistance here. Therefore, Washington is trying to push through its position, relying on international law, or rather, pretending that the United States is concerned about its observance and sincerely care about the equal rights of all countries of the world and about the belonging of the Arctic to all mankind.

In fact, the United States is very concerned that they own only a small piece of the Arctic - Alaska. Accordingly, the dividends from the use of all the advantages of the US Northern Sea Route are minimal. Therefore, American politics in the Arctic is aimed at its "internationalization", that is, simply at the affirmation of the principle "that no one is mine."

Canada, Norway and Denmark, the western Arctic countries, are US allies in the NATO bloc. Therefore, now the United States has the opportunity to strengthen its military presence in the region, using the territories of these states. Naturally, the policy of building up a military presence in the Arctic is accompanied by the bloating of the myth of the Russian threat. They talk about it in Norway, Denmark and even in Canada, which is very far from Russia and has never entered the sphere of interests of our country.

Washington uses its northern allies to pressure Russia. But even Norway, which has borders with our country, can do nothing. Indeed, almost the entire Northern Sea Route runs along the Russian coast. Therefore, the only opportunity that the United States still has is to prevent the development of Russian-controlled shipping through the NSR through various political obstacles.

In particular, Norway now constantly expresses concern about the environmental situation in the northern seas and calls Russia the main source of environmental risks for Northern Europe. The presence of nuclear submarine in our country fleetstationed in the Far North, becomes another cause for concern made. In fact, Americans, British or French with their military tests and exercises around the world harm the environment no less, but maybe more. But in the framework of the strategy of containing Russia in the Arctic, the West is resorting to the policy of double standards familiar to it.

Norwegian Prime Minister Ine Marie Erickson Sereide said that it is necessary to check the Russian Northern Sea Route for compliance with European standards. The “environmental community” has also become more active, which even manages to connect global warming with the growth of Russia's economic and military activity in the Far North.

However, Russia is just trying to protect the environment, including transferring its fleet to more environmentally friendly nuclear fuel. For example, the large-capacity tanker Prospekt Koroleva traveled the entire Northern Sea Route with clean fuels, which once again confirmed Russia's intention to continue to improve the environmental friendliness of its sea vessels.

The Northern Sea Route is the Russian artery

Russia views the Northern Sea Route as a “historically formed national transport communication”. This wording is also contained in Russian legislation - in the Federal Law “On Natural Monopolies”. Russia has not claimed and is not going to claim the entire Northern Sea Route, but we must understand that a significant part of it passes through the territorial waters of our country. This is the first caveat.

The second nuance is that the Northern Sea Route is a single sea shipping route and it is impossible to use its separate sections that are not under Russian jurisdiction. In addition, shipping along the Northern Sea Route is very dangerous without navigation, which only Russia can carry out.

Since the Cold War with the USSR, the United States has tried to challenge the control of the Soviet state over the Arctic. In June 1965, the Americans, in a reply to the Soviet leadership, emphasized that in relation to the Kara Sea straits, one should be guided by the right of all vessels to pass through the straits that connect the two parts of the open sea and are used for international shipping.

But the right is right, and in fact it is still impossible to pass the entire Northern Sea Route without Russian navigation. Therefore, as if the United States did not want to achieve its goal, but Russia "holds" the Arctic with an iron grip. And Washington does not have any real legal leverage in order to influence Russia. And Russia can play on the contradictions of other Arctic states, which, despite allied obligations with the United States, still have their own geopolitical and economic interests in the Arctic.

At the same time, global civil shipping does not lose at all from the fact that ships will have to pass through the Russian Northern Sea Route. Moreover, there are certain advantages. Thus, vessels flying the Russian flag may be granted exclusive rights to transport oil, gas and other resources. Russia is ready to provide assistance to foreign vessels following the NSR and guided by the rules and requirements of Russian legislation during its passage.

From Varangians to Chinese

Do not forget about another very important player on the Arctic field. This is China, which although it does not go to the northern seas, but has undisguised interests and ambitions in this region. First of all, they are connected with the transport corridor from East Asia to Europe, which can be safely called the “New Silk Road”, and secondly, with the possibility of transporting oil and gas from the Far North from Russia to China.

The route through the Russian North is much shorter than through the Indian Ocean, moreover, it is under the control of Russia, with which China has very friendly relations, and is devoid of the many risks associated with piracy off the coast of the Malay Archipelago and East Africa. If we talk about the land "New Silk Road", then the Northern Sea Route is also able to make it a serious competition.

China's activity in the Arctic is very worrying for the United States. American representatives have repeatedly stated that the Celestial Empire did not try to intervene so much in the situation in the Arctic seas. But it is worth noting that Russia should not turn a blind eye to Chinese interest in the Arctic. Indeed, despite the confrontation with the United States, China’s position on the Arctic space is not much different from the American.

The Arctic situation is actually wider than the territory of the states that make up the region. It is also vital to other members of the international community,

- says the "White Book", published by the Chinese government and dedicated to the strategy of the Celestial Empire in the northern seas.

In order to gain a foothold in the Arctic, China will increase investment in the construction and development of oil and gas infrastructure in the Russian Far North. So, the plant for the production of liquefied natural gas in Yamal, commissioned last year, at 30% was funded by the National Petroleum Corporation of China.

Since Denmark, Norway and Canada are much more suspicious of China and the investments it offers, than Russia, it is our part of the Arctic that becomes the main object of investment activity of Chinese companies. Moreover, against the background of sanctions by the United States and the European Union, Moscow simply has nowhere to go, and further development of interaction with Beijing becomes for it the only alternative in the current situation.

Comments

[Thrifty]

So after all, the United States dictates to Russia its rights and conditions, and from our side, in response, only "fraternal people", and nothing concrete on the merits of the issue. ..

[Civil]

According to some reports, it is the Russian Arctic that hides almost all the reserves of Arctic gas and up to 80% of the oil reserves of the Far North

Which to the West and sell. Funny author)

[Tatyana]

The current task of the US Navy is to build up power in the Arctic by creating new strategic naval bases in the Bering Sea region and expanding its military presence in Alaska,

- said US Secretary of the Navy Richard Spencer.

100 years of Alaska leasing from Russia by the USA have passed! America has long been time to return Alaska to Russia, and not lick its envy on the Northern Sea Route of the Russian Federation.

Best defense is attack!

[tesser]

Quote: Tatiana

100 years of Alaska lease from Russia

First off, Alaska is sold. The text of the contract can be taken and read, this is not a secret.
Secondly, what else is Russia? The Bolsheviks had the mind to not sign royal debts.
Third, Alaska has been the US state since 1958. In the US, the priority of national law over international law is in force.

[Tatyana]

Quote: tesser

Quote: Tatiana

100 years of Alaska lease from Russia

First off, Alaska is sold. The text of the contract can be taken and read, this is not a secret.
Secondly, what else is Russia? The Bolsheviks had the mind to not sign royal debts.
Third, Alaska has been the US state since 1958. In the US, the priority of national law over international law is in force.

And this in politics for Russia should be no difference!
For Russia should troll the United States in the same way that Washington trolls in geopolitics of Moscow and pushes other countries to do this - Poland, Ukraine, the Baltic countries, Japan and other NATO countries and not NATO.

National interests of Russia should be higher than American!

[tesser]

Quote: Tatiana

For troll USA Russia

You see, the principle of "the sea is free" is one of the cornerstones of the modern system, one of the main results of WWII (yes, you won't believe it). So if you want to troll Omerika so that everyone, including China, will fit in against Russia, this is the most suitable topic.

[Tatyana]

Quote: tesser

You see, the principle "the sea is free" is one of the cornerstones of the modern system, one of the main results of WWII.

And about the Northern Sea Route along Russia, it is not necessary to mention it!

And the question of the North Sea shelf belonging along the Russian Federation is supposedly already not Russian yet to be resolved! Our hydrologists prove that he is Russian!
Let foreigners swim from Europe to around Alaska - there and back! And see how the United States and Denmark (Greenland) like it.

By the way, about the documents that Alaska was allegedly sold by the United States to Russia, experts say that they are fake.
So in trolling Russia America has where and where to turn around!

[Tatyana]

Quote: Tatiana

By the way, about the documents that Alaska was allegedly sold by the United States to Russia, experts say that they are fake.

If you expose Khrushchev, then to the full!
We need to talk about the fact that Khrushchev squandered Alaska in the interests of the United States, and not only promised Japan to donate 2 to the Kuril Islands.

Nefig was the Politburo of the CPSU to let Khrushchev in the USA to Nixon, so that he would shake the corn on the cob natively! He touched the corn that surrendered the United States to Alaska.

[Tatyana]

I apologize not to Nixon, but to Dwight Eisenhower.

[tesser]

Quote: Tatiana

not to Nixon, but to Dwight Eisenhower.

To Nixon, too, he was vice president.

[Vasya_Piterskiy]

In the United States, the priority of national law over international law is in force.

So we need to make sure that in contentious issues priority is given to the Russian Constitution, and not to international law. So far we have the opposite ... Although our Chapter is trying to change this. God grant that he had enough time and effort for this.

[tesser]

This is a purely internal topic. In the Russian Federation (simplifying), the president can sign an agreement on behalf of the state, and the Russian Federation will be obliged to execute it (if the agreement does not stipulate ratification by the parliament). In the United States, it cannot, the treaty comes into force only when Congress adopts it as law (therefore, for example, no Yalta-Potsdam system for the United States has ever existed, no matter what Roosevelt and Truman said at the time). That is, the issue is not of "sovereignty", but of the delineation of powers between the president and parliament.
So in the USA, no agreement that contradicts national law will enter into force. If you enter - it will be canceled by the sun. If you have already entered, and Congress wants to accept something new that does not fit into the agreement, it repeals the old law and, accordingly, automatically withdraws the USA from the agreement.

[Town Hall]

Section VI of the US Constitution states that the provisions of international treaties not only constitute the “supreme law of the country,” but also “legally oblige” the authorities of individual states. Thus, if a conflict arises between a self-enforceable international agreement and the laws of any US state, a self-enforceable international agreement will take precedence.

So, in the Asakura v. Judgment Seattle The US Supreme Court, having examined the complaint of a Japanese citizen residing in the United States, declared illegal a provision issued by the Seattle authorities, which prohibited the issuance of licenses to foreigners to engage in usurious activity, since this regulatory act violated, from the point of view of the Court, the provisions of the Friendship Agreement , trade and shipping, concluded between the United States and Japan in 1911. In making the decision, the Supreme Court relied on an article of the Treaty, which established that “citizens or other entities of one of the High Contracting Parties will have the freedom to enter, travel and reside in the territory of the other Party, engage in trade to the same extent as its own citizens or subjects. " The court recognized the provisions of this article as self-enforcing and not requiring any assistance from federal or state law for their application in US courts. Thus, it was determined that engaging in usury is one of the varieties of "trade" - the term specified in the Treaty. The US Supreme Court decided that the provision in violation of the Treaty should be repealed.

[ccsr]

Quote: Town Hall

The US Supreme Court decided that the provision in violation of the Treaty should be repealed.

This argument is very doubtful - the United States simply cancels the contracts disadvantageous to them, such as for the RMND, and that’s all over. In this case, casuistry, as in the case of a separate individual citizen, will not work - the rate is too high, and the Americans do not care that someone will respect the treaty disrespectfully. As they say, the Arctic is worth it, and the rate is high so that they send everyone to a known address with any contract ....

[Town Hall]

Quote: tesser

In the USA it cannot, the treaty enters into force only when Congress adopts it as law

It is also necessary to consider that in American law it is assumed that US international treaties can be concluded in the form of executive agreements. Executive agreements are those agreements that are concluded by the President of the United States with a foreign state, for which Senate consent is not necessary, an executive order of the President is sufficient. Basically, there are two types of such agreements: a) subject to Congress approval by a simple majority vote (congressional executive agreements), and b) without the consent of Congress, which are carried out by the President of the United States as part of his authority as the head of the executive branch, head of foreign policy or the chief commander (freestanding executive agreements

[Town Hall]

examples of the first type of agreement are the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and US participation in the World Trade Organization (WTO). In the second case, examples include international cooperation with the states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which was executed in the United States through executive agreements without the approval of Congress, as well as agreements on the establishment of diplomatic relations or an agreement on peace or armistice (for example, the Paris Agreement of 1973 on ending the war and restoring peace in Vietnam or the Yalta or Potsdam agreements of 1945) and various other treaties, among which secret executive agreements

[Town Hall]

No less important and interesting was the United States v. Belmont by the US Supreme Court, within the framework of which the Court raised the question of the validity of the executive agreement concluded by President F. Roosevelt, without the approval of the Senate, with the Government of the USSR, which contradicts the public order of the State of New York. In making the decision, the US Supreme Court, in accordance with Article VI of the Constitution, once again confirmed that international treaties, together with the US Constitution, constitute the supreme law of the country, therefore, this rule applies to all other types of international documents and agreements, including executive agreements. Due to the fact that the federal government has supremacy in the field of international relations over the states, therefore no state authorities can intervene or restrict the prerogative of the federal authorities in the field of international affairs. Therefore, executive agreements of the President of the United States have equal legal force with international treaties of the United States within the framework of the federal legal system and have supremacy over all state laws that contradict them.

[Town Hall]

In 1988, the United States v. Palestine Liberation Organization. The court was to assess the appropriateness of the actions of the United States Attorney General, who closed the representation of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) at the United Nations in New York, in accordance with and pursuant to the 1987 Federal Anti-Terrorism Act, which conflicted with US obligations under an international treaty United Nations Headquarters. The District Court of Appeals, based on Congressional Acts, decided that the Attorney General, like any other government agency, did not have the appropriate authority to take actions that run counter to the US headquarters international treaty. Thus, the federal court recognized the illegality and unlawfulness of the actions of the Attorney General and the fact that the international treaty in this case prevails over the later Congress Act (Anti-Terrorism Act 1987).

[Town Hall]

Quote: tesser

This is a purely internal topic. In the Russian Federation (simplifying) the president can sign the treaty on behalf of the state, and the Russian Federation will be obliged to execute it (unless ratification by the parliament is stipulated in the treaty). In the USA it cannot, the treaty enters into force only when Congress adopts it as law

It is necessary to recall the decision of the US Supreme Court of 1829 in the case of Foster & Elam v. Neilson, in which it was decided that an international treaty was not self-executing and therefore not applicable until it became part of the US legal system (this does not apply to self-executing agreements in which the United States participates)
I do not see any difference with:

15. Self-enforceable and non-enforceable rules of international law

The Federal Law of the Russian Federation “On International Treaties” enshrined the well-known division of treaty provisions into “self-enforceable” and “non-self-enforceable”. The Law referred the provisions of treaties to the first ones as “not requiring the publication of domestic acts for application”; the second includes provisions for the implementation of which the adoption of relevant regulatory legal acts is necessary, and therefore they do not apply directly. The courts of the Russian Federation directly apply only the so-called "self-executable" international treaties.

[tesser]

UAU.

Thanks a lot, Town Hall. Thoroughly stated.
However, I want to draw your attention to the following:

1. Two of your examples relate to the relationship between a contract as a federal norm and state law. That is, similarly, the compliance of international treaties of the Russian Federation with regional legislation, for example, so as not to go far, of the Kaliningrad region. In the Russian Federation, this situation is regulated by Article 4 of the aforementioned 101-FZ, which, speaking generally, prescribes the subjects of the federation under the hood.

2. The third example, with the OPA, limits the interpretation of legislation by executive authorities. The court indicated that the Congress Act leaves room for interpretation that does not contradict an international treaty. In the event of a conflict of Congress Act and an international treaty, the Congress Act shall prevail if expressly provided for in the Act. If Congress has not clarified this issue, then the prosecutor’s office cannot independently decide on the priority of documents.

That is, the case of the United States v. The Palestine Liberation Organization confirms just my position: a document of Congress (as a norm of national law) takes precedence over decisions of the executive branch, including in the form of an interpretation of a normative act.

3. You are right in pointing out the decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Council of 10.10.2003 on the application of self-executing agreements. That is, the plenum directly points to the very priority of national legislation over international, which some people lack. However, again, the same dog is buried under the flawed Russian "priority": the inflation of presidential powers in Russia to the detriment of parliamentary powers. In American practice, it is clearly defined: the United States' entry into an international treaty is possible only to the extent permitted for implementation by US presidential decrees. If the implementation of the treaty goes beyond the presidential powers, then the international treaty must be included in the US legal system by acts of Congress. Compare this with the Russian boodyagi, where the adoption of this or that norm is explained by the "international obligations of the Russian Federation" adopted 100 years ago. That is, as it were, Article 15 101FZ says the same

1. The international treaties of the Russian Federation are subject to ratification:
a) the execution of which requires a change in existing or the adoption of new federal laws, as well as establishing rules other than those prescribed by law;

but neither II nor V section 101FZ does not state that the Legislator can withdraw the Russian Federation from any international treaty by adopting a non-conforming Federal Law or refusing to accept the corresponding one. The powers of the Legislator are written as toothless as possible.

[Town Hall]

Welcome Just added a few touches to the picture). You are right that the vast majority of US international treaties are implanted by the relevant laws of the Senate. I just added a few exceptions to this rule.

[yuratanja1950]

Quote: tesser

In the United States, the priority of national law over international law is in force.

Amazing And in world international practice, they try to palm off the rest of the countries on the contrary - the prevalence of international law over national (state) ...
Gopniks on an international scale, and you will not call it anything else ...

[tesser]

Quote: yuratanja1950

to other countries to palm off on the contrary - the prevalence of international law over national (state) ...

I seem to have written in Russian.
Take any international treaty by federal law, like the Americans - and you will be the primacy of national law.

[Amurets]

Quote: tesser

In the United States, the priority of national law over international law is in force.

In the Russian Federation, on the contrary: "The Constitution of the Russian Federation, Part 4 of Article 15:" The generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation are an integral part of its legal system. If an international treaty of the Russian Federation establishes rules other than those provided for by law, then the rules of the international treaty are applied . "
More details in the source: http://sneg5.com/obshchestvo/zakonodatelstvo/o-glavenstve-mezhdunarodnogo-prava.html

[tesser]

Quote: Amurets

If other rules are established by an international treaty of the Russian Federation than those provided by law, the rules of the international treaty shall apply.

This provision should be understood in conjunction with Art. 15 101FZ ON INTERNATIONAL TREATIES OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION. If an international treaty requires a change in national legislation, then it is subject to ratification by the Legislative Assembly, which implies that the national legislation will be changed in accordance with it. Thus, the good authors of the constitution "simply" cut the corner: if the national legislation still needs to be brought into conformity, then we will assume that it has already been brought.

But you are, of course, right. Party "United Russia" represented by its leaders g. Turchak and Medvedev should have initiated a change in Art. 15. To do this, firstly, it should adopt the Federal Law "On the Constitutional Assembly", which is provided for by Article 135 of the Constitution (absent to this day), and then initiate its convocation and the development of a new Constitution (since Chapter 1 cannot be changed).

We are waiting, sir.

[Basarev]

Ideally, any foreign or international laws should be declared null and void in Russia. Indeed, according to common sense, only Russian laws should apply in Russia. And of course, there should be a single law throughout the country. That is, the country should be unitary. And this will also solve the historical injustice laid down by Leninist national politics: finally, all peoples will in fact be equal in rights, because the Nazi republics, almost sovereign kingdoms, will disappear. Only ordinary regions will remain, without any own legislation, as it should be.

[tesser]

Quote: Basarev

Indeed, according to common sense, only Russian laws should apply in Russia.

Above is a fairly detailed discussion of this situation with the Amur. Contact the nearest United Russia reception office with your ideas.

Quote: Basarev

Only ordinary regions will remain, without any own legislation, as it should be.

You do not seem to understand that federations in the conditions of the "multinational Soviet people" are more stable than unitary states. In a situation of "take sovereignty as you take away" Russia, whether it is bad or good, went through very difficult and hungry times as a united state.
How it will succeed without a federation (and the de facto transition to a unitary state has happened a long time ago) - we'll see. If we survive.

[ALLxANDr]

The Bolsheviks had the mind to not sign royal debts.

- to declare this is the same as to write - I am not competent in this topic. The Bolsheviks refused, yes, and as it turned out, it only benefited in the short term. And then this solution brought big problems not only in the coming years, but also later, decades later. Was it worth it? I think it was not worth it. Read necessarily fascinating reading)

In the United States, anything can be written, even such as a ban on a river spilling in high water, but this does not prevent the river from spilling every spring. Do you understand what I mean?
And in the context that you wrote, this law will operate exactly as long as politicians of an international level are bought in countries for a certain amount. And it will act only in those countries where these politicians were bought. But with the help of army forces, they can really dictate their rights, but as a rule these are third world countries.

[tesser]

Quote: ALLxANDr

as it turned out, it only benefited in the short term.

Another blogger understands the international situation better than Comrade. Chicherin.

Quote: ALLxANDr

Do you understand what I mean?

No. It's not about the weather, but about regulations that are entirely in the hands of Congress.

Quote: ALLxANDr

this law will operate exactly as long as internationally purchased policies are bought in countries for a certain amount.

This law will operate exactly as long as the main players have a willingness to wet everyone who goes against the thieves move. If on some issue the United States, the EU and China say: it will be like that, but if it doesn’t - it’s gone, then you won’t fight a lot with your army.

Here it is necessary to distinguish between the SKM problem, where China is trying to fence itself a corner, the US is against, and the EU does not care, and the SMP problem, where the EU, China and the USA have a common position.

[ALLxANDr]

Another blogger understands the international situation better than Comrade. Chicherin

- And Comrade Chicherin, the last and only instance on whose words you can rely? Do you seriously think that not repaying a debt to an international bank and this will not end in anything ?! This decision came back almost immediately, a coalition from a number of European countries began to gather to isolate Russia. There was a conspiracy to completely isolate Russia - since it failed. For this, another step did not fail - when Russia began to buy only a certain range of products and mainly agricultural. Thus driving Russia into a purely agricultural country. It got to the point that they later set such a condition that only wheat would be bought. What subsequently got out in hunger.
So let Comrade Chicherin and those who are with this comrade - let them go through the woods. The decision with debt climbed sideways for a long time and more than once, since everything on this did not calm down.

No. It's not about the weather, but about regulations that are entirely in the hands of Congress.

- I see a book, and nevermind in it. You did not understand what was written. Reread.

This law will operate exactly as long as the main players have a willingness to wet everyone who goes against the thieves move. If on some issue the United States, the EU and China say: it will be like that, but if it doesn’t - it’s gone, then you won’t fight a lot with your army.

- this will act exactly as long as rivers of cash flow into the pockets of international players from the White House. And if Russia and China say no, even this will not help either America or the EU. Like what happened in Syria)

Here we should distinguish between the SKM problem, where China is trying to fence itself a corner, the US is against, and the EU does not care, and the SMP problem, where the EU, China and the USA have a common position

- China is not only trying, but also doing. And he will do it despite the fact that Americans and Europeans like it or not. China does not care if the Americans have a single position or not.

[tesser]

Quote: ALLxANDr

and Comrade Chicherin, the last and only instance on whose words you can rely?

You were not there, comrade would have told. Lenin and Trotsky, how to conduct politics.

Quote: ALLxANDr

You did not understand what was written.

It would be that.

Quote: ALLxANDr

this will operate exactly as long as cash flows from the White House

This will continue to be the case when the solutions proposed by the Americans are, in the aggregate, more convenient for everyone than any other.

Quote: ALLxANDr

China is not only trying, but also doing. And he will do it despite the fact that Americans and Europeans like it or not

As, for example, in the UKM part, China wants it in a special way, but in other seas, including the NSR, China wants it in the American way. He will return to the topic of straits in territodes, for example, Indonesia - Comrade Xi, will become a liberal at all. Radical liberal.

Quote: ALLxANDr

Russia and China say gone out, even this will not help either America or the EU. Like what happened in Syria

Not to mention what is happening in Syria, the position on the NSR in China coincides with the American. By the way, this is written in the note.

[ALLxANDr]

You were not there, comrade would have told. Lenin and Trotsky, how to conduct politics.

- By the way, you were not there either, but nevertheless you are speaking about this) Do not remind, by the way, where did Trotsky go so quickly? Is this Judas damned?

It would be that

- It was smarter, I’m sure I would have missed myself!

This will continue to be the case when the solutions proposed by the Americans are, in the aggregate, more convenient for everyone than any other

- this will be until democracy in America is covered with a basin) By the way, the copper basin is ready)) A multipolar world has come, and no one has asked Americans for permission!

As, for example, in the UKM part, China wants it in a special way, but in other seas, including the NSR, China wants it in the American way.

- this is probably what Comrade Xi personally told you, right? What you want to wishful thinking, I have already seen. Let's continue.

He will return to the topic of straits in territodes, for example, Indonesia - Comrade Xi, will become a liberal at all. Radical liberal.

- and if we do not allow ?! Have you ever considered another variant of events? Or learned to vang on vodka?

Not to mention what is happening in Syria, the position on the NSR in China coincides with the American. By the way, this is written in the note.

- That's right, do not say. The position on the NSR in your head converges, and that of the author. Have you personally heard how C said this? Maybe there is a link to the official source, where does the Chinese leader say this? I haven’t come across this. Share the link, I want to read. And then you never know what the author of this article neglected .. at least he did not give sources, and it is not possible to verify this.

First read this very "White Paper of China", and then build your own conclusions. Experts have nothing against her, as do journalists: https://ria.ru/20180910/1528215029.html

[tesser]

Quote: ALLxANDr

Experts have nothing against it, just like journalists: https://ria.ru/20180910/1528215029.html

The usual blah blah blah. But you should pay attention to the interpretation of the "expert". He speaks of Russia as a country providing icebreaker escort services along the NSR. There are no allusions to "sovereignty" understood as the right to prohibit someone from doing something.

Quote: ALLxANDr

Have you personally heard how C said this?

Comrade C on minor issues rarely speaks out.

Quote: ALLxANDr

and if we do not allow ?! Have you ever considered another variant of events?

What other variant of events? When Indonesia prohibits passage through its straits of Chinese ships? The Chinese comrades have in mind such a moment, but are not very worried. In particular, from time to time there is a desire to dig a canal bypassing Indonesia, through Thailand.

Quote: ALLxANDr

this is probably comrade Xi personally told you

Again. Comrade C is not a two-core. The position of China on the NSR is more or less described by your own link.

Quote: ALLxANDr

The multipolar world came, and no one asked the Americans for permission!

The multipolar world consists in the fact that the Americans are trying to throw the whole mess, which they themselves have spread and dump.

Quote: ALLxANDr

By the way, you weren’t there either, but nevertheless you are speaking about it

I’m drowning for the Soviet regime (which is rarely the case with me), but here you are alternativeizing something there.

[ALLxANDr]

The usual blah blah blah. But you should pay attention to the interpretation of the "expert". He speaks of Russia as a country providing icebreaker escort services along the NSR. There are no allusions to "sovereignty" understood as the right to prohibit someone from doing something.

“You either perceive it that way or you don’t know everything.” We can’t forbid anyone to go the northern way, if you haven’t figured it out. There are also international waters. But! Nobody will go there, since the thickness of the ice there is even higher. And to snuggle up to the shore - this already means to bow to Russia. And here, in any case, the situation forces us to go to Russia. Firstly, only Russia has an icebreaking fleet - this is a fact. Secondly, the thicker the ice, the lower the speed - this is also a fact. And the third fact follows from here - international waters in the Arctic, will always lose to the coastal Russian. Less fuel for transportation, faster travel speed and in case of big problems on the water - the coast is not far. And the fact that you thought up there is not true.

Comrade C on minor issues rarely speaks out

- the logical question is from here, but was that statement that excited you so much?

What other variant of events?

- you do not have so many arguments and time to convince (at least logically) that this is the only option for the development of events. I will not write my own versions of events, there is no desire to arrange a polemic on this issue.

Again. Comrade C is not a two-core. The position of China on the NSR is more or less described by your own link.

- that's it. Therefore, we take into account the words of experts. If you do not trust, we take a book and read from cover to cover and draw conclusions based on what is written, and not on the basis of your inner fears.

The multipolar world consists in the fact that the Americans are trying to throw the whole mess, which they themselves have spread and dump.

- where can they dump from this planet? The answer is nowhere. Therefore, your conclusion is not correct. A multipolar world means that Americans will now be forced to consider new centers of power and reckon with these forces. Up to this point, they have done what they wanted and how they wanted. And so that this "mess", as you put it, does not cost them too much - they usually connected several more countries, which were ready to shoulder part of the costs for certain dividends. There is nothing even to discuss here.

I’m drowning for the Soviet regime (which is rarely the case with me), but you’re alternative there

- drown and as deep as possible so that it does not accidentally come up. I'm such a pacifist, but as I recall Gorbachev and Yeltsin (who were the Communists at the head of an entire party that did not react in any way (or reacted languidly) to the collapse of the USSR), bloodthirstiness wakes up in me (which is rare with me).

[tesser]

Quote: ALLxANDr

We can’t forbid anyone to go the northern way, if you haven’t figured it out.

Seriously? You take the Rules of navigation in the waters of the Northern Sea Route, the order of the Ministry of Transport of 2013, read article 2.

Quote: ALLxANDr

And the fact that you thought up there is not true.

Your understanding of navigation matters is generally clear.

[ALLxANDr]

Seriously? You take the Rules of navigation in the waters of the Northern Sea Route, the order of the Ministry of Transport of 2013, read article 2.

- Seriously. We take the rules and read. Plus, we additionally read what the water area is and where it goes, we understand. Plus, we additionally correct legal nihilism, namely, before referring to the document or its part - write it correctly. They would indicate at least the order number, since you are referring to it)

Quote: tesser

Your understanding of navigation is generally clear

- Well, if it’s clear, then it’s good - it will save you from unnecessary correspondence. It’s bad that your understanding in these matters is not very clear.

And this, additional literature for self-education:
https://determiner.ru/termin/akvatorija.html
https://studme.org/59172/pravo/severnyy_ledovityy_okean_rezhim_plavaniya

[Mikhail Drabkin]

You Lean write:

So after all, the United States of America dictates its rights ...

In short: DO NOT RAIN!
—- The Arctic is not only the Northern Sea Route and the seas of the Arctic Ocean. This is a significant part of the unknown Russia and the treasury of the world.
-Russia has the will, goals, means and ability to consolidate its competitive advantage over the rest of the world in the Arctic. This is expressed in geographical, territorial, political, military, industrial, historical (Plav-Sever and Chelyuskintsy, navigation along the Northern Sea Route ...), technological ... components of a sharpened Arctic strategy and the momentum of its implementation.

SPECIFIC AND FOR EXAMPLE:
—6 new bases on the islands (5) covering the Northern Sea Route:
-Island New Earth
-Island Land of Alexandra
-Island Medium
-Island Boiler Room
-Wrangel Islands
-Mys Schmidt.
In December 2017, Shoigu said that in total, 425 objects with a total area of ​​700 thousand square meters were built in the Arctic over five years. m. They are deployed more than one thousand troops, and the arctic armament. The Northern Strategic Direction was created under the command of the Northern Fleet.
—- The growing nuclear icebreaker fleet: another Russian nuclear-powered icebreaker "Ural" was launched. In 2016 and 2017, two other icebreakers were commissioned - Sibir and Arktika. This has not been built since Soviet times. Nuclear floating station "Lomonosov", delivered to Tiksi.
—- Industrial, mining and oil and gas development ... CIS Sabetta, Prirazlomnaya ...
—- Russia's application for the shelf to the North Pole, after exploring the Lomonosov Ridge (Chilingarov’s expedition)
—- And about China - this is most likely the smallest possible problem of Russia in the Arctic. After all, in the end - owning an asset is 80% of the right to own it.
—- The main thing is not to lose the momentum of development and use the power of Russia in the Arctic.

"Arctic. We have returned":
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_b5OLN2cIgo
Map and details of Russia's military presence in the Arctic:
https://zen.yandex.ru/media/nikitinskiy/vse-voennye-obekty-rossii-v-arktike-5bd041aa8d61b800aaf93c5d

[Same lech]

The main thing is not to lose the momentum of development and use the power of Russia in the Arctic

Without a good baton in hand for sobering the dull Arctic, there is no way to defend ... the icebreaking fleet and the Northern Fleet of Russia is a good argument for the West.

[Uncle lee]

Yes ! There are many who wish. But will they not have the appearance, as in the picture?
PS I imagine that he has Faberge .....

[Amurets]

Quote from Uncle Lee

Yes ! There are many who wish. But will they not have the appearance, as in the picture?

Worse. The muzzle of his face so as not to lose face. It keeps better in the cold. But the realities, see the link: The submarine had to literally "cut" out of the ice

American submariners were not well prepared for a war with the Russians in the Arctic. The Los Angeles-class nuclear submarine Hartford got stuck in the northern ice, practicing strikes against the ships of the Russian Navy. The incident was reported on its Twitter page by the US Navy Currents magazine.
https://utro.ru/army/2018/03/22/1354725.shtml

[Amurets]

The presence in our country of an atomic submarine fleet deployed in the Far North is yet another cause for concern. In fact, Americans, British or French with their military trials and exercises around the world harm the environment no less, but maybe more. But as part of the strategy of containing Russia in the Arctic, the West is resorting to its usual

And this means that it is time for Greenpeace under the leadership of Baron Rothschild to be recognized as a terrorist organization. Concern about the existence of the Soviet and Russian atomic fleets, and not only during this period, but since its inception. And after the collapse of the USSR, the United States stubbornly tried and is trying to destroy the shipbuilding industry and the military shipbuilding of Russia. This was partially achieved by the destruction of the Black Sea shipyards in Nikolaev in Ukraine.

Ilyin, Kolesnikov. "Submarines of Russia."

[knn54]

China finances projects, and Russian money is transferred to offshore companies. At least, it’s strange.

[Uncle lee]

Quote: knn54

Russian money is transferred to offshore

And then they are waiting for foreign investment ....
And this is not strange, but leads to bad thoughts about the activities of our government.

[Chaldon48]

What's strange here is that the capitalists have always been cosmopolitans and no matter what nationality they are, they are everywhere and everywhere busy looking for a "cash cow", and the concept of Motherland means little to them.

[rotmistr60]

Washington dreams of the Northern Sea Route

Dreaming is not harmful, but who will give them control of the NSR? Russia has long been in a state where it is possible to dictate something.

[tesser]

Quote: rotmistr60

who will give them control over the NSR? Russia has long been in a state where it is possible to dictate something.

Some kind of strange position.
SMP - is this the way from where to?

[Amurets]

Quote: tesser

SMP - is this the way from where to?

Dig from the fence to lunch, if the BS-shovels can persuade. So let the Yankees try to combine incompatible.

[Alex Fox]

from everywhere

Quote: tesser

Quote: rotmistr60

who will give them control over the NSR? Russia has long been in a state where it is possible to dictate something.

Some kind of strange position.
SMP - is this the way from where to?

everywhere the path, the shortest path from the Pacific Ocean to Europe. and it passes 90% in the territorial waters of Russia.

[tesser]

Quote: Alex Fox

everywhere the shortest way from the Pacific Ocean to Europe

Please name the main ports of the NSR, the communication between which may be of international interest.

Quote: Alex Fox

and it passes 90% in the territorial waters of Russia.

If you are not aware, then only one section of the entire NSR passes through the waters that Russia considers its territorial - the Sannikov Strait, 238 km long. This strait is not covered by the 12-mile zone, but Russia considers it to be its cirque, since the entire territory of the Novosibirsk archipelago, the islands of which this strait separates, is Russian territory.

On the other hand, there is a position that regardless of the situation with the waterways (for example, the Gibraltar Strait is located in the Spanish, British and Moroccan waterways), the straits used in international shipping should enjoy the status of a transit passage, which implies the free movement of any ships, including military ... Not a "notification procedure," as the Russian Federation understands using the example of Kerch, but free movement.

[ccsr]

Quote: tesser

On the other hand, there is a position that regardless of the situation with the cords (for example, the Gibraltar Strait is in Spanish, English and Moroccan cords), the straits used in international shipping should enjoy the status of a transit passage, which implies the free movement of any ships, including military .

Well, let them try to go this route without our icebreakers and navigation support systems - the flag is in their hands. Only how much will Lloyd ask for insurance for them, first let them figure out before they start navigating the NSR without Russia.

Quote: tesser

Please name the main ports of the NSR, the communication between which may be of international interest.

Our airports in Siberia and the Far East are also not of interest to airlines, but American planes fly to Asia through our territory, and not where the best air harbors are. The same will happen with the NSR, as soon as the cost of delivery from China to Europe is significantly reduced compared to the traditional route.

Quote: tesser

Not a "notification procedure," as the Russian Federation understands using the example of Kerch, but free movement.

And what does it have to do with the Kerch Strait passing through the territory of Russia? Who will force us to determine the order of movement there - based on the results of the war in Donbass or something, or according to the results of the First World War?

[tesser]

Quote: ccsr

Only here how many of them Lloyd will ask

The question is correct, but no longer the question of "permissions" and "sovereignty", agree.

Quote: ccsr

but flights of American planes to Asia are carried out through our territory

These flights are carried out on the basis of mutual agreements, and not be prescribed unilaterally in the Federal Law, as the Russian legislator is trying to do.

Moreover, these flights are a commercial matter. There will be a misunderstanding of the parties - they will start flying differently, and the Russian Federation will lose money.

Quote: ccsr

as soon as the cost of delivery from China to Europe is significantly reduced compared to the traditional route.

This will not happen as long as ice-class vessels are required, and especially icebreaking assistance. Via Suez is faster.

Quote: ccsr

And what does it have to do with the Kerch Strait passing through the territory of Russia?

And Danish - through the territory of Denmark. By the way, there is also a bridge. If the Danes introduce the same procedure for Russian vessels as the Ukrainian ones in Kerch / the Sea of ​​Azov, then it will be possible to talk in detail.

[ccsr]

Quote: tesser

The question is correct, but no longer the question of "permissions" and "sovereignty", agree.

This is a matter of making a profit, and for the sake of it, everyone will reckon with our requirements.

Quote: tesser

rather than unilaterally register in the Federal Law, as the Russian legislator is trying to do.

Who told you such nonsense? Why on earth are we going to freeze our ears for the sake of the ambitions of some kind of near-politician? Who exactly are you talking about?

Quote: tesser

Moreover, these flights are a commercial matter. There will be a misunderstanding of the parties - they will start flying differently, and the Russian Federation will lose money.

The same thing about the NSR - there will be interest, ships will follow it, spitting on the opinion of the Americans. As for the flights of Americans through our territory, for some reason, so far, not a single sanction has been imposed on Russian companies serving this route. Make a conclusion to whom it is more profitable.

Quote: tesser

Via Suez is faster.

Why did you get that through Suez faster? Russia is already providing icebreaking wiring - pilot wiring took place a long time ago. So it's a matter of time, and the NSR will work.

Quote: tesser

And Danish - through the territory of Denmark. By the way, there is also a bridge. If the Danes introduce the same procedure for Russian ships,

When Denmark has its own nuclear weapons, then someone will reckon with its opinion. And now she is doing what is required of her by those who have weight in this world.

Quote: tesser

what is valid in Kerch / the Sea of ​​Azov for Ukrainian - then it will be possible to talk substantively.

Do not give out wishful thinking - for the Sea of ​​Azov and the passage to it of the Third World War will not begin. So everyone will fulfill what Russia will require when passing through the Kerch Strait, especially since this does not contradict the world shipping requirements.

[tesser]

Quote: ccsr

beyond the Sea of ​​Azov and passages to it the third world will not begin

You are absolutely right, do not care for everyone. But even in the case of a ban by the NATO aggressive block of the Black and Baltic Seas for ships from / to Russian ports, incl. military, nothing will start either, no need to deceive yourself. Maximum, they will not get off with tomatoes.

Do you have tomatoes in Denmark? And if we find?

Quote: ccsr

When Denmark has its own nuclear weapons, then someone will reckon with its opinion

Firstly, I would not recommend joking with Denmark. There are 3 new frigates with MK41, and on KBF 4 corvettes 20380 and 1 (live) frigate 11540. Secondly, if there is an opinion to close the Baltic, it is unlikely that the Danish government will make this decision on its own. And then it’s too simple, then we have an aggressive NATO bloc, or one little Denmark, for some reason, takes offense for everyone.

Quote: ccsr

Why did you get that through Suez faster?

Because container ships now run 20-25 knots, and how many icebreakers?

Quote: ccsr

there will be interest, the ships will go along it, spitting on the opinion of the Americans.

No one will go anywhere unless the Americans give the go-ahead for the Bering Strait. This is for a start.

Quote: ccsr

Make a conclusion to whom it is more profitable.

It is mutually beneficial. But if they close Siberia, then the bourgeoisie will get + an hour of flight time and +50 bucks for a ticket, but Aeroflot will lose non-financial money, which they donate to him for this topic.

Quote: ccsr

for some reason, there’s still not a single sanction against Russian companies serving this route,

This is Aeroflot.

Quote: ccsr

Why on earth are we going to freeze our ears for the sake of the ambitions of some kind of near-politician?

Be careful in terms. Also, do not freeze your ears.

Quote: ccsr

Who exactly are you talking about?

About him, dear.

Putin proposes to ban foreign vessels from transporting hydrocarbons along the Northern Sea Route

https://www.vedomosti.ru/business/articles/2017/11/17/742087-inostrannim-sudam-sevmorputi

Quote: ccsr

This is a matter of making a profit, and for the sake of it, everyone will reckon with our requirements.

Or they will drive their icebreakers. I wrote "freedom of passage of warships", did you miss it?

[ccsr]

Quote: tesser

But even in the case of a ban by the NATO aggressive block of the Black and Baltic Seas for ships from / to Russian ports, incl. military, nothing will start either, no need to deceive yourself. Maximum, they will not get off with tomatoes.

You apparently do not know that in the places of the straits the territorial waters cannot exceed 3 nautical miles, which is why the Kerch Strait just forces all ships to enter into our territorial waters, which requires permission. The Danish Strait at a minimum distance of 18 km, so the option with a resolution will not work. Moreover, Denmark has already been paid for passing through the straits in the 19th century, including Russia, which is why in peacetime no one will forbid us to use the Danish Strait.

Quote: tesser

Firstly, I would not recommend joking with Denmark.

We generally do not see her at point blank range - even let the Nord Stream pass by, and do not pay them anything.

Quote: tesser

Secondly, if there is an opinion to close the Baltic,

If it comes to this, then for starters we will destroy those who try to close the Baltic - the United States in the first place.

Quote: tesser

Be careful in terms. Also, do not freeze your ears.

Oh, how fearful you are - not Svidomo by chance?

Quote: tesser

Or customize their icebreakers.

Let them be built first, and then we will look. And we already know how their submarines come up.

Quote: tesser

I wrote "freedom of passage of warships", did you miss it?

You can write anything, but US carriers are not designed for the Arctic, so you can dream about how they go along the NSR.

[tesser]

Quote: ccsr

but US carriers are not for the Arctic,

Ice class carriers would really look weird. So while the notorious global warming does not free the NSR from the ice at least periodically, this issue has a scholastic character. On the other hand, prepare your sled in the summer.

Quote: ccsr

Let them be built first, and then we will look.

Build / built, even the Chinese. We'll see sooner or later.

Quote: ccsr

Oh how shy you are

Do not value a good attitude.

Quote: ccsr

If it comes to this, we will first destroy those

You will rub grate.

Quote: ccsr

even the Nord Stream by

This is please.

Quote: ccsr

You probably don’t know that in places of straits territorial waters cannot exceed 3 nautical miles,

Of course not in the know. Since such a rule does not exist.

Quote: ccsr

forces all ships to enter OUR territorial waters, which requires permission.

Just the transit principle means that entering the tervodes during the passage of the strait not requires permission in the police sense of the word. The Russian side was witty enough to tell outside that its actions in the strait ensure safe navigation in the narrow. Including channel blocking of the fairway during the 2018 incident.

By the way, for memory. Absolutely me not confuses the idea of ​​a sea blockade of the Azov coast of Ukraine.

Quote: ccsr

The Danish Strait at a minimum distance of 18 km, so that the option with a resolution will not work.

Read Wikipedia carefully. The length of the bridge is 6,7 km.

Quote: ccsr

Denmark has already been paid for passing through the straits in the 19th century, including Russia,

There was no RF in the XNUMXth century. Already discussed in this thread.

Quote: ccsr

in peacetime no one will forbid us to use the Danish Channel.

The Danish Strait - it is in a completely different place. Danish Straits (and the Bosphorus) - You are right, no one will forbid.

Bye Donnie president. And then - how it goes.

[ccsr]

Quote: tesser

So while the notorious global warming does not free the NSR from the ice at least periodically, this issue has a scholastic character. On the other hand, prepare your sled in the summer.

We have already prepared them - the Bastion complex, for example.

Quote: tesser

You will rub grate.

Yes, they didn’t rub in Syria, so don’t worry about our sanitation, since the Americans fled there.

Quote: tesser

Of course not in the know. Since such a rule does not exist.

It seemed to you:

The territorial sea is a part of the sea, with a width of 12 nautical miles (22,2 kilometers), measured from the low tide line or from the baseline.
Russia, like most states, set the breadth of its territorial sea to 12 miles. Approximately 30 countries, mainly maritime powers, adhere to the previous limit of 3 miles.

Just in the dispute between Russia and Ukraine over the Kerch Strait, they used this figure when they wanted to reach an agreement. At least that's what the media wrote, as far as I remember.

Quote: tesser

Read Wikipedia carefully. The length of the bridge is 6,7 km.

They measure not by the width of the bridge, but by the width of the strait, because artificial structures can generally narrow the strait to hundreds of meters.

Quote: tesser

There was no RF in the XNUMXth century. Already discussed in this thread.

And how did this free modern Russia from paying off debts on tsar's bonds?

Quote: tesser

Danish Straits (and the Bosphorus) - You are right, no one will forbid.

So you just tried to intimidate the public by allegedly blocking our oxygen in the Baltic Sea if we did not make concessions along the Kerch Strait.

Quote: tesser

Bye Donnie president. And then - how it goes.

And then China will dominate the world, and he will really need our NSR. So Donnie is resting, along with his plans, to impose something on us according to the regime of using the NSR.

[tesser]

Quote: ccsr

We have already prepared them - the Bastion complex, for example.

)) Rust until.

Quote: ccsr

since the Americans fled from there.

You see a) they did not run away, but aligned the front line)) b) how is our great friend Erdogan? Didn’t get off with tomatoes? It seems that he has a son who sells oil, banned in Russia, by Isil, and they said on TV that he heard about this?

Quote: ccsr

Approximately 30 countries, mainly maritime powers, adhere to the previous limit of 3 miles.

So what? Where did you get the idea that Denmark and the Great Belt are just from "about 30 states"?

Quote: ccsr

They measure not by the width of the bridge, but by the width of the strait, because artificial structures can generally narrow the strait to hundreds of meters.

Who measures, sorry? Are you trying to control Queen Margrethe, or what?

Quote: ccsr

And how did this free modern Russia from paying off debts on tsar's bonds?

Completely. Royal debts were not included in the debt mass of the London and Paris clubs. There were some bodybuilders at the media level, but no more. The Russian Federation declared itself a successor to the USSR, but the USSR never declared itself a successor to the Republic of Ingushetia.

Quote: ccsr

So you just tried to intimidate the public by allegedly blocking our oxygen in the Baltic Sea if we did not make concessions along the Kerch Strait.

No. I said that the grounds for passage by straits (not only Danish) of Russian ships are fundamentally the same principles as the passage of any ships through the NSR. As for Kerch, Ukraine is not in a position to resolve the issue by force, but who is able to - does not care for all these harlots.

Quote: ccsr

China, and he will really need our NSR.

First, China doesn't care about the NSR as long as there is enough ice. Secondly, if and when China needs it, then, excuse me, it is not "yours", but general. China is just drowning for "sharing the Arctic" to such an extent that even the Norwegians are pissed off. That in part of the NSR coincides with the position of the United States. Scandalizing China and the United States with your Bastions is not the same as ex-brothers.

[ccsr]

Quote: tesser

Rust until.

Dream ...

Quote: tesser

You see, a) they didn’t run away, but aligned the front line

This we took the course "History of military art", so we remember how they in Vietnam, too, drew lines.

Quote: tesser

So what? Where did you get the idea that Denmark and the Great Belt are just from "about 30 states"?

I already told you that we do not see Denmark at all, and it is unclear why you dragged her into her straits. But the fact that you have not heard about the 3-mile zone is obvious to me, otherwise you did not ask your question.

Quote: tesser

Royal debts were not included in the debt mass of the London and Paris clubs.

You again did not understand that several states paid off Denmark in the 19th century, including RI. What are Dan’s claims to the passage of our ships now, especially since we de facto recognized the requirement to pay debts to international organizations, i.e. recognized the succession of not only the USSR, but also RI. What does not suit you in this? Maybe that they are not going to return the tsar’s gold to us, as the historian V. Sirotkin repeatedly wrote, and on the basis of this you draw a conclusion about present-day Russia? Do not flatter yourself - and time will come to royal gold ....

Quote: tesser

I said that the grounds for passage by straits (not only Danish) of Russian ships are fundamentally the same principles as the passage of any ships through the NSR.

So no one forbade them to walk on the NSR outside our territorial waters - where did you hear that? Tell me ...

Quote: tesser

First, China doesn't care about the NSR as long as there is enough ice. Secondly, if and when China needs it, then, excuse me, it is not "yours", but general. China is just drowning for "sharing the Arctic" to such an extent that even the Norwegians are pissed off.

Do you even understand that the passage along such a long route without a developed coastal infrastructure is impossible? Well, who will provide all this if Russia stands in a pose and does not provide its territory for this? So do not exaggerate the role of the United States and China in this project, especially since it is already obvious that we ourselves will go there, providing oil and gas to interested consumers. Well, the transit of goods to Europe is also a good thing, but for us it is not an end in itself.

[tesser]

Quote: ccsr

Dream ...

Warming is not a quick matter.

Quote: ccsr

so we remember how they evened the lines in Vietnam.

By the way, a good analogy, except for one nuance. How many Americans put their own there?

What about Russia?

Quote: ccsr

But the fact that you have not heard about the 3-mile zone is obvious to me, otherwise you did not ask your question.

Of course I have not heard. From somewhere you copied text that is not relevant to the cases discussed.

Quote: ccsr

What can Denmark claim for the passage of our ships now,

Any.

Quote: ccsr

we de facto recognized the requirement to pay debts to international organizations, i.e. recognized the succession of not only the USSR, but also RI.

Again. RI did not recognize the debts. Do you even think how much and to whom the Emperor owes?

Quote: ccsr

what the historian V. Sirotkin wrote repeatedly

Gambling a little gold is, of course, a good thing. But not break off.

Quote: ccsr

So no one forbade them to go on the NSR

Quote: tesser

Seriously? You take the Rules of navigation in the waters of the Northern Sea Route, the order of the Ministry of Transport of 2013, read article 2.

Quote: ccsr

Do you even understand that the passage along such a long route without a developed coastal infrastructure is impossible?

What are you talking about? Between China and the United States brought a lot of infrastructure?

Quote: ccsr

we ourselves will walk there

This is as much as you like.

[ccsr]

Quote: tesser

Of course I have not heard. From somewhere you copied text that is not relevant to the cases discussed.

You probably don’t know that the issue of the Kerch Strait did not resolve at all until 2014. It was in the disputes between Russia and Ukraine that the question of the three-mile zone was raised in order not to take into account the Tuzla spit when passing through the strait. In general, if you are seriously interested, then you yourself will find where this figure came from.

Quote: tesser

RI did not recognize the debts. Do you even think how much and to whom the Emperor owes?

V. Sirotkin categorically argued that the overall balance is in our favor, especially taking into account the shortages of arms from France, for which they paid with gold.

Quote: tesser

Gambling a little gold is, of course, a good thing. But not break off.

You have decided so far, but life does not stand still, you look, and it will come to gold when something substantial is required of us.

Quote: tesser

You take the Rules of navigation in the waters of the Northern Sea Route, the order of the Ministry of Transport of 2013, read article 2.

Our rules cannot apply to the entire Arctic, and this is obvious. So first decide on the boundaries of the NSR, and only then we will discuss how the rules do not contradict our international agreements.

Quote: tesser

Between China and the United States brought a lot of infrastructure?

There is no ice conditions, and icebreakers are not needed on those routes - as they say, feel the difference.

[tesser]

Quote: ccsr

It was in the disputes between Russia and Ukraine that the question of the three-mile zone was raised in order not to take into account the Tuzla spit when passing through the strait.

Again. The dispute over Kerch does not concern territorial waters. Who wrote what in the Russian media does not matter.

Quote: ccsr

V. Sirotkin categorically argued

V. Sirotkin can say anything. Professional offenders are now in fashion.

Quote: ccsr

and life does not stand still

This is yes.

Quote: ccsr

Our rules cannot apply to the entire Arctic, and this is obvious. So first decide on the boundaries of the NSR

Who should decide, me? Contact the Ministry of Transport, let them determine their documents.

Quote: ccsr

There is no ice conditions, and icebreakers are not needed on those routes.

While there is ice conditions on the NSR - you can discuss anything. When this situation does not begin (we assume that there is still warming) - other music will go.

[ccsr]

Quote: tesser

Who wrote what in the Russian media does not matter.

Well, but then tell me how it all ended, according to the international version.

Quote: tesser

V. Sirotkin can say anything. Professional offenders are now in fashion.

It is strange to hear about the late Doctor of Historical Sciences, a professor at the Diplomatic Academy and an adviser to the State Duma committee, who was hardly offended by anything. Did you happen to hurt him personally?

Quote: tesser

Contact the Ministry of Transport, let them determine their documents.

Do not tell me - according to the decisions of the Constitutional Court, laws are being changed, and you are talking about some internal document of one of the departments, as if there is nothing higher. The Ministry of Transport will be sent with all its documents as soon as the government decides that we need to somehow strengthen our positions in the international field.

Quote: tesser

When this situation does not begin (we assume that there is still warming) - other music will go.

The funny thing is that serious scientists say that there is a general cooling of the planet, so it all depends on who you consider authority in a situation with warming.

[tesser]

Quote: ccsr

Well, but then tell me how it all ended, according to the international version.

In Kerch? Nothing ended. The weak, as Vladimir Vladimirovich rightly remarked, are beaten.

Quote: ccsr

Did you happen to hurt him personally?

I'm not interested in old professors yet. And you should not have remembered the State Duma in vain; this is not everyone's respect.

Quote: ccsr

The Ministry of Transport will be sent with all its documents as soon as the government decides

That's when the Government decides something else, then there will be a conversation. In the meantime, so.
https://russian.rt.com/russia/article/578072-severnyi-morskoi-put-arktika-korabli

Quote: ccsr

The funny thing is that serious scientists say that there is a general cooling of the planet,

In the North Atlantic - Arctic region, there is warming. The amount of ice in the Arctic Ocean is really decreasing.

[ccsr]

Quote: tesser

In Kerch? Nothing ended.

How could this not end if the Navy ships are arrested in Kerch?
It ended up with the fact that almost all countries of the world recognized the rightness of Russia, well, except for Svidomo, of course.

Quote: tesser

I'm not interested in old professors yet. And you should not have remembered the State Duma in vain; this is not everyone's respect.

Actually, it was about the obligations of Russia, which she observed de facto on royal debts. So we can present something too - though the result is unlikely to be positive for us.

Quote: tesser

In the North Atlantic - Arctic region, there is warming. The amount of ice in the Arctic Ocean is really decreasing.

Let's hope that this will make us better - at least nature will contribute to the speedy development of the NSR, and our development of the shelf of this region in the first place.

[tesser]

Quote: ccsr

It ended up with the fact that almost all countries of the world recognized the rightness of Russia, well, except for Svidomo, of course.

This ended up with all sorts of impotent people, like the UN maritime tribunal, called for the release of detainees, etc.

Quote: ccsr

Russia’s obligations de facto regarding royal debts

What? More about de facto, please.

Quote: ccsr

the development of the NSR, and our shelf development

Forget about the shelf, but shipping yes, in the future several decades may change.

[ccsr]

Quote: tesser

This ended up with all sorts of impotent people, like the UN maritime tribunal, called for the release of detainees, etc.

They are not a decree for us - I hope you will not dispute this?

Quote: tesser

What? More about de facto, please.

The Air Force reported in more detail:

France acknowledged that Russia has transferred 50 millions of dollars in repayment of debt on the so-called "royal" securities. Thus, the amount of debt agreed in 1996 by Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin and his French counterpart Lionel Jospin in 1996 was fully paid.

https://www.bbc.com/russian/0803_8.shtml

Quote: tesser

Forget about the shelf

Why on earth or are you already deciding for the whole of Russia? Do not suffer from mania?

[tesser]

Quote: ccsr

They are not a decree for us - I hope you will not dispute this?

Certainly. This is hinted at by the value judgment of "all kinds of impotent."

Quote: ccsr

Russia transferred 50 million dollars

Lord Wow, what a rogue the Emperor was.

Quote: ccsr

Why on earth or are you already deciding for the whole of Russia?

Purely on the economy. Take an interest in the same Shtokman. Now and not on the Arctic marine projects, for example, Brazilian, problems. They are significantly more expensive than oil shale.

[ccsr]

Quote: tesser

Lord Wow, what a rogue the Emperor was.

No, he was not a beggar, but simply believed Western crooks, for which he paid later:

The conditions of orders made in the USA were extremely unsuccessful: payment was made in gold, the lead time was long. Their performance by the spring-summer of 1917 amounted to no more than 15%, the exception was Winchester. For example, out of 657 thousand rifles ordered in the USA out of 3,6 million ordered.

Quote: tesser

Purely on the economy. Take an interest in the same Shtokman. Now and not on the Arctic marine projects, for example, Brazilian, problems. They are significantly more expensive than oil shale.

Columbus' expeditions were costly, but subsequently it all paid off. It is still not evening, as one of our poet sang, so the main thing for us is to stake out for centuries our right in the Arctic. This is the reason for our revitalization in recent years, and this is a reasonable approach.

[tesser]

Quote: ccsr

the exception was Winchester. For example, out of 657 thousand rifles ordered in the USA

And, do you plan at the same time to recover a forfeit from remington? Oh well.

Quote: ccsr

It’s not yet evening, as our poet sang,

"One of our poet" is called Laima Vaikule. Lyrics by I. Reznik.

[ccsr]

Quote: tesser

And, do you plan at the same time to recover a forfeit from remington? Oh well.

No, I just state the fact that Western crooks were deceiving our king.

Quote: tesser

"One of our poet" is called Laima Vaikule. Lyrics by I. Reznik.

This is your name, and ours sang differently:

And the captain sends us the familiar sign:
Not yet evening, not yet evening!

Ask your grandmother, she will tell you who composed and who put these lines on the music.

[tesser]

Quote: ccsr

This is your name, and ours sang differently:

You are right, I take it back.

Although in that story, it seems, everything ended in a preposterous way.

[Astra wild]

"Washington dreams of the Northern Sea Route" inspired: "the Turak is getting richer with a thought."

[Astra wild]

The picture on the screen saver is cool, and I especially liked the snot icicle. I would recommend sending her to the White House, but I'm afraid they will not appreciate the humor

[Valery Valery]

US Arctic ambitions. Washington dreams of the Northern Sea Route

But they asked Shoigu ?!

[Butchcassidy]

It is necessary to denounce the Shevarnadze-Baker Agreement. And strengthen the fleet. We will calmly exploit the Northern Sea Route p.in.do.sy not give!

[Mouse]

The Americans simply did not have time for the Arctic

and the engine is already here !!!

[Sergey-8848]

"... However, Russia is just trying to preserve the environment, including transferring its fleet to more environmentally friendly nuclear fuel. For example, the large-capacity tanker Koroleva Prospect passed the entire Northern Sea Route on environmentally friendly fuel ..."

Both phrases in the article are correct, but together they are not. The tanker "Prospekt Koroleva", like others in the "green" series of Sovcomflot, runs on LNG, not nuclear fuel.

[thinker]

Here I stumbled! I read it twice and made some inquiries in Yandex until I figured out what's what. "Korol Avenueёwa "

[analitik79]

GAI there, but more

[Prisoner]

Let's dream about Florida. For one thing and a doctrine can be riveted, some kind of overwhelming. Let the "partners" poke around.

[karabass]

You know, I can’t understand what is the excitement? ANY ship of ANY country of the world has the right to go the Northern Sea Route, in accordance with international laws. Only have an icebreaker, or pay us HERE AND ALL! What is the problem then? Can anyone explain?

[tesser]

Quote: karabass

ANY ship of ANY country of the world has the right to go the northern sea route, in accordance with international laws ... What is the problem? Can anyone explain?

The excitement is that a large number of patriotic citizens claim that the NSR is the internal waters of the Russian Federation (in full or in separate areas), and now almost tomorrow we will sit and dispose of everything, like Nasser in Egypt, let it go, let it go . Greatness, all things.

The idea that the NSR begins on the shores of the aggressive NATO bloc and ends at the coast of the United States itself, so that "American control" over the NSR - madness already at the stage of posing the question - is not obvious to anyone.

[Operator]

The existing scheme for transporting liquefied gas, oil and ore in the Arctic is based on the transportation of goods by ice-class vessels from shipping points to Murmansk and Petropavlovsk with further transshipment to non-ice class vessels.

Then why would a goat bayan - the Northern Sea Route, when our valiant shipbuilders are able to stamp as many nuclear submarine tankers and bulk carriers as they want (see the 48-kiloton nuclear submarine "Akula"), which do not need icebreaker escort along the NSR at any time of the year?

[rocket757]

What is cheese boron and costs not very small for?
Like on hydrocarbons "green" are ready to seal a big fat cross?
Ali no ???
The military did not climb there .... the weather there is not ah, not Hawaii after all.

[Livonetc]

Quote: ccsr

Quote: tesser

Oh well.

No just

Quote: tesser

"One of our poet" is called Laima Vaikule. Lyrics by I. Reznik.

and ours sang differently:

And the captain sends us the familiar sign:
Not yet evening, not yet evening!

.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=GqQjXxt5wq8