Independently to confront the challenges of Bucharest Kiev is not able to

Speaking at the tenth meeting of heads of foreign diplomatic institutions in December last year, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych made a statement that Romania is a country that should start to perceive Ukraine differently. "These countries ... (Romania was mentioned together with Moldova) should feel - the time of soft Ukraine has passed." It seems that the Ukrainian leader was somewhat hasty with conclusions and expressed what he wished for as real: the “soft” time was not yet over.

ROMANIAN GAMBIT

“The desire to grab something from the neighbors has always been present in Romania. But now, inspired by the decision of the Hague International Court, she is looking for new territories that she is ready to swallow. And this is the essence of the aggressive foreign policy of Bucharest, ”wrote Ukrainian military expert Alexander Manachinsky in an article for the publication“ Versions ”. He is not the first to say so and he is not the last, and there is a basis for such a conclusion.

A year ago, the chairman of the Great Romania party, Cornelius Tudor, stated that Ukraine is an artificial state that “holds Romanian territories”, in particular Northern Bukovina (part of the Chernivtsi region), and “by signing the border agreement with Ukraine, Romania kept mind that Ukraine itself is an inconclusive project, which means everything is possible. ” “Everything is possible,” of course, implies a revision of the borders, but what is this amazing decision that opened the way for Romania to such wide territorial claims?

Recall: 3 February 2009 of the United Nations International Court ruled that Serpentine Island can not be considered part of the coastal line of Ukraine in determining the boundaries of the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone. As a result, about 1500 square meters went under Romanian jurisdiction. km of the continental shelf and sea area (79,34% of the disputed territories) with hydrocarbon reserves equal to the annual consumption of Ukraine, and the most delicious deep-water flounder-kalkan. According to many Ukrainian experts, the decision of the UN court was the first in the newest stories legal act that initiated the division of the Ukrainian state. Let's say more: in international legal practice, this court decision can be a dangerous precedent for reviewing the entire world order, as defined by the Yalta agreements. Thus, having got involved in a lawsuit, which could simply be dismissed, Kiev, having lost it, gave reason to question the boundaries inherited from the Soviet Union, and without exaggeration, ultimately, the sovereignty of the country.

Ukraine in general is a territory of insults and claims on the part of neighboring states, at the expense of which territories it was formed: Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania. But above all, what the orange segment of Ukrainian society is sure of, from the side of “imperial” Russia and the Soviet Union, thanks to which, only in the twentieth century, Ukraine increased by almost 30%. Romania has already pinched off a piece of this “pie”, now it swung at the next “portion”: it wants to get Fr. Maikan. Under international law, when the border between countries goes along the river, then it follows the fairway, unless the parties agree otherwise. And in this case, not only did not agree, but did not even try to agree. Now the fairway between the large Romanian island Babin and the Ukrainian island Maikan has changed, and the ships go between Maikan and the Ukrainian coast. On this basis, the Romanian authorities concluded that the border should be moved, and the island should be taken away by Romania. And since “everything is possible”, it should also be recalled that the chain reaction of revising the results of not only the Great Patriotic War, but also World War II was launched by the European Parliament and the OSCE in July 2009, when the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) laid equal responsibility for the outbreak of World War II on Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. The resolution was adopted to support the initiative of the European Parliament, which proposed to declare August 23 the Day of Remembrance for the Victims of Nazism and Stalinism. On this day, as is known, in the 1939 year, the so-called Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed, which in fact divided the spheres of influence of Germany and the USSR in Europe. Its consequence was the accession of the Baltic states to the USSR, the entry of Western Ukraine and Western Belarus into the Soviet Ukraine and Soviet Belarus, and the creation of another European state - Soviet Moldavia (1940).

After the Second World War, Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina and the Hertz region were assigned to the USSR. Romania transferred to the Soviet Union Snake Island (exactly as an island) in the Black Sea and part of the Danube Delta, including the island of Maykan, Ermakov and a series of nameless islands, named after the Soviet victory over Japan the Kuril Islands. Today, under the gun of Romania Maykan Island. But when, after the landmark decision of the International Court of Ukraine, the foreign affairs agencies of Ukraine and Romania exchanged relevant statements, it became obvious that the episode with Snake, discussions about the territorial affiliation of the island of Maikan, and others was nothing more than a “covering operation”: the main goal of Romania is the Danube delta . The price of this issue is much higher than in any other Ukrainian-Romanian territorial dispute. Flowing through Germany, Austria, Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine, the Danube flows into the Black Sea just near the Ukrainian Kuriles. Clearly clear: who owns the Kuril Islands - he owns the Danube. Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Konstantin Gryshchenko, in response to a question from journalists regarding Bucharest’s claims regarding the island of Maykan, said that the Ukrainian side does not intend to revise the border with Romania. The previous, orange, power called the court with a bang in the Hague "a brilliant victory of Ukrainian diplomacy." Romanians, on the contrary, do without diplomatic “curtsies”. And, apparently, we intend to continue to behave this way. If not more tough.

As you know, in Soviet times it was based on the Danube flotilla warships of the USSR. With the acquisition of sovereignty, the Ukrainian leadership for some reason decided that the Danube Flotilla was not needed for a Euro-Atlantic state. Such political "wisdom" rejoiced in Bucharest. Unlike Kiev, it strengthens and modernizes the flotilla on the Danube, consisting of two brigades (Braila and Tulcha). They include three large and six small monitors, 18 armored boats, over 20 minesweepers, as well as amphibious self-propelled barges and auxiliary vessels. Since 2006, two battalions of Romanian special forces have been deployed directly near the borders of Ukraine opposite Izmail and Bukovina.

PANELS WITHOUT Danube

Romanian military grouping on the Danube, Ukraine has nothing to oppose. Its current Danube "flotilla" consists of two obsolete ships, and there are no ground forces at all. For Romanians, therefore, the path to Odessa is open. Stanislav Borisenko, the former mayor of Izmail, is convinced that the threat to the sovereignty of Ukraine from Romania is real. He is not the first to say that Ukraine risks losing the Danube region if it is not paid attention to as a strategically important region. And so, according to the governor of the Odessa region, Eduard Matviychuk, the military will finally appear in the city of Bolgrad. It is assumed that it will house a reinforced mechanized battalion of up to 600 men with military equipment. Note that in the Soviet period, the airborne division was stationed here. And it was at that time when Romania did not even dare to say something aloud to territorial claims to Ukraine. Today, plus to everything, about 100 thousand of citizens of Ukraine and 70 thousand of Moldova have Romanian passports. Some time ago, the Romanian deputies adopted a decision to simplify the procedure for granting citizenship. Now foreigners have the right to live in Romania within its borders until 1940, including modern Moldova, part of the Odessa, Chernivtsi and Nikolaev regions of Ukraine, as well as their descendants up to the third generation. At the same time, knowledge of the Romanian language is not necessary, and the term for consideration of an application is not more than five months. MEP Pavel Koval recently said that today the greatest chances for joining the EU and NATO are Moldova, where most of the population has dual citizenship - Moldova and Romania.

In fact, Romania and Moldova are already one state. Although, according to the European Commissioner for Enlargement and the European Neighborhood Policy, Stefan Füle, “The European Union is very cautious about such issues as possible changes to borders. Especially if such changes occur with the use of military force. I believe that in the 21st century such approaches are absolutely unacceptable. ” He made this statement at a seminar in Brussels, which included the problem of the Romanian community, which, as a result of the turbulent events of the 20th century, was cut off from the “European home”. But in that case, how would you order to understand the fact that 11 years ago, the North Atlantic Alliance bombed the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia into parts? The bombing campaign, which lasted 78 days, received the codename “Operation Allied Forces” in NATO, in the American Army it is more known as “Operation Noble Anvil”, and was promoted in Washington and other Western capitals as the first “humanitarian war” in history? What, again, a similar "humanitarian aid" is being prepared?

Under the common European noise, Romania is trying to recreate the “Greater Romania”. Back in 1991, she tried to pick up Northern Bukovina and part of the Odessa region, but failed. Previously, Russia would immediately put an end to these ideas, but it’s just one thing to conflict with Romania and quite another with Romania as a state - a member of the alliance: NATO Romania with its claims has become much more influential. And, apparently, the “insular” Rumanian-Ukrainian conflict is nothing more than a red herring. It is more clear that solely controlling such a truly gold-bearing vein, like the Danube, is unlikely to be allowed to Bucharest. As well as solely dispose of hydrocarbon reserves of the continental shelf recovered from Ukraine. And although Russia and Romania signed an agreement on friendly relations and cooperation in 2003, according to which Romania abandoned its territorial claims to Russia as the successor of the USSR in connection with Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina joining the latter, objectively Romanian territorial claims to Ukraine are directed against Russia. Thus, in the current situation, Ukraine became not only a cause for contention between the West and Russia, but also the territory of contention itself.

At the end of November last year, Romanian President Traian Basescu stated that Bucharest does not trust Russia because of the presence of Russian troops near the Romanian border, in Transnistria. According to Basescu, Moscow has no more confidence in Bucharest. “If Russia is so friendly to the states of the Black Sea, why then does it need such a large fleet in such a small sea?” Asked Basescu. And in an interview with the Romanian newspaper Romania, Libera says: “We are not at all satisfied with the fact that Russia extended the treaty on the basing of its fleet in Sevastopol”. Commenting on the statements of the Romanian president, the Ukrainian political scientist Maxim Vetrov noted that “the aggressive policy of the president of Romania Traian Basescu is already becoming familiar to Europe. But if earlier they were the fantasies of a separate, not the most influential political leader, then after Romania’s entry into NATO and the EU, these statements will have to be considered. ” And indeed it is.

On the Romanian territory from 2005, the Pentagon and the Alliance have the Mikhail Koghelnichanu airbase, the Chinku training grounds, the Smardan training grounds and the Babadag shooting range. The airbase was used to attack and invade Iraq in 2003, and is regularly used during the US and NATO war in Afghanistan. After the visit of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, her Romanian counterpart Theodore Baconsky spoke about an increase in the Romanian military contingent in Afghanistan, about cooperation to improve the protection of contingent (?), And about the participation of Romania in the US missile defense program

Admiral Viktor Kravchenko, former commander of the Black Sea Fleet and Chief of the Main Staff of the Navy, believes that the Russian leadership should review the tasks of the Black Sea Fleet and strengthen its combat potential. “The situation when the American SM-3 interceptor missiles take up combat duty in Romania and in the Black Sea can lead to a drastic change in the balance of forces in the region not in favor of Russia,” said Kravchenko. “From a military point of view, the claims of the American administration that missile defense facilities in the south of Europe do not threaten the interests of Russia are at least hypocritical,” he added. “We are talking about the deployment of the Aegis system in Romania before 2015, which involves the use of the new SM-3 missiles.

According to him, the SM-3 anti-missiles, taking into account the program of their further modernization and improvement of performance characteristics, will have the ability to intercept and destroy Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles in the initial part of the flight trajectory.

And the European Union rapporteur and member of the EU-Moldova parliamentary delegation committee, Romania’s representative Traian Ungureanu, states that the situation in the Black Sea region remains unpredictable due to frozen conflicts, the intersection of many geopolitical interests and "spheres of influence", and also because of its presence in Crimea navy of Russia. He sharply criticizes the Russian-Ukrainian agreements on extending the tenure of the Russian Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol, they say, "the deal was made in a very dubious way," and this "will not contribute to strategic stabilization in the region." Stresses that Turkey with its own interests has recently joined the struggle for a place of regional leader and that Romania, as a member of the EU, cannot remain indifferent to what is happening on the eastern borders of the European Union - in a region that is of major strategic importance for Europe (and NATO). In an interview with the Financial Times, President Basescu makes a scandalous statement that the scenario of the Russian-Georgian conflict 2008 of the year in South Ossetia may repeat in Transnistria. According to him, the events in South Ossetia "have shown that anything can happen at any moment."

It becomes quite obvious that in the big Euro-Atlantic game for mastering the Black Sea basin of Romania is assigned the role of a working tool. This at least means that one of the considered scenarios of Romania’s actions in crisis situations may relate (and most likely there is such a scenario) to the neutralization of the Russian Black Sea Fleet in Ukraine. Thus, the interests of Ukraine and Russia in this region completely coincide.

Romania relies on the real support of NATO and the European Union. Consequently, Ukraine and Russia, both separately and together, will have to deal with the combined efforts of these international structures. Ukrainian-Russian and NATO-European interests will again collide on the Black Sea, as Russian and Anglo-Saxon interests have been facing for centuries. How much can Russia count on Ukraine’s support today?

8: 1 NOT IN OUR BENEFIT

The naval forces of Ukraine are a de facto flotilla. Most of the ships and vessels of the former Black Sea Fleet of the USSR transferred to Nezalezhnoy in the 1997 year of 70 over the past 13 years were either written off or “cut”. Currently only four ships are drums. Their specific weight of the main-caliber salvo is 12 CRT P-15U Termite developed in the middle of the 50-ies of the 20th century and inferior to modern anti-ship missile systems, primarily in the firing range (35 – 40 km of non-modernized missiles). The submarine component of the fleet is completely absent. The most efficient fleet core is represented by: a frigate, four corvettes (one of them is a shock one), two landing ships, five mine-sweeping ships, a control ship. The fleet “Getman Sagaidachny”, launched in 1992, and the corvette “Lutsk”, which entered service in 1993 year, by the way, are the most modern warships, are the pride of the fleet. And then there is the small sea tanker "Fastov" (in service since 1972), the sea minesweeper "Zhovti Vody" (1974), the sea rescue tug "Kremenets" (1983).

According to the White Paper of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, in 2009, the buildup of naval ships decreased almost threefold and amounted to an average of only 9,4 days. Total raid aviation The Navy compiled an average of 28,7 hours. According to unofficial data, in the fall of 2009, only one warship of the Ukrainian Navy, the Ternopil corvette, in the past a Project 1124M small anti-submarine ship, remained in a functional state. Volumes of fleet financing during the years of independence amounted to about half of the required amount. It is quite natural that the Navy is able to solve a very limited range of tasks, primarily related to the border patrol service, escorting convoys, landing operations of small complexity and scale, mine operations and mine action, participation in peacekeeping operations. But even these tasks require the efforts of the forces of the entire fleet and close cooperation with other branches of the army, which, we note, are also not in a brilliant state. By the way, financing of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in 2011 is almost equal to financing of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, so no major changes for the better can be expected.

The military potential of Romania is no more powerful than the Ukrainian one. Next, it is known, Bulgaria is also a member of NATO, but even if the Romanian and Bulgarian potentials are summed up, they will still not be enough to pose a serious military threat to Ukraine. Romanian Minister of Defense Gheorghe Oprea stated that funding in 2010 was unsatisfactory. The budget of the Ministry of Defense was 1,31% of GDP, while at the time of joining NATO it was equal to 2,3%. According to the minister, 80% of the budget goes for the maintenance of the army and only 20% goes for combat missions inside the country (?) And abroad. In the current situation, the minister believes that the Romanian army is close to a “default”. Comparing further the forces and means of the land forces of Ukraine and Romania simply does not make sense. However, for those who dream of Great Romania, it is enough to “take away” Southern Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina as a result of such a “blitzkrieg”, which is quite possible, since there are no Ukrainian military units along the Romanian-Ukrainian border.

As for the Romanian fleet, it is quite “adequate” to the Ukrainian. The Romanian Navy consists of a submarine, a destroyer, six patrol ships, three missile boats, three torpedo boats, a mine layer, four minesweepers, 27 monitors and auxiliary ships. But due to a larger number of real floating craft, the Romanian fleet is superior to the Ukrainian one, which allows predicting the defeat of the Ukrainian Navy in the event of an armed conflict. According to experts, only the Russian Black Sea Fleet can save the Ukrainians: Romanian corvettes and rocket, torpedo boats are unlikely to dare to strike at the Ukrainian military ships near the ships of the most powerful fleet in the Black Sea.

However, the special heroism from the Romanians certainly will not be required. The rate in the Black Sea basin is made on NATO Turkey. She, so to say, with pleasure "swallow" the Crimea, the former vassal territory of the Ottoman Empire. However, the need for a strong fleet is primarily due to Turkey for a number of threats: this is Russia, which seeks to restore the sphere of influence in the northern region of Turkish interests; and conflicts in the south; historical rivalry with Greece in the west; finally, the unpredictable Iran in the east. In addition, 90% of foreign trade is implemented on sea routes, and the fleet must ensure the safety of commercial shipping and ensure protection of 8300 km of coastline and islands in the Aegean Sea by XNUMX. And to the surprise of all the neighbors, the Turkish Navy is relatively quickly transformed into an effective force that can loudly declare itself in the regional waters with modern ships of foreign and - more and more often! - own shipyards. The scale of the construction of new ships almost corresponds to the scale of modernization. Today, standardization is being carried out throughout the fleet. weapons, weapon control systems and other ship systems.

The Turkish Navy is far from the largest and richest type of the country's armed forces. The number of regular naval forces reaches 60 thousand people, even before 70 thousand are in reserve. The ship's structure includes 121 ship main classes (17 submarines, five destroyers, five frigates URO, 11 frigates, five patrol boats, 43 landing ships, seven mine-layers, 26 minesweepers, two patrol boats), 83 combat boats (18 rocket, one artillery, three torpedo, 21 patrol, 33 troopers, seven minesweepers) and 101 auxiliary ship. There are nine basic patrol aircraft, three anti-submarine defense helicopters. The number of personnel of the aviation Navy 900 people. Marines represented by one brigade (4 thousand people). The Navy is mainly equipped with ships built by Western states and transferred to Turkey as part of military assistance programs, including frigates of the class Meko 200 (Germany), Oliver Hazard Perry and Knox (USA), six corvettes of French and 14 submarines of German construction. Significant assistance to Turkey is provided primarily by the United States. Not out of altruistic motives, of course.

NATO IS UNDERSTANDING THE BLACK SEA

The Center for the Study of Globalization recently published an article by the Canadian journalist Rick Rozoff, “The Black Sea - a bridge to three continents and the Middle East.” The author states that the main dream of the Americans is to squeeze out the Russian fleet from the Crimea, as the only obstacle to the White House to complete supremacy at sea. In fact, NATO (read: the United States) has been intensively developing the Black Sea since the middle of August 1991. Since 1992, the Black Sea Naval Forces on the Atlantic began to develop the Black Sea on a regular basis, and for the first time after World War II, the entry of a detachment of warships of the German Navy was noted. Since 1993, joint exercises of the naval forces of NATO and the countries of the Black Sea basin (Ukraine, Bulgaria, Romania) have been held under the Partnership for Peace program. Every day at least 4 of thousands of ships pass through the Mediterranean and Black Sea, and they are monitored by NATO ships to 10. On an ongoing basis in the Black Sea is up to 20 large NATO ships.

According to the military departments of Russia, Ukraine, Turkey and the United States, to date, the ratio of naval power and capabilities of Russian and American reconnaissance facilities in the Black Sea basin (including coastal areas, including Russia’s North Caucasus Black Sea Coast and the Turkish Black Sea Coast) has almost reached 1 to 6 . And given the potential of the entire alliance in the same region - 1 to 8. (By the way, a similar relationship took shape on the eve of the Crimean War with the anti-Russian coalition 1853 – 1855). The command of the block conducts targeted preparation for the possible use of its naval strike and amphibious assault formations. This sea in general has recently attracted all countries that have ships capable of firing. Without the Black Sea, the military-political arc from the Baltic to the Caspian Sea, which is so much desired by the West, cannot be formed. Romania is not an independent player here, as never, by the way, it has never been.

Kiev is not able to resist the challenges of Bucharest on its own. In this situation, the Russian Black Sea Fleet becomes the basis of security not only the southern borders of the state, but also the guarantor of the national security of Ukraine. Is it the intention of post-orange Ukraine to build its foreign and defense policy in such a bundle? And how ready is Russia to create a joint security system with Ukraine in the Black Sea basin? Today, one thing is clear: the “soft” Ukrainian time will end on the condition that such a system will be created. Extending the stay of the Russian Black Sea Fleet in the Crimea to 2042 is only the first step towards solving this problem.