Military Review

Analysts: the confrontation between the Russian Federation and NATO in the Black Sea will increase

69
Russia will soon face more frequent forays of NATO ships into the Black Sea due to the Alliance’s increased interest in this region, leading RIA News opinion of experts of the American military analysis company Stratfor.


Analysts: the confrontation between the Russian Federation and NATO in the Black Sea will increase


“After the Crimea became part of Russia in 2014, the balance of forces in the Black Sea changed. Ukraine has been ousted from the arena, while Moscow has strengthened its fleet, ”note the report’s authors.

“Meanwhile, the strategic importance of this water area has increased in the eyes of NATO, which is seeking to strengthen the policy of containing Russia in Europe,” they write.

"NATO should take into account the Montreux 1936 Convention of the Year limiting the tonnage, the number and time of stay of non-Black Sea warships in the Black Sea, but the multinational forces of the alliance can bypass the restrictions by recruiting their fleet with ships from several countries and resorting to their rotation."

That is why "at the next summit, which will take place on July 8-9 in Warsaw, the possibility of strengthening the joint naval forces of the alliance in the Black Sea will be discussed," experts explain.

In their opinion, not all NATO countries will support the idea of ​​building up forces in the region. "While Romania is likely to be an ardent supporter of gain, Bulgaria and Turkey may be more restrained, not wanting hostility with Russia," analysts say.

The article recalls that "until recently, Turkey also supported the strengthening of NATO in the Black Sea, but in recent weeks, Ankara tried to normalize relations with Moscow."

Comparing the naval forces in the region, the authors conclude that “Russia is inferior to NATO in the number of ships, but it has many other advantages, for example, in aviation". In addition, Russia is currently actively updating its submarine fleet.

In essence, “Moscow can no longer rely on the Montreux Convention - NATO will look for ways to circumvent the restrictions and ensure the leadership of its naval forces in the region, but Russia's position on the Crimean peninsula gives it a significant advantage over the alliance,” the experts conclude.
Photos used:
http://www.korabli.eu/
69 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Khariton
    Khariton 7 July 2016 17: 20
    -6
    And in the Caspian Sea ..)))?
    1. Kos_kalinki9
      Kos_kalinki9 7 July 2016 17: 27
      +3
      But how will NATO ships get to the Caspian? If only dragging laughing ali so
      1. Major Yurik
        Major Yurik 7 July 2016 17: 32
        +5
        Russia will soon be faced with more frequent sorties by NATO ships into the Black Sea due to the increased interest of the alliance in this region,
        Good mining of the main fairways, they say, significantly reduces the "increased interest" of the pigs which this region does not touch in any way! negative
        1. Asadullah
          Asadullah 7 July 2016 18: 42
          +16
          Good mining of the main fairways is said to significantly reduce "increased interest


          And what for? NATO members wave their fists after a fight. Their actions resemble the behavior of a boxer after a good knockdown, he staggers, mutters something through the mouthpiece, waving his arms out into the void. The trainer is einy, with a clever look, seeks compensation for the Crimea, something "reinforces", something "reorganizes", something "organizes". Kudaaa, honey! All Crimea is not in the NATO scheme. Was and swam. For Crimea is something that locks up any fleet, of any Black Sea country, at its berths. And no matter how many ships there are not a handful, they are all easily defeated targets. But then the entire military infrastructure of the Crimea is being sharpened.
          1. Cat
            Cat 7 July 2016 21: 45
            +3
            I support! The use of coastal missile systems - land-sea almost completely overlaps the Black Sea aviation area.
        2. WKS
          WKS 7 July 2016 19: 00
          +2
          The most impressive thing in the article is the nameless analysts from anal, at the end of the article transformed into the same nameless experts.
      2. Thrall
        Thrall 7 July 2016 17: 50
        0
        I think, without another Lake Peipsi can not do angry
      3. Simon
        Simon 7 July 2016 18: 34
        0
        And why drag ships by drag, there is the Volga-Don canal, besides, our "Calibers" fly well, so that the Black Sea will be closed.
        1. Amurets
          Amurets 8 July 2016 01: 18
          0
          Quote: Kos_kalinki9
          But how will NATO ships get to the Caspian? If only dragging


          Quote: Simon
          Why drag ships by drag, there is a Volga-Don canal,

          Sorry for taking it out of context, but do you think it turns out that along the Volga-Don we will drag NATO ships to the Caspian? What for? Maybe as trophies ?.
      4. Talgat
        Talgat 7 July 2016 19: 36
        0
        Quote: Kos_kalinki9
        But how will the NATO ships get into the Caspian?

        Of course. The enemy will not get to the Caspian Sea while Iran is standing.

        And the Black Sea is easy. Here, I think everyone will agree. that the USSR is not, unfortunately, and will not work purely by force to oppose NATO and Turkey
        The solution is probably in the right diplomatic maneuver, to find a compromise with Turkey - threatening her with military force and at the same time her economic interests and seek a compromise - and for the time being have been forced (but there would have been times of the Golden Horde or Attila or the USSR and there was no need to find a compromise would - all issues were resolved quickly and specifically)
        1. Talgat
          Talgat 7 July 2016 19: 44
          +2
          I will also add: here is a quote from the article - "however, Russia's position on the Crimean peninsula gives it a serious advantage over the alliance," "

          I think that is why all the fuss started. Crimea is a strategic point - having gained control over it, Russia has changed the balance of power in the Black Sea
        2. Monarchist
          Monarchist 7 July 2016 20: 24
          -2
          Admiral Makarov worked on the issue of blocking the Bosphorus, and in the spring of 1917 the Bolsheviks did everything to save the ally of their "friends" the Germans. Admiral KOLCHAK was preparing a landing operation to seize the Dardanelles, and this turned Turkey off from the war and in the future gave Russia big dividends. Remember the story that happened in May at the Black Sea Fleet?
    2. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 7 July 2016 18: 03
      0
      Quote: Chariton
      And in the Caspian Sea ..)))?

      And on Baikal?
      1. Kos_kalinki9
        Kos_kalinki9 7 July 2016 18: 23
        +4
        Quote: Vladimirets
        Quote: Chariton
        And in the Caspian Sea ..)))?

        And on Baikal?

        Khariton. And in Russia there is Lake Baskunchak. By the way, it’s salty, like the sea.
        1. Monarchist
          Monarchist 7 July 2016 20: 34
          -3
          I consider your remark about Lake Baskunchak only a manifestation of knowledge of geography. The issue with the Caspian is rather complicated: they won’t be able to swim there physically, but if, hypothetically, will Baku join NATO? Whereas? Of course, and x the Navy (I do not know the composition) against our flotilla ... but various moments will begin ... How then with Baskunchak?
          1. Kos_kalinki9
            Kos_kalinki9 7 July 2016 21: 26
            0
            You explain this to Khariton. And here we are reminding him of some of our comrades.
            1. Khariton
              Khariton 7 July 2016 22: 03
              0
              Quote: Kos_kalinki9
              You explain this to Khariton. And here we are reminding him of some of our comrades.

              You did not understand my irony .. From the Caspian you can create geopolitics with life-giving "Calibers" ... And you raised barking here ..))))) "Liberastons" here worked on the brains of many ....)))) laughing
    3. APASUS
      APASUS 7 July 2016 18: 30
      +2
      Quote: Chariton
      And in the Caspian Sea ..)))?

      In the Caspian, all countries were able to agree that they do not represent the territory under the base of the Navy to countries outside the Caspian region.
      I think the battle for the Caspian is yet to come.
    4. japs
      japs 7 July 2016 19: 09
      +5
      Ukropithek noble diggers of the seas.
  2. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 7 July 2016 17: 23
    +9
    There is no doubt in the title of the article. The reason on the surface is the aircraft carrier (and not only) Crimea, a serious factor pushing the zone of influence of NATO to the south.
  3. evil partisan
    evil partisan 7 July 2016 17: 25
    +10
    It is urgent to shatter all German mines from the Second World War on the seabed and during NATO calls, quietly let them go up repeat ... If that is an echo of war! request
    1. Poppy
      Poppy 7 July 2016 17: 44
      +1
      enough to fly around with dryers - diapers are guaranteed
      1. vovanpain
        vovanpain 7 July 2016 18: 37
        +9
        Quote: Poppy
        enough to fly around with dryers - diapers are guaranteed

        Yes, the mattresses give them all that. fellow
    2. Mountain shooter
      Mountain shooter 7 July 2016 18: 00
      +4
      I’m afraid there’s so much to be found. We’ll have to fix the issue, with the corresponding marking. The Germans had good mines, with non-contact detonators, and even with counters. Not the first ship reacted!
      1. evil partisan
        evil partisan 7 July 2016 18: 24
        0
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        I’m afraid there’s so much to be found. We’ll have to fix the issue, with the corresponding marking.

        Note, Colleague, I did not offer THIS ... winked
    3. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 7 July 2016 18: 06
      +6
      Quote: Angry Guerrilla
      shatter all German mines of WWII

      Why immediately German? No.
      1. evil partisan
        evil partisan 7 July 2016 18: 26
        +2
        Quote: Vladimirets
        Why immediately German?

        I see, Colleague, that because of your failures in the hunt you have become too aggressive ... sad
        Hello to poachers of middle lanes from the Ural fishing masters! drinks
        1. Vladimirets
          Vladimirets 7 July 2016 18: 31
          +2
          Quote: Angry Guerrilla
          because of your failures in the hunt you became too aggressive ...

          Hunting after 1,5 months, the boat strikes, does not bite, you will be aggressive here. angry
          Quote: Angry Guerrilla
          Hello to poachers of middle lanes from the Ural fishing masters!

          And what are these Ural meters? Have you finally switched to the metric system? That's right, it's high time, otherwise all arshins, but fathoms. Hey. drinks
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. bubalik
          bubalik 7 July 2016 18: 33
          +6
          evil partisan (3) RU  Today, 18: 26 ↑
          ,, that hunters, that fishermen ,, the essence of one ,, laughing
          1. Monarchist
            Monarchist 7 July 2016 21: 14
            +1
            Captain, I liked your picture: a cat is being prepared. Only it seems to me that our sun is a little stronger than fish
            1. bubalik
              bubalik 7 July 2016 22: 18
              0
              Monarchist RU  Today, 21: 14 ↑
              ,,, Vyacheslav do not dig deep, the picture is the picture, just flood laughing although which side to look what wink hi
            2. The comment was deleted.
  4. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 7 July 2016 17: 26
    +1
    Quote: Chariton
    And in the Caspian Sea ..)))?

    We are not alone there, but in conjunction with the Crimea, this is a very serious factor in keeping the alliance safe.
  5. Mikhail Krapivin
    Mikhail Krapivin 7 July 2016 17: 34
    +2
    I was not mistaken, in the photo is an American aircraft carrier in the background? Only he was not enough for complete happiness in the Black Sea. But our people are afraid of such happiness, they will not be too happy.
    1. APASUS
      APASUS 7 July 2016 18: 38
      +4
      Quote: Mikhail Krapivin
      I was not mistaken, in the photo is an American aircraft carrier in the background? Only he was not enough for complete happiness in the Black Sea. But our people are afraid of such happiness, they will not be too happy.

      The Montreux Convention does not allow an aircraft carrier to enter the Black Sea, then the tonnage of ships of non-Black Sea countries will be exceeded.
      The problem is that Crimea has such a geographical position that allows you to control the entire water area of ​​the Black World from land and any deployment of the fleet of NATO countries can do nothing about it. This is not what the Americans like, we took their place, this is what the NATO countries did to control the whole region and part of the countries!
      1. Reserve officer
        Reserve officer 7 July 2016 19: 32
        +10
        Lonely old mine
        Waiting for NATO to rust.
        The deep waters of the Black Sea ...
        1. Pitot
          Pitot 8 July 2016 00: 13
          +2
          However, the tank ...
      2. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 7 July 2016 21: 04
        0
        Quote: APASUS
        The Montreux Convention does not allow an aircraft carrier to enter the Black Sea, then the tonnage of ships of non-Black Sea countries will be exceeded.

        As an option, in the future, the United States may transfer universal landing ships with the F-35B (modification with vertical take-off and landing).
      3. Mikhail Krapivin
        Mikhail Krapivin 8 July 2016 00: 10
        0
        Quote: APASUS
        The Montreux Convention does not allow an aircraft carrier to enter the Black Sea, then the tonnage of ships of non-Black Sea countries will be exceeded.


        The law is not written to fools and Americans. There have already been calls from them on the topic - "no one will interfere with any of our ships in any quantity and for as long as you want in the Black Sea, we do not know any Montreux and we do not want to know!"
    2. Simon
      Simon 7 July 2016 18: 48
      +3
      Don't worry buddy! Three "Calibers" from the Caspian Sea and the aircraft carrier will be a bait for divers in the Black Sea. "Calibers" will be difficult to find, they will fly through the Caucasus Mountains. So that the entire Black Sea will be under control.
    3. Pitot
      Pitot 8 July 2016 00: 13
      0
      A large cupboard falls louder ....
  6. S_Baykala
    S_Baykala 7 July 2016 17: 35
    +7
    NATO must take into account the Montreux Convention 1936 of the year, limiting the tonnage, number and duration of stay in the Black Sea of ​​warships of non-Black Sea states

    We must introduce our own convention, let’s say: the Vitko convention. And the limitation: Neh ... what do you do here!
    ps I apologize, but got it: ours do not climb into the Caribbean or Newfoundland so that strengthen US containment policy in North America
    1. Mikhail Krapivin
      Mikhail Krapivin 8 July 2016 00: 15
      0
      American logic is simple and understandable - who has eleven Aianossians, floats wherever he wants and assigns any point of the globe as a zone of his interests. We will wait until China sets up its aircraft carriers in the right amount and see how it ends.
  7. Arandir
    Arandir 7 July 2016 17: 35
    +1
    By 1945, it became clear that the fleet was losing aircraft, and with the advent of anti-ship missiles, especially those from the USSR-Russia, or electronic warfare systems like the Khibiny, Amer’s ships became simply not very stable flag demonstrators. Well, it's like in Turkey in 2014, when Ukrainians teased Russian tourists with their chants and flags.
  8. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 7 July 2016 17: 35
    0
    Quote: Kos_kalinki9
    But how will NATO ships get to the Caspian? If only dragging laughing ali so

    Purely hypothetically - through the Volga-Don, we are waiting for investments to deepen the fairway and reconstruction of locks. Otherwise, no dough no matter how. Entrance - cut for a kilo or liter in / and, output 100 $.
    1. Kos_kalinki9
      Kos_kalinki9 7 July 2016 18: 38
      +3
      Quote: avg-mgn
      Quote: Kos_kalinki9
      But how will NATO ships get to the Caspian? If only dragging laughing ali so

      Purely hypothetically - through the Volga-Don, we are waiting for investments to deepen the fairway and reconstruction of locks. Otherwise, no dough no matter how. Entrance - cut for a kilo or liter in / and, output 100 $.

      Even I did not finish. What does NATO, Volga-Don, locks and investments have to do with it?
      Or do you propose to launch the NATO ships to the Caspian Sea by deepening the forwarder? There is no need for even purely hypothetical rubles or bucks from this pack. Or you mowed under the unforgettable Gorby, he also proposed to kill and expand, and find a consensus. So we find the NATO consensus at our borders.
      1. Monarchist
        Monarchist 7 July 2016 21: 26
        0
        MS, so that the devils "loved" him in one place, did a lot to a consensus, but ShUshkevich, Kravchuk and Borya made a full "consensus". The main thing is that they did not come across the "palenki". An acquaintance recently brought from Belarus a bottle of ... average nasty. Honestly, I hoped that they were doing well there.
  9. izya top
    izya top 7 July 2016 17: 39
    +3
    Russia will soon encounter more frequent NATO ship sorties into the Black Sea due to the alliance’s increased interest in the region, RIA Novosti quotes the opinion of experts from the US military-analytical company Stratfor.
    for such a conclusion, you don’t need to be an analyst request bastion to help them repeat
  10. Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov 7 July 2016 17: 43
    +6
    What, what did American authors write !? "After Crimea became a part of the Russian Federation ......" that is, it became a part? So there is no annexation, great! Some more saw their sight.
  11. mamont5
    mamont5 7 July 2016 17: 54
    0
    Quote: wicked partisan
    It is urgent to shatter all German mines from the Second World War on the seabed and during NATO calls, quietly let them go up repeat ... If that is an echo of war! request

    So I thought about the same thing ...
  12. Tambov Wolf
    Tambov Wolf 7 July 2016 18: 02
    +1
    You won’t take RCC Crimea, but the US ships and their hangers-on are elementary.
    1. Monarchist
      Monarchist 7 July 2016 21: 33
      0
      For ships there are "hotels" and high-quality, but "5collona": different "islyams" and our "bad boys" are. Remember the different x Sunni, "false defenders", pillars of "liberalism" in the person of: Kasyanov et al.
  13. KVashentcev
    KVashentcev 7 July 2016 18: 06
    +2
    Analysts: the confrontation between the Russian Federation and NATO in the Black Sea will increase

    Then I’m an analyst too ... Or an obvious captain ...
  14. Izotovp
    Izotovp 7 July 2016 18: 27
    0
    And here, to reduce the militancy of the same Romania, it would not hurt to strengthen the landing capabilities of the marine corps.
  15. The comment was deleted.
  16. lukke
    lukke 7 July 2016 18: 45
    +3
    The Russia-NATO confrontation will continue and grow not only in the Black Sea, it will be everywhere where there is still an empty vacuum of spheres of influence. NATO is Washington’s offensive pressure tool, we are only defending ourselves. Well, this is correctly noticed:
    In essence, "Moscow can no longer count on the Montreux Convention - NATO will look for ways to circumvent restrictions and ensure the leadership of its Navy in the region, but Russia's position on the Crimean peninsula gives it a serious advantage over the alliance," experts conclude
    Crimea is the most advanced and largest aircraft carrier today)
  17. sergey2017
    sergey2017 7 July 2016 18: 49
    +2
    The alliance understands very well what are (in general) the capabilities of the RF Armed Forces (including the fleet) to destroy any targets in the Black Sea, including underwater ones! To somehow indicate this presence, the multinational forces of the alliance will use the tactics of rotating ships from several countries, which will help them bypass the restrictions of the Montreux Convention of 1936. After the annexation of Crimea to Russia, the US and NATO warships no longer have a chance to survive in the Black Sea and our "partners" know about it!
    1. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 7 July 2016 20: 45
      0
      Quote: sergey2017
      In order to somehow indicate their presence, the multinational forces of the alliance will use resorting to the tactics of rotating ships from several countries, which will help them bypass the restrictions of the 1936 Montreux Convention.

      I don’t think that the United States and NATO will increase the ship’s composition in the region, most likely the 1-in destroyer like Arly-Burke or the Ticonderoga cruiser will go into the Black Sea. It is more likely that they will deploy fighters with anti-ship missiles in Romania and northern Turkey, it is also possible to deploy anti-submarine aircraft P-8 Poseidon and coastal anti-ship systems with Harpoon missiles.
      All the same, with ships everything is quite complicated and expensive, you need to equip a base for basing, and the Black Sea is almost completely shot by our bastions, so ships are too vulnerable.
  18. Alexander 3
    Alexander 3 7 July 2016 18: 55
    +5
    The Black Sea is our puddle and we don’t need to croak at us from our puddle.
  19. Victor1
    Victor1 7 July 2016 19: 22
    +1
    It was in the 1988th:
  20. masiya
    masiya 7 July 2016 19: 26
    +2
    This is our SEA, and it’s not the best thing for various reptiles from Florida, Philadelphia, Los Angeles to climb, the interpretation itself, the Montreux Convention of 1936, limits the tonnage, number and duration of the warships of non-Black Sea states in the Black Sea (however, the multinational alliance forces can circumvent restrictions, having equipped his fleet with ships from several countries and resorting to their rotation), only the point is about the Black Sea states, and not about the USA, France, Germany. etc., etc., let them complete it - they won’t give good, they’re sorry for themselves, but they need to be drowned if they don’t drown themselves ... and who should be given to such naval commanders as gypsies - Romanians, or even better kakly, that it was sold yes they drank ..., the Bulgarians themselves are in doubt ..., and the Turks have enough of their Amer’s trash, only there aren’t enough matrosen for new ones, and to train lyres is dumb ...
  21. Anchonsha
    Anchonsha 7 July 2016 19: 27
    +1
    Well, well, the geyropa and the USA would have long forgotten about Crimea, but not now, when Russia is squaring its shoulders and becoming such a force that it needs to be intimidated and defeated or negotiated. They preferred the first to NATO, but this is a losing business. The only bad thing is that the Black Sea Fleet in our country is not sufficiently developed. We would have to the Black Sea another cruiser type Moscow and several destroyers and frigates and the United States in the back seat would be. And we need to establish good relations with Turkey, but not to the detriment of ourselves.
  22. Olegater
    Olegater 7 July 2016 19: 36
    +6
    “At the next summit, which will be held on July 8–9 in Warsaw, the possibility of strengthening the joint naval forces of the alliance in the Black Sea will be discussed”
    Dear forum users, I have an idea - it consists in forecasting the results of this gathering in Poland.
    My prediction:
    1. An increase in NATO spending for Europe.
    2. Russia threat number 1 as never before
    3. The implementation of the supply of arms in 404.
    4. possible adoption as associative friends (in short mongrel at hand) Moldova Ukraine Georgia.
    5. Deployment of new large NATO and lice bases there.
    6. The increase in bases in Japan and Korea (against China).
    7. And as a science fiction they’ll come up with something regarding Kaliningrad.
    And so do your predictions and at the end of the coven we will see who was closer to its results.
    1. the villain
      the villain 7 July 2016 22: 26
      +3
      Quote: Olegater
      And as a science fiction they’ll come up with something regarding Kaliningrad.

      These are bad people. Why, the Germans themselves voted for the renaming of Koenigsberg into Kaliningrad in 1945 with both hands, accompanied by cries of "Rus, nicht schissen, Hitler-kaput, they are capitulating."
  23. red joni
    red joni 7 July 2016 19: 41
    +6
    NATO students do not teach history well, they have repeatedly raked from us in the Black Sea region, it’s time to understand our Black Sea of ​​Crimea and there is nothing to roam around here without the permission of the elders.
  24. Bramb
    Bramb 7 July 2016 19: 51
    +3
    Why is there a photo with an aircraft carrier in this thread? Carriers are forbidden to enter the Black Sea.
  25. Lt. Air Force stock
    Lt. Air Force stock 7 July 2016 20: 37
    +2
    In terms of ship composition, the Black Sea Fleet is being updated, there are already 3 Varshavyanka and Frigate Admiral Grigorovich, as a result there will be 6 Varshavyanka + 1 submarine of the project Paltus Alrosa, 6 Frigates of the project 11356 (Admiral Grigorovich the first ship in the series), in addition, it seems that construction of corvettes for the Black Sea Fleet is planned. There are coastal anti-ship complexes of the bastion; eventually, hypersonic Zircon missiles will appear. Also, do not forget about anti-submarine aviation.
    In the event of a flotilla of NATO ships in the Black Sea, it will be possible to respond by increasing the number of Su-30SM fighters capable of carrying anti-ship missiles, increasing the number of Bastions and strengthening air defense of the Crimean peninsula and the area near Novorossiysk. This will be a fairly cheap and effective way to counter the NATO flotilla.
  26. Yugra
    Yugra 7 July 2016 21: 30
    0
    Coastal missile systems in the Crimea and Novorossiysk in anticipation of war? Well, why then drool drool ...
  27. evge-malyshev
    evge-malyshev 7 July 2016 21: 43
    0
    “After the Crimea became part of Russia in 2014, the balance of forces in the Black Sea changed. Ukraine has been ousted from the arena, while Moscow has strengthened its fleet, ”note the report’s authors.

    Analysts-experts admitted that Crimea became part of Russia, and not annexed.

    But I really wanted to place a civilian base in Crimea. But no. Not fused. Our Crimea. Our Black Sea.
  28. Khariton
    Khariton 7 July 2016 22: 13
    0
    I wonder why the Israeli comrades suddenly calmed down in such articles ..? Tipo blew us off and watch giggling ..? Eh, the men all ran into the trenches ... One, I’m here with a saber waving! You cowards .... (like that and the USSR collapsed ..) hi
  29. Tektor
    Tektor 7 July 2016 22: 55
    0
    KMK, the states cannot come up with anything original, and provoke our reaction, which can be interpreted as aggression. There are several options. The oldest - provocations in the LPNR, but there - it does not work ... Turkey - failed, but an attempt to exacerbate the situation in the Black Sea region is likely. Transnistria, for example, or Georgia will "dare". At the extreme, they will start shooting at the borders of the Tribaltik and declare a blockade to the special Kaliningrad region. I'm afraid that not answering will not work. The question is in order of answer: should it be proportionate and against the insolent, or immediately by states? It seems to me that the best answer would be a tsunami from a landslide on Hilo ... If they do not understand, then a tsunami from a landslide on Palma. How to cause landslides and tsunamis? Was a method developed from an MHD generator in the Rode? The problem is only in its delivery and justification for carrying out, allegedly, work.
  30. t118an
    t118an 7 July 2016 23: 02
    +1
    For Dunno .. from the West specially Quote from the Encyclopedic Dictionary ......

    The Russian Sea is the name of the Black Sea in ancient Russian and Arabic sources. * * * RUSSIAN SEA RUSSIAN SEA, the name of the Black Sea in Russian chronicles (see CHRONICLES) when describing the events of 9-15 centuries, as well as in Arabic sources of the 10th century ...
  31. komel
    komel 8 July 2016 01: 50
    0
    Erdogan may make a surprise on the NATO Alliance. Why does he need NATO’s ships in the Black Sea when, in fact, it has weight on the sea from the Russian Federation. It is not profitable for him to launch a NATO fleet, not only because of rapprochement with Russia, but also because there was no help from their alliance, and there were promises. Erdogan’s support for Kurds by the Americans did not go unnoticed. In the best case, Erdogan will remain silent, or, according to the Eastern tradition, he will bargain. It is curious for the Russian Federation how Erdogan will behave at a NATO meeting, unless of course something can depend on Turkey there.
  32. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 8 July 2016 05: 06
    0
    America has no choice but to look in all directions for Russia's weaknesses. They think how they will feel for it, they will begin to untwist it. Freaks.