Syrian Rubicon of the Russian Navy. Ships of the Russian Navy rushing around the Mediterranean with unclear objectives
Literally every day, new explanations are announced on the tasks that were set by a detachment of Russian warships sent to the Mediterranean Sea. However, for some reason, clarity in this matter is not increasing. It seems that in the leadership of the Ministry of Defense, the command fleet today there is no clear idea of why the Middle East has a significant naval grouping and how it can be used. Ten days ago, the press service of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation announced that a detachment of warships of the Northern Fleet had passed the Strait of Gibraltar and was entering the Mediterranean Sea. The detachment consists of large landing ships (BDK) "Alexander Otrakovsky", "George the Victorious", "Kondopoga" and the rescue tugboat SB-921, as well as sentry ships from the Baltic Sea, Yaroslav the Wise, Fearless, and a tanker "Lena". The report noted that a detachment of warships of the Black Sea Fleet is already in the designated area of the southeastern Mediterranean, consisting of large landing ships Caesar Kunikov and Nikolai Filchenkov, patrol ship Smetlivy and two support ships. In addition, the large anti-submarine ship of the Northern Fleet "Vice-Admiral Kulakov", which had previously participated in ensuring the safety of navigation in the Gulf of Aden, joined the general plan for the fulfillment of tasks by the ships of the three fleets.
And at the end of last week, Vice-Admiral Viktor Chirkov, Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy, tried to explain to the public the tasks assigned to the joint inter-fleet group of Russian warships and auxiliary vessels in the Mediterranean. Great revelations of the commander in chief at a press conference did not happen. But the admiral’s comments nevertheless led to the conclusion that the naval group of Russia being created off the Middle East coast was directly related to the tragic events in Syria.
Dessert led to readiness
“The ships that are in the Mediterranean today fulfill the tasks of planned combat training,” explained Viktor Chirkov. - All these events were planned last year, since we are planning a year ahead. This is not a quick decision making. We prepared ships and personnel for this campaign in advance. The group will carry out combat missions in the Mediterranean Sea in accordance with the plan of combat service and combat training. ”
That is, the commander-in-chief made it clear that we are talking about the daily activities of the fleet forces, the most usual combat training activities. At the same time, he noted that they would not be carried out anywhere, but in close proximity to the region where the conflict situation is becoming more acute. Well, Victor Chirkov confirmed the presence on the amphibious ships of the Marine Corps in full strength and with standard armament.
In this regard, it is necessary to note the presence of five landing ships in the inter-fleet grouping at once. This fact can not be called ordinary. Now it is even difficult to remember when such a significant naval landing of Russia appeared in this region. Let only one of the ships belongs to the classic large amphibious. This is “Nikolay Filchenkov”, having a capacity of up to 1700 tons of cargo, taking on board up to 300 paratroopers and 20 armored vehicles. The remaining four were once built as medium landing ships and only relatively recently became considered BDK. Each of them has a capacity of up to 500 tons of cargo, carries up to 225 paratroopers and 13 armored vehicles. Of course, all of the above ships have been in operation for more than 30 years, have high wear and are unlikely to be able to "carry" loads along the highest level of design capabilities. Nevertheless, let's calculate what contingent of marines they can collectively concentrate on the maximum off the coast of Syria. 1200 paratroopers and 72 armored vehicles units are coming out. And if you even make an amendment to the old age of ships, reduce the numbers, say, by 20%, you will still get about 1000 paratroopers and a little less than 60 armored vehicles. Anyway, a serious military formation ... Why is it needed there?
On this occasion, Vice-Admiral Chirkov also explained: “The logistics center of the Russian Navy is located in the Syrian port of Tartus. It is designed to provide ships that perform tasks in the Mediterranean Sea and the Gulf of Aden, allows you to timely replenish stocks of fuel and lubricants, food and water. It is very convenient for us. Because the state has the opportunity to spend less money, it is not necessary to send ships from Russia to replenish supplies or buy all this abroad at unprofitable prices. ” According to the commander in chief, Russia will try to keep the logistics and technical support center in the port of Tartus. True, he noted diplomatically that in the near future the group of warships is not planning to call at this Syrian port.
STRANGE SHIPS
It would seem that all the accents are placed. Although very cautious, with cautions, the purpose of concentration in the problem region of the inter-fleet group and the landing fist of the Russian Navy was indicated. So that was something to insure and ensure the safety of the logistics center in the port of Tartus. And nothing more.
This completely understandable position of the commander-in-chief of the fleet allowed other officials of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation to demonstrate an adequate response to Russian interests to events in Syria. True, military leaders preferred to make tough statements all the same anonymously. Just the day after the press conference of Vice-Admiral Chirkov, the Interfax-AVN Agency released a statement from an unnamed representative of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces.
“If the Syrian armed opposition decides to realize its threats against a possible attack on the PMTO, the Russian Navy now has all the opportunities in the region to respond adequately,” the agency’s source said. “We would not advise“ hot heads ”from the Syrian opposition to do this.”
This warning was issued in response to an attack on the same day by one of the leaders of the Syrian Free Army (FSA), leading the armed struggle against the regime of Bashar al-Assad. The oppositionist threatened to strike at the MTO in Tartus. He was made clear to what could such a rash step lead to.
And what a surprise it was after that to hear last week-end new explanations of the commander-in-chief of the Navy about the prospects for the security post. “If an attack occurs, we will be forced to evacuate the personnel available there,” the admiral said on the radio station Ekho Moskvy. - I do not give commands, there is the Minister of Defense. The fact that we will be forced to evacuate the personnel who are there is, of course, we will take him from there. ” At the same time, Chirkov clarified that in order to carry out such actions, an appropriate decision should be made by the Supreme Commander and the political leadership of the Russian Federation. In other words, the highest authority must decide how exactly to react in the event of an attack on the MTO point of irreconcilable opponents of the regime, which in fact provided an opportunity for the Russian Navy to use a piece of Syrian territory. And, to all appearances, there is still no such a solution - up above - there is still no such solution. And the obvious supreme reflection inevitably turns into contradictory actions of the executive military.
Without any preliminary announcements, the large landing ships "Caesar Kunikov" and "Nikolay Filchenkov", the sentry guard "Sharp-witted" returned to their native Sevastopol on the Day of the Russian Navy. On the official website of the Defense Ministry it was reported that the detachment of the warships of the Black Sea Fleet fulfilled the whole range of tasks of interaction with the ships of the Northern and Baltic fleets in the operational zone of the Mediterranean Sea (we recall, it was said about its southeast area). At the same time, the message of the MoD information management stated that the grouping of ships and vessels of the Northern and Baltic fleets began to fulfill the tasks of a long voyage to ... the central part of the Mediterranean Sea. And then - on the fulfillment of the missions of the large anti-submarine ship "Vice-Admiral Kulakov" (SF), tanker "Ivan Bubnov" and tugboat "MB-304" (BSF), again in ... the south-eastern part of the same Mediterranean Sea. Moreover, it was emphasized that “upon arrival in the zone of radio-technical and visual visibility of the inter-fleet grouping they will begin to perform general combat training tasks according to the plan of unified command”.
So where do they eventually concentrate? And for what? It is somehow difficult to imagine that ships from somewhere near Malta are visually visible from the area near the territorial waters of Syria or Lebanon. What and to whom Russia wants to prove these sudden transfers of warships from the ports of origin in the Mediterranean and back? Indeed, almost simultaneously with the announcement of the return of several ships to Sevastopol, “cautious” information appeared about replacing them with other ships that received a long hike command through the Gibraltar and Bosphorus bases in the SF, BF and BSF bases.
HARD LOGIC
In this situation, even the envy of the position of the United States and NATO member countries on the Syrian issue is even envy. Yes, their impudence is no limit. Yes, shamelessly using double standards. Yes, many of their demands are immoral in their essence. But, you see, in the hardness, consistency of the position, in its sophisticated internal logic, the countries of the West will not refuse.
Let us remember ... The powerful 18 explosion of July in Damascus led to the death of Syrian Defense Minister General Daoud Rajhi and a number of other high-ranking Syrian security officials. How did the ruling circles of the United States rate this attack? “We condemn all terrorist acts, all the explosions of objects, of civilians. Nonetheless, the Ministry of Defense’s top officials from the military and security services were the target of the explosion, US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said publicly. “Without justifying such tactics, since we do not justify violence in any of its forms and condemn the bombing, I would like to note that they (the victims. - OV) were not civilians. The dead were the organizers of the Assad military campaign. ” In response to the question of whether the dead could be considered "legitimate targets of a terrorist act," Nuland did not give a direct answer, but noted that "it is also wrong to put them innocent victims." Once again, she completely laid all the responsibility for the violence in Syria on the current authorities of the country and President Assad.
Undoubtedly, the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Sergei Lavrov, is right in calling the US position on the terrorist act "creepy." He commented on the statement by the US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, who said that the attack in Damascus is another confirmation of the need to adopt a tough UN Security Council resolution on Syria: “In other words, in Russian, this means: we will continue to support such terrorist acts until The Security Council will not do what we want. This is generally a terrible position. ”
But just such a horror, such a policy of double standards makes it absolutely logical for all other steps of the Americans in support of the vigorous actions of the Syrian armed opposition against the authorities. For example, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton calmly builds the further strategy of Washington in the Middle East: “We must work closely with the opposition, as it captures all large territories, in the end they will become reliable refuges in Syria that can be used for further operations of the opposition” .
Naturally, such passages are perceived by the anti-Assad opposition very concretely and evoke in her ... "logical" desires. Malik Kurdi, a representative of the Free Syrian Army, states: “We cannot say that the SSA fully controls something, but we cannot say that the regime’s army also completely controls something, and this will continue until the SSA receives heavy weapons.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov gave a correct assessment of Western policy, generating unhealthy expectations for the Syrian opposition: “Unfortunately, our Western partners ... with several countries neighboring Syria encourage, support and direct the armed struggle against the regime. The price of this whole thing is even more blood. ” However, it must be noted that the confusion of Russian actions and plans around whether it is possible to defend the logistics point in Tartus, or whether the inevitable evacuation of personnel from there does not seem to cause anyone in Syria at all. And the sly opposition to the opposition that the inter-fleet grouping of the Russian Navy has concentrated in the Mediterranean only "for conducting exercises under a single command," is regularly prompted to turn in the opposite direction the accusations sounded from Moscow.
According to Burkhan Galyun, a member of the executive committee of the Syrian National Council, the former head of this organization, the maneuvers of the Russian Navy ships off the coast of Syria may contribute to continuing violence by the government of Bashar al-Assad against civilians. It is easy to assert this without seeing firmness and decisiveness in Russia's actions to protect its interests in the region. After all, their allies in the West, the Syrian opposition leader observes a much more rigid and consistent position. And he is well from the fact that she does not like Russian so much.
Information