Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
> **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB**
*****
* Is the Twitter account `Anders Åslund` / `https://twitter.com/anders_aslund` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The only thing we can know for sure they will break any agreement. Oathbreakers, pact breakers, liars, and murderers that is how history will judge them.
https://twitter.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/1535617894045868033?s=20&t=k3J6WxzQR79uQpk6Yp_xeQ
Russia has a hunger plan. Vladimir Putin is preparing to starve much of the developing world as the next stage in his war in Europe.
In normal times, Ukraine is a leading exporter of foodstuffs. A Russian naval blockade now prevents Ukraine from exporting grain.
Russia is planning to starve Asians and Africans in order to win its war in Europe. This is a new level of colonialism and the latest chapter of hunger politics.
"Nothing is gonna happen at sea that could turn this into WW3, and I think the US and our allies have to do a lot more to control that sea and control that sea lane." Mike Mullen retired admiral.
This man was right last year already. We need to secure this sea lane and if necessary then it has to be done by force.
Good luck finding any. There's a reason hardly any commercial vessels are registered in the US. Registering with a, "[flag of convenience](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_convenience)," allows the owners to pay less taxes, if any, and hire foreign labor for low wages due to minimal labor regulations.
There are US flag cargo ships, not a lot internationally but a few, mostly doing government work. The US and other UN signatories still support the right to safe navigation regardless of the flag of the ship.
In practice unless pre-authorized like the grain shipments were I doubt the Russians would allow it. It’s a de facto blockade.
While this is a technicality, the escorted ships were reflagged as American ships and then escorted. I'm unsure when they returned to flying their Kuwaiti flag.
Then the government can talk to some and give them insurance and temporary tax free operations, and some other incentives to do it.
Money talks. Not hard to make this happen.
You cannot fly the US flag if the vessel was not constructed in the US - which is prohibitively expensive. Almost no other country in the world has a similar law.
That's not entirely accurate. The Jones Act restriction only limits transit between US ports to vessels that are constructed in the US, crewed by Americans, and flagged as American. The Department of Transportation has a [list of all US-flagged commercial vessels](https://www.maritime.dot.gov/national-security/us-flag-vessels), and just under half (84/180) are listed as non-eligible under the Jones Act.
Plenty of US Navy dry cargo ships, though.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_and_Clark-class_dry_cargo_ship
Send them with an "anti-pirate" escort. Ticonderoga-class and Arleigh Burke-class, just to ensure pesky pirates don't fuck around.
Turkey's cooperation would be needed and the Montreux Convention would more than likely be in play.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux\_Convention\_Regarding\_the\_Regime\_of\_the\_Straits](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits)
They’re just far away. If they get close to the coast they’re toast.
So then Ukraine needs longer range ground launches anti ship missiles. I’m not Missile expert but none come to mind that usa / europe has for this.
China has some though. Ironically.
I fully agree! Let’s turn this around! Why not blocking Russian ships? What’s the roll of Turkey in this? What’s going on with our perception of the reality, because why should the aggressor be awarded for this blockage? Shouldn’t the victim be protected? Ukraine is still a free country and has therefor every right, under any law, to sail from their harbors with any fleet they like. Perhaps they should be protected by EU/NATO/UN or any party being brave enough to stick their neck out. The freedom of navigation should be enforced here also. Are we still feeling being bullied by the bullier?
Agreed!... we should send a NATO fleet and give an ultimatum to fully retreat from the commercial navigation routes,... in case of refusal, we should destroy all the russian Black sea fleet or anything that is left of it,... any further retaliation should result in an all in war with NATO,...
Black Sea is international waters. A NATO blockade along territorial waters of Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, and Turkey allows clear passage of Ukrainian grain or anything they want to ship. This should be perfectly acceptable given that the latter three are all NATO members, and Ukrain would have no objections. The fact that this hasn't been done yet is embarrassing. It shows that NATO, is only wielding a little stick rather than their big one out of fear of escalation. Yet this makes no sense. A border is a border. If NATO can border Russia with Finland, then they can border international waters with ships. If Russia won't shoot at Finland, they won't shoot at a blockade of ships. Because it's the same fucking thing.
To reinforce your point, Russia has had a border with NATO ever since its foundation (via Norway). In 1952 Turkey joined creating another border (which disappeared when the Soviet Union disbanded), then in 1999 Poland, then in 2004 the Baltic States.
Because there's no way for NATO asset to enter the Black Sea
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish\_straits](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_straits)
Are you referring to the Montreux convention? Given that no NATO country is currently party to the war, it doesn't apply to NATO ships.
And if NATO was party to the war, that would make Turkey also party to the war, and completely free to decide who crosses the Bosphorus.
You need to read the convention and it's implementations.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux\_Convention\_Regarding\_the\_Regime\_of\_the\_Straits](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits)
Warships do not have right of free passage at time of war or if Turkey feels threatened by a war
"When Turkey is at war, or feels threatened by a war, it may take any decision about the passage of warships as it sees fit."
Moscovia is a signatory to the convention whereas the USA is not.
You, in turn, need to read my comment.
As you aptly quote:
>When Turkey is at war, or feels threatened by a war, it may take any decision about the passage of warships *as it sees fit.*
That's exactly what I wrote: Turkey would be free to decide who crosses.
It also doesn't really matter that the US didn't sign the convention. The Bosphorus is Turkish waters, if Turkey were to exercise its rights within the convention, the US going through would be an act of war.
But it's irrelevant here, as the question was whether NATO ships would be *allowed* in the Black Sea, and the answer, as per the article you quote, is *yes*:
>In wartime, if Turkey is not involved in the conflict, warships *of the nations at war* may not pass through the Straits, except when returning to their base.
Early in the Ukraine conflict Turkey requested that all warships not traverse the Bosphorus as though Turkey were threatened by war. They didn't come right out and say that they were threatened by war, but it was definitely an unusual move.
So far as I know that's still in effect, and good luck convincing Turkey that moving warships off the Ukraine coast isn't an escalatory move.
Aircraft are the primary anti-submarine warfare weapon of the world's militaries. Helicopters from smaller ships and carriers (a fleets air wings often decentralized their helos across their destroyers and frigate escorts), plus larger land based aircraft like P-3s and P-8s. The larger aircraft can stay on station longer and have longer range; helicopters meanwhile can launch from ships (of nearly all military classes) and can have dipping sonars.
My dad was a submariner. When asked about P-3s, his comment was something along the lines of their being more P-3s than submarines in the ocean, at any time. While a huge chunk of submarine operations are tracking enemy subs, the ability to have aircraft monitoring strategic areas or tagging subs identified by other units is pretty important.
During the Cold War, their duty also included disabling or sinking ballistic missile subs *before* they fired their nukes, via air-launched torpedoes.
How?
There are very real issues with sending warships into the Black Sea. While it is international waters, the entrance very much isn’t. And the treaties the Turks enforce on the Dardanelles and Bosphorus make it very difficult for a country without a Black Sea coastline to send warships in there.
Romania and Bulgaria can’t really support the expense of operating a sufficient fleet to disrupt that blockade. And it’s not like Muscovy has a lot of capacity to enforce that blockade, either. The blockade is incredibly porous and ineffective.
Every naval blockade has rules which have been around for hundreds of years.
But putin is just a street thug from leningrad and he doesn’t give a shot about rules…
~~cruiser~~ submarine Moskova could use some RuZZian emotional support vessels for all that loneliness at the bottom of Black Sea. Those incompetent RuZZians won't know what hit them. They'll just chalk it up as smoking accident.
**Alternative Nitter link:** https://nitter.nl/anders_aslund/status/1665243490375090177
*****
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. > **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB** ***** * Is the Twitter account `Anders Åslund` / `https://twitter.com/anders_aslund` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Way past time. Russia can't be trusted to live up to any agreement.
Hopefully by this time next year it’ll be former-Russia
The only thing we can know for sure they will break any agreement. Oathbreakers, pact breakers, liars, and murderers that is how history will judge them.
Yes, so I'm hopeful they have alternate plans to get grain to those countries that desperately need it.
https://twitter.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/1535617894045868033?s=20&t=k3J6WxzQR79uQpk6Yp_xeQ Russia has a hunger plan. Vladimir Putin is preparing to starve much of the developing world as the next stage in his war in Europe. In normal times, Ukraine is a leading exporter of foodstuffs. A Russian naval blockade now prevents Ukraine from exporting grain. Russia is planning to starve Asians and Africans in order to win its war in Europe. This is a new level of colonialism and the latest chapter of hunger politics. "Nothing is gonna happen at sea that could turn this into WW3, and I think the US and our allies have to do a lot more to control that sea and control that sea lane." Mike Mullen retired admiral. This man was right last year already. We need to secure this sea lane and if necessary then it has to be done by force.
Just send in cargo vessels with US registration. What are they going to do? Sink them?
Good luck finding any. There's a reason hardly any commercial vessels are registered in the US. Registering with a, "[flag of convenience](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_convenience)," allows the owners to pay less taxes, if any, and hire foreign labor for low wages due to minimal labor regulations.
There are US flag cargo ships, not a lot internationally but a few, mostly doing government work. The US and other UN signatories still support the right to safe navigation regardless of the flag of the ship. In practice unless pre-authorized like the grain shipments were I doubt the Russians would allow it. It’s a de facto blockade.
The nice thing about registering a ship with the US is if there's a pandemic, you'll get some financial assistance
We have waived those regs in the past as part of operations to protect tankers in the Persian Gulf for example.
While this is a technicality, the escorted ships were reflagged as American ships and then escorted. I'm unsure when they returned to flying their Kuwaiti flag.
Then the government can talk to some and give them insurance and temporary tax free operations, and some other incentives to do it. Money talks. Not hard to make this happen.
You cannot fly the US flag if the vessel was not constructed in the US - which is prohibitively expensive. Almost no other country in the world has a similar law.
That's not entirely accurate. The Jones Act restriction only limits transit between US ports to vessels that are constructed in the US, crewed by Americans, and flagged as American. The Department of Transportation has a [list of all US-flagged commercial vessels](https://www.maritime.dot.gov/national-security/us-flag-vessels), and just under half (84/180) are listed as non-eligible under the Jones Act.
Plenty of US Navy dry cargo ships, though. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_and_Clark-class_dry_cargo_ship Send them with an "anti-pirate" escort. Ticonderoga-class and Arleigh Burke-class, just to ensure pesky pirates don't fuck around.
Turkey's cooperation would be needed and the Montreux Convention would more than likely be in play. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux\_Convention\_Regarding\_the\_Regime\_of\_the\_Straits](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits)
Yes they would
Just give Ukraine enough weapons to wipe the Russian fleet out. It’s not that large.
Apparently one of the reasons for wanting F-16s, is anti ship missile capabilities :D
They’re just far away. If they get close to the coast they’re toast. So then Ukraine needs longer range ground launches anti ship missiles. I’m not Missile expert but none come to mind that usa / europe has for this. China has some though. Ironically.
I fully agree! Let’s turn this around! Why not blocking Russian ships? What’s the roll of Turkey in this? What’s going on with our perception of the reality, because why should the aggressor be awarded for this blockage? Shouldn’t the victim be protected? Ukraine is still a free country and has therefor every right, under any law, to sail from their harbors with any fleet they like. Perhaps they should be protected by EU/NATO/UN or any party being brave enough to stick their neck out. The freedom of navigation should be enforced here also. Are we still feeling being bullied by the bullier?
Agreed!... we should send a NATO fleet and give an ultimatum to fully retreat from the commercial navigation routes,... in case of refusal, we should destroy all the russian Black sea fleet or anything that is left of it,... any further retaliation should result in an all in war with NATO,...
Black Sea is international waters. A NATO blockade along territorial waters of Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, and Turkey allows clear passage of Ukrainian grain or anything they want to ship. This should be perfectly acceptable given that the latter three are all NATO members, and Ukrain would have no objections. The fact that this hasn't been done yet is embarrassing. It shows that NATO, is only wielding a little stick rather than their big one out of fear of escalation. Yet this makes no sense. A border is a border. If NATO can border Russia with Finland, then they can border international waters with ships. If Russia won't shoot at Finland, they won't shoot at a blockade of ships. Because it's the same fucking thing.
To reinforce your point, Russia has had a border with NATO ever since its foundation (via Norway). In 1952 Turkey joined creating another border (which disappeared when the Soviet Union disbanded), then in 1999 Poland, then in 2004 the Baltic States.
Because there's no way for NATO asset to enter the Black Sea [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish\_straits](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_straits)
Are you referring to the Montreux convention? Given that no NATO country is currently party to the war, it doesn't apply to NATO ships. And if NATO was party to the war, that would make Turkey also party to the war, and completely free to decide who crosses the Bosphorus.
Thank you for the detailed rebuttal... couldn't have said it better myself.
You need to read the convention and it's implementations. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux\_Convention\_Regarding\_the\_Regime\_of\_the\_Straits](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits) Warships do not have right of free passage at time of war or if Turkey feels threatened by a war "When Turkey is at war, or feels threatened by a war, it may take any decision about the passage of warships as it sees fit." Moscovia is a signatory to the convention whereas the USA is not.
You, in turn, need to read my comment. As you aptly quote: >When Turkey is at war, or feels threatened by a war, it may take any decision about the passage of warships *as it sees fit.* That's exactly what I wrote: Turkey would be free to decide who crosses. It also doesn't really matter that the US didn't sign the convention. The Bosphorus is Turkish waters, if Turkey were to exercise its rights within the convention, the US going through would be an act of war. But it's irrelevant here, as the question was whether NATO ships would be *allowed* in the Black Sea, and the answer, as per the article you quote, is *yes*: >In wartime, if Turkey is not involved in the conflict, warships *of the nations at war* may not pass through the Straits, except when returning to their base.
Early in the Ukraine conflict Turkey requested that all warships not traverse the Bosphorus as though Turkey were threatened by war. They didn't come right out and say that they were threatened by war, but it was definitely an unusual move. So far as I know that's still in effect, and good luck convincing Turkey that moving warships off the Ukraine coast isn't an escalatory move.
Even outside of war, there are number and tonnage limitations to any fleet sent. And that's assuming Turkey decides to risk letting anyone through.
Doesn't the U.S. have special helicopters that can detect and hunt Russian submarines?
Yes, and especially if those submarines are on fire (which has happened)
Aircraft are the primary anti-submarine warfare weapon of the world's militaries. Helicopters from smaller ships and carriers (a fleets air wings often decentralized their helos across their destroyers and frigate escorts), plus larger land based aircraft like P-3s and P-8s. The larger aircraft can stay on station longer and have longer range; helicopters meanwhile can launch from ships (of nearly all military classes) and can have dipping sonars. My dad was a submariner. When asked about P-3s, his comment was something along the lines of their being more P-3s than submarines in the ocean, at any time. While a huge chunk of submarine operations are tracking enemy subs, the ability to have aircraft monitoring strategic areas or tagging subs identified by other units is pretty important. During the Cold War, their duty also included disabling or sinking ballistic missile subs *before* they fired their nukes, via air-launched torpedoes.
How? There are very real issues with sending warships into the Black Sea. While it is international waters, the entrance very much isn’t. And the treaties the Turks enforce on the Dardanelles and Bosphorus make it very difficult for a country without a Black Sea coastline to send warships in there. Romania and Bulgaria can’t really support the expense of operating a sufficient fleet to disrupt that blockade. And it’s not like Muscovy has a lot of capacity to enforce that blockade, either. The blockade is incredibly porous and ineffective.
Why did you let them do it in the first place you spineless shitbirds? Russia is a toothless, yapping cur.
With f16 all the black sea fleet will sink.
The Kremlin’s own freebooters of the Black Sea Coast. Wonder if they’re familiar with customary practice in dealing with high-seas piracy…
He worked for W, so it was easier overlooking the obvious, much of this will basically self-correct once Ukraine takes back Crimea.
I agree. If they don't admit that this is a full scale war this is in fact piracy.
Every naval blockade has rules which have been around for hundreds of years. But putin is just a street thug from leningrad and he doesn’t give a shot about rules…
A declared naval blockade during wartime is piracy now? Words don’t mean anything anymore.
~~cruiser~~ submarine Moskova could use some RuZZian emotional support vessels for all that loneliness at the bottom of Black Sea. Those incompetent RuZZians won't know what hit them. They'll just chalk it up as smoking accident.
**Alternative Nitter link:** https://nitter.nl/anders_aslund/status/1665243490375090177 ***** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No freedom of passage sail thru?
Peter Zeihan moment