Russia

Ships from Russian Baltic Fleet rotate on deployment

2018-04-20 By Anders Puck Nielsen Leave a Comment

The Russian Baltic Fleet rotates some ships on deployment to the Mediterranean.

The frigate Yaroslav Mudry and the tanker Lena have left the Baltic and will join the Russian maritime forces in the Mediterranean. Yaroslav Mudry is a Neustrashimyy-class frigate, which has been in service since 2009. The last long deployment of Yaroslav Mudry was in 2016.

At the same time, the landing ship Minsk is returning from deployment. Minsk is a Ropucha-class ship from 1984, and it left Kaliningrad on 4 October 2017. During its deployment the ship has participated in the unofficially termed operation “Syrian Express” which brings logistical supplies to the Russian forces on the Khmeimim Air Base and to the Syrian government forces.

Minsk conducted a port stay in Lisbon in Portugal before setting course for home on Wednesday 18 April.

Helicopter crashes on Russian problem ship Ivan Gren

2018-04-13 By Anders Puck Nielsen Leave a Comment

A Russian Ka-29 helicopter has crashed in the Baltic Sea on Thursday 12 April. The incident occurred while practicing deck landings at night on the Navy’s new landing ship Ivan Gren. That reports flot.com. Both pilots died in the crash.

Ivan Gren is still undergoing sea trials. Official commissioning by the navy is planned for next month, and the Yantar shipyard does not expect the accident to delay the process. The ship did not receive damages from the crash.

It would be fair to call Ivan Gren a troubled project. Works on the ship started in 2004, and delivery has been delayed many times. The ship was launched in 2012, and sea trials began in 2016.

A problem with the ship’s astern propulsion has proven particularly difficult to remedy. Apparently it is challenging to control the ship’s movements while going astern. On the next ship in the series, Petr Morgunov, the shipyard will change the direction of rotation on the propellers to see if that helps. If the reversed rotation gives better manageability, it will be changed on Ivan Gren as well.

The Russian Navy has decided not to order more ships of the Ivan Gren class than the two already under construction.

American journal calls Kuznetsov a bad aircraft carrier, Russian media has a fit

2018-04-07 By Anders Puck Nielsen Leave a Comment

A somewhat entertaining dispute has erupted between the American website The National Interest and the Russian press corps.

The National Interest has made a list of the 5 Worst Aircraft Carriers Ever Put to Sea, and the Russian Admiral Kuznetsov is on that list. That does not go over well in Russia.

For example Lenta.ru has collected statements from a range of Russian military experts who disregard the American website as a propaganda tool in an anti-Russian campaign.

The Russian experts also complain that the American journal includes Admiral Kuznetsov in a list of “aircraft carriers” because actually it is an “aircraft-carrying missile cruiser”. Those things are apparently not comparable at all.

One of the Russian experts explains that Admiral Kuznetsov held up very well during the operations in Syria (despite losing two aircraft), and another claims that the Russian ship brings more strategic weight to the battlefield than a modern American carrier which is little more than a floating airport.

Ah, well…

The other four ships on the list are the British HMS Eagle from 1924, the French Bearn from 1927, the Japanese HIJMS Kaga from 1928, and the American USS Ranger from 1934.

The Russian media seems convinced that the list is prioritized so Admiral Kuznetsov is named the worst aircraft carrier ever. As far as I can tell, it is just in chronological order.

Fear of missile defense traces back to World War II for Russia

2018-04-06 By Anders Puck Nielsen 1 Comment

Austin Long has a thorough account of the Soviet and Russian fear of Western missile defense capabilities in War on the Rocks under the title “Red Glare: The Origin and Implications of Russia’s ‘New’ Nuclear Weapons”.

He explains Putin’s revelation of new nuclear weapons in his March 1st speech as grounded in an old Russian concern with Western missile defense technology. The experience of being unable to respond to the German air campaign during World War II caused Stalin to focus intensely on the ability to retaliate in case of a nuclear attack. Already at that time there was talk about the dangers of an American missile defense which would leave Russia vulnerable to a first strike.

So when the Russian leadership is determined not to let an American missile defense threaten the retaliatory power of Russia, it is in line with a long history of military thinking.

So what does this mean for the nuclear relationship? First, U.S. leaders should recognize that no amount of explaining of the technical limitations of present or even potential U.S. missile defense capability is likely to change long and deeply held Russian views about missile defense competition.

Second, and more importantly, there is probably no future for formal, treaty-based U.S.-Russian arms control if the negotiations do not cover missile defense. The Russians sought unsuccessfully to include missile defense in the last round of strategic arms control negotiations (2009-2010). Today, with their “new” systems, they have a stronger bargaining position.

Gerasimov on the characteristics of modern warfare

2018-04-03 By Anders Puck Nielsen Leave a Comment

Chief of the Russian general staff Valery Gerasimov held a speech at the Military Academy in Moscow during a March 22-23 conference. Here he reflected on the trends of modern warfare and the general geopolitical situation that faces Russia.¹

I thought it would be interesting to look at his messages, especially in the light of Putin’s March 1st speech to the Federal Assembly where he showcased a range of new strategic nuclear weapons.

A complete transcript of Gerasimov’s speech has not been published. However, Krasnaya Zvezda has a fairly comprehensive account of the speech with many direct quotes. It seems good enough to get the idea.²

I often find Gerasimov’s statements informative when trying to understand how the Russian military establishment sees itself and the world. Putin and defense minister Shoigu have a different agenda in their public appearances where the intended audience is either the Russian public or foreign states. Gerasimov, however, addresses the military personnel, so his goal is more to make sense and direction than to impress or instill fear.

Let’s not question the future of Königsberg

2018-03-31 By Anders Puck Nielsen Leave a Comment

Next time you think the Russians are paranoid for believing that NATO might attack them, keep this in mind:

Jüri Saar has an article titled “The Future of Königsberg” in Diplomaatia, which is an Estonian think tank publication. In this he argues that the 1975 Helsinki Accords are no longer valid, and that Kaliningrad is essentially an illegally occupied territory which the West should demand to get back.

“The issue of the territorial ownership of the Kaliningrad Oblast after the Russians leave is considered a problem. The area could become a new bone of contention between Germany, Poland and Lithuania. For this reason, it must not be merged with the territory of any existing country. The solution, however, is also as plain as day. Königsberg must become the first region solely under the jurisdiction of the European Union, similar to the capital of the US, which forms a separate administrative unit, the District of Columbia.”

This is probably the worst idea I’ve seen all month. In fact it’s so bad I had to read the article twice to look for signs that it is meant as a joke.

Saar more or less proposes that the West should seek regime change in Kaliningrad through a series of hybrid warfare operations. This is exactly what the Russians believe to be the Western doctrine, and what chief the the general staff Valery Gerasimov has pointed out that Russia needs to prepare for. If I were a Russian military strategist, I’d be pretty happy about those Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad now.

What we need is to create certainty about the existing borders. Both sides must believe that the opponent accepts the borders as they are. It may require some fortification before we get to that point, but it also requires cogency.

Silly suggestions like this one which question the border drawing in the Baltic region are flat out dangerous.

Book review: Near Abroad — Putin, the West and the Contest over Ukraine and the Caucasus

2018-03-24 By Anders Puck Nielsen Leave a Comment

Title: Near Abroad — Putin, the West and the Contest over Ukraine and the Caucasus
Author: Gerard Toal
Publisher: Oxford University Press; 1 edition (2017)
ISBN-13: 978-0190253301

Near abroad cover

Gerard Toal has written an insightful book about the geopolitics of the former Soviet Union. Through case studies of South Ossetia and Ukraine, Toal unfolds the complexities of the geopolitical field and exposes prejudices on all sides.

Professor Gerard Toal is one of the prominent proponents of critical geopolitics. Through his career, he has contributed extensively to the development of this theoretical framework which places itself in opposition to more traditional schools of international relations theory like realism and liberalism.

His latest book, Near Abroad: Putin, the West and the Contest over Ukraine and the Caucasus, is not a book about the theoretical framework. Toal’s intention is to contribute to a scholarly understanding of the unfolding conflicts between Russia, its neighbors, and the West. He does this by examining the conflicts in South Ossetia and Ukraine which erupted into wars in 2008 and 2014 respectively.

…Continue reading

Putin is popular, but his voters don’t necessarily agree on much

2018-03-18 By Anders Puck Nielsen Leave a Comment

There is little excitement about the result of today’s presidential election in Russia, but that does not mean that there is nothing exciting about it. Sam Greene has a sharp analysis on his blog, Moscow-on-Thames:

Vladimir Putin will win today’s elections because he is genuinely popular. We should be clear about that. But we should also be clear about what exactly that popularity means.

The typical political-science view of political behavior holds that preferences – whether expressed at the ballot box or to pollsters – are formed by citizens acting as rational, utility-maximizing individuals. Without wanting to knock the importance of rationality, if there is anything that the events of recent years around the world, from the Euromaidan to Brexit to Trump, should have taught us, it is that politics is fundamentally a social phenomenon. People intuitively and continually read their social surroundings, looking for cues that would convey meaning, solidarity and a sense of inclusion. Nobody votes in a vacuum. …Continue reading

Sailor fell overboard from Russian corvette in Baltic Sea

2018-03-16 By Anders Puck Nielsen Leave a Comment

On Tuesday 13 March a crew member fell overboard from the Russian corvette Soobrazitelny in the Baltic Sea. Eight ships took part in the search-and-rescue operation, but the sailor was not found. That reports korabel.ru.

The incident occurred just after midnight, and at 21:00 the search was canceled. With the present water temperatures around 0 degrees Celsius a person without a survival suit will not be able to survive for more than a few hours.

Soobrazitelny is a Steregushchiy-class corvette based in Kaliningrad.

Podcast recommendation: WOTR – A big debate about a little nuke

2018-03-15 By Anders Puck Nielsen Leave a Comment

There is a great discussion about Russia and nuclear weapons in this episode of the War on the Rocks podcast.

The panel is terrific. Olga Oliker is brilliant, Frank Miller is wrong about most things concerning Russia but argues his case very well, and Vipin Narang has deep technical insights. Ryan and Usha do a fantastic job of moderating the discussion between the guests who clearly represent very different views.

The discussion follows up on the new U.S. Nuclear Posture Review which has some controversial assumptions about Russia’s nuclear doctrine and on Putin’s announcement of a new suite of nuclear weapons.

If the nuclear discussion interests you at all (and it should), this is a must-hear.