Next Question
Mahalo is adding a tip to all questions that don't offer a tip.
M¢37 Funded By Mahalo ? |
September 30, 2009 03:11 PM
RSS
Russia have gained access to the Mediterranean by using Syria’s Tartus as main naval HQ. Russia and Syria signed a contract which allowed the Russians to convert Tartus into highly-developed naval infrastructures outside of Russian territory.
these two links will give you the answer to both questions asked.
http://defense-update.com/analysis/analysis_091207_navy.htm
http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/russia_major_mediterranean_deployment
Source(s):
http://defense-update.com/analysis/analysis_091207_navy.htm
http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/russia_major_mediterranean_deployment
Permalink | Report
http://img65.imageshack.us/img65/3457/02173060si1.jpg
Historically, Russians always felt they have a right to be in the Mediterranean by tradition and geographical position alleging that they were a Black Sea power and since this stretch of water was connected with the Mediterranean, they were also a Mediterranean power.
The Soviet Union tried since the early years of the Cold War to maintain a presence in the Mediterranean. From 1958 until 1961, Soviet submarines were based at Valona, Albania. A more permanent presence was just attempted starting in 1964, still the soviet operation remained low because lack of support facilities in this shores.
During the years that followed the Sovmedron (Soviet Mediterranean Fleet) was strong in the Eastern Mediterranean were it had quantitative superiority. Still, they were operating at their limits with presence in the Mediterranean of 6 to 9 month. Their principal doctrine at the time was the ASW roll (Anti-Submarine Warfare) and important task in the enclosed Mediterranean where many times crossed with units from the USS Sixth Fleet observing their tactics and operations to gain sea experience.
Between 1966 to 1975 the Sovmedron changed dramatically, incrementing its force with dozens of new units and their offensive character clearly boasting an aggressive projection of military power. By 1968 they were already using the Egyptian ports of Alexandria and Sallum enabling them year-round deployments with quantities between 20 to 23 ships and submarines. Also, air anti-ship capabilities were provided by the Soviet Naval Aviation flying from Egyptian airfields. Their rights to use Egyptian ports ended in 1972.
Tartus, in Syria, was the Sovmedron maintenance site during the Soviet-era, today it has become the only Russian foothold in the Mediterranean nesting the country's Black Sea Fleet, now that its current main base in Sevastopol, Crimea, will be closed in 2017. Three floating piers were deployed at the Tartus site, with accommodation for up to a dozen warships. Russia has also expanded the port of Latakia building a pier. The whole move to Tartus is another milestone in the large history of the Russian navy trying to control the Mediterranean Sea.
Aerial view of Tartus Russian naval base in Syria
http://www.syria-shipping.com/tartous.jpg
Source(s):
http://books.google.com/books?id=1-x5BWYoeCkC&pg=PA77&lpg=PA77&...
Permalink | Report
Answered Question
Mahalo is adding a tip to all questions that don't offer a tip.
How has the Russian Navy gained access to the Mediterranean?
Explain the history of Russian naval power in the Mediterrean
Interesting Question?
Yes (0)
No (0)
- In Science & Mathematics |
- |
- Report |
-
Share
RSS
Best Answer Chosen by Asker
| October 04, 2009 01:14 AM |
these two links will give you the answer to both questions asked.
http://defense-update.com/analysis/analysis_091207_navy.htm
http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/russia_major_mediterranean_deployment
Source(s):
http://defense-update.com/analysis/analysis_091207_navy.htm
http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/russia_major_mediterranean_deployment
| Asker's Rating: |
• The Black Sea, Caspian sea, and Mediterrain sea seem to have drawn attention from Russian naval power when tensions escalate in Israel.
Permalink | Report
Reply
Other Answers (1)
October 04, 2009 05:07 AM
Russian Navy aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov on its way to the port of Tartus at the beginning of 2009. Historically, Russians always felt they have a right to be in the Mediterranean by tradition and geographical position alleging that they were a Black Sea power and since this stretch of water was connected with the Mediterranean, they were also a Mediterranean power.
The Soviet Union tried since the early years of the Cold War to maintain a presence in the Mediterranean. From 1958 until 1961, Soviet submarines were based at Valona, Albania. A more permanent presence was just attempted starting in 1964, still the soviet operation remained low because lack of support facilities in this shores.
During the years that followed the Sovmedron (Soviet Mediterranean Fleet) was strong in the Eastern Mediterranean were it had quantitative superiority. Still, they were operating at their limits with presence in the Mediterranean of 6 to 9 month. Their principal doctrine at the time was the ASW roll (Anti-Submarine Warfare) and important task in the enclosed Mediterranean where many times crossed with units from the USS Sixth Fleet observing their tactics and operations to gain sea experience.
Between 1966 to 1975 the Sovmedron changed dramatically, incrementing its force with dozens of new units and their offensive character clearly boasting an aggressive projection of military power. By 1968 they were already using the Egyptian ports of Alexandria and Sallum enabling them year-round deployments with quantities between 20 to 23 ships and submarines. Also, air anti-ship capabilities were provided by the Soviet Naval Aviation flying from Egyptian airfields. Their rights to use Egyptian ports ended in 1972.
Tartus, in Syria, was the Sovmedron maintenance site during the Soviet-era, today it has become the only Russian foothold in the Mediterranean nesting the country's Black Sea Fleet, now that its current main base in Sevastopol, Crimea, will be closed in 2017. Three floating piers were deployed at the Tartus site, with accommodation for up to a dozen warships. Russia has also expanded the port of Latakia building a pier. The whole move to Tartus is another milestone in the large history of the Russian navy trying to control the Mediterranean Sea.
Aerial view of Tartus Russian naval base in Syria
Source(s):
http://books.google.com/books?id=1-x5BWYoeCkC&pg=PA77&lpg=PA77&...
Permalink | Report
Reply
October 04, 2009 05:21 AM
Comments by John Bolton
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGYtufAmg7U&feature=related
1. The Russian Mediterranean presence will be strategic if Israel strikes Iran nuclear program.
2. Bolton says diplomacy has failed
3. Pressure is being put on Israel not to use Military force
4. Iran could retaliate by increase attacks in Iraq or cutting the strait of Hormus
5. Israel will wait until end of 2009 for political solutions
6. Bolten does not know whether the conflict will escalate into a global war. He says the outcome is not known
7. US and Israeli relations are worst in 60 years.
Report
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGYtufAmg7U&feature=related
1. The Russian Mediterranean presence will be strategic if Israel strikes Iran nuclear program.
2. Bolton says diplomacy has failed
3. Pressure is being put on Israel not to use Military force
4. Iran could retaliate by increase attacks in Iraq or cutting the strait of Hormus
5. Israel will wait until end of 2009 for political solutions
6. Bolten does not know whether the conflict will escalate into a global war. He says the outcome is not known
7. US and Israeli relations are worst in 60 years.
October 04, 2009 03:38 PM
1. Not quite. Russian historical doctrine to gain access to the Mediterranean and believing in their big roll as a player in the region crashes against the southern flank of NATO (Turkey, Greece and Italy) not to mention the readiness of US Fleet. NATO not Israel is the main concern for the Russian presence in the Mediterranean.
2. I agree with Bolton. Diplomacy has failed as well as US and European nation’s failure to notice how Iran has dodged the issue all the way since the beginning.
3. Yes, pressure is being put on Israel not to attack, mainly by the US which can´t control them, and Russia which is a second player with even much less influence but eager to come to terms with the Israelis. In that respect this is a true advance in international diplomacy and a shift in geopolitical stance.
4. Not likely, Iran´s attack on Iraq will be the end of their regime because this most certainly involve the US directly. The US base of Diego Garcia is located just south in the Indic Ocean few hours distance with its strategic forces, meaning Iran will be targeted in a snap with B-1 supersonic bombers and B-2 stealth aircraft that has the capability to obliterate its infrastructure. Blocking the Strait of Hormuz is another thing. This involve the blockade of a big part of the oil consumed by the US and most likely will involve the deployment of two or three Navy Fleets. In this regard a territorial dispute is out of the question and won´t involve the bombing of its nuclear or military capabilities. Oil is not connected with an issue with Iraq. Nuclear installations are not an issue connected with the Oil blockade in the Strait of Hormuz.
5. I think so. But I must admit that I was specting the attack on Iran´s nuclear facilities since the end of 2008. This tells me how the Israelis are taking their time to think a solution with Iran, instead rushing an attack that will ultimately bring dangerous consequences to the region. I still believe the attack will go but there is no indication now from Israel as when it will take place.
6. Agree with Bolton again. It is unknown whether the attack will escalate a major conflict or if Israel will be successful in shattering Iran’s military and nuclear infrastructure.
7. Not true. Israel relation with the US has been strong despite the advent of democrats like Carter, Clinton or Obama. Just take a look at the Obama speech before the elections and after he gained the presidency and you´ll see that his stance have become friendlier and understanding with Israel over middle-east issues and especially with nuclear Iran.
This is what happens when you are attacked by the US with its B-2 stealth bombers coming out of Whiteman AFB (half distance around the world) or Diego Garcia AFB. March 2003 bombing of Baghdad´s administrative ministerial compounds. This will happend again if Iran attacks Iraq (with the American still there) for any reason...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0kcaziP-0o
Report
2. I agree with Bolton. Diplomacy has failed as well as US and European nation’s failure to notice how Iran has dodged the issue all the way since the beginning.
3. Yes, pressure is being put on Israel not to attack, mainly by the US which can´t control them, and Russia which is a second player with even much less influence but eager to come to terms with the Israelis. In that respect this is a true advance in international diplomacy and a shift in geopolitical stance.
4. Not likely, Iran´s attack on Iraq will be the end of their regime because this most certainly involve the US directly. The US base of Diego Garcia is located just south in the Indic Ocean few hours distance with its strategic forces, meaning Iran will be targeted in a snap with B-1 supersonic bombers and B-2 stealth aircraft that has the capability to obliterate its infrastructure. Blocking the Strait of Hormuz is another thing. This involve the blockade of a big part of the oil consumed by the US and most likely will involve the deployment of two or three Navy Fleets. In this regard a territorial dispute is out of the question and won´t involve the bombing of its nuclear or military capabilities. Oil is not connected with an issue with Iraq. Nuclear installations are not an issue connected with the Oil blockade in the Strait of Hormuz.
5. I think so. But I must admit that I was specting the attack on Iran´s nuclear facilities since the end of 2008. This tells me how the Israelis are taking their time to think a solution with Iran, instead rushing an attack that will ultimately bring dangerous consequences to the region. I still believe the attack will go but there is no indication now from Israel as when it will take place.
6. Agree with Bolton again. It is unknown whether the attack will escalate a major conflict or if Israel will be successful in shattering Iran’s military and nuclear infrastructure.
7. Not true. Israel relation with the US has been strong despite the advent of democrats like Carter, Clinton or Obama. Just take a look at the Obama speech before the elections and after he gained the presidency and you´ll see that his stance have become friendlier and understanding with Israel over middle-east issues and especially with nuclear Iran.
This is what happens when you are attacked by the US with its B-2 stealth bombers coming out of Whiteman AFB (half distance around the world) or Diego Garcia AFB. March 2003 bombing of Baghdad´s administrative ministerial compounds. This will happend again if Iran attacks Iraq (with the American still there) for any reason...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0kcaziP-0o
October 04, 2009 03:57 PM
I've open a $1 question "What has been Russian historical doctrine in gaining access to the Mediterranean?" to further explain Russia presence in the Mediterrean
Report
October 04, 2009 04:02 PM
Bolton seems to indicate that Israel or the US will act to stop an Nuclear Iran
Report
October 04, 2009 04:05 PM
Who is saying that Israel and US relationships are the worst in 60 years?
Such a saying, makes it seem that Israel will act in haste against the consent of the US policy makers.
Report
Such a saying, makes it seem that Israel will act in haste against the consent of the US policy makers.
October 04, 2009 05:46 PM
Obama won’t act aggressively on Iran in the first place. That is for sure. So the ball is now on Israel´s turf. The most likely candidate to act on Iran is (and has always be) Israel.
US have nothing to gain in the short term (but may probably regret the decision in the near future, as they usually do...) But the one is being threaten is Israel, especially after Ahmadinejah declarations that Israel "must be wiped out of the face of the Earth".
Who is more likely to react to this, US or Israel? The answer is a no brainer.
I don´t know who is saying that Israel and US relationships are the worst in 60 years? neither. Perhaps some tabloid or a vision doom reporter living out of reality
Report
US have nothing to gain in the short term (but may probably regret the decision in the near future, as they usually do...) But the one is being threaten is Israel, especially after Ahmadinejah declarations that Israel "must be wiped out of the face of the Earth".
Who is more likely to react to this, US or Israel? The answer is a no brainer.
I don´t know who is saying that Israel and US relationships are the worst in 60 years? neither. Perhaps some tabloid or a vision doom reporter living out of reality
October 04, 2009 06:01 PM
The issue for US involve will probably be Saudi Oil and Caspian Sea Oil interests. Saudi Oil provides about 25 percent of the world oil. China get about 10% of its oil from Iran and India receives about 40% of its natural gas from Iran.
Report
October 04, 2009 06:27 PM
CNN report 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=firSf_fomW0
1. Israel, Turk, and US Navy is practicing in the Mediterranean sea, as a humanitarian operation, but it doesn't hurt to send another message that NATO is ready.
2. Three Navies speaking three different languages, how to cooperate, and how to communicate with other navies.
3. The training and coordination ready, if assistance is needed.
4. The biggest Israeli warship, the Sapphire was included in the practice. The Sapphire blocks weapons transport to Syria.
5. What would happen, if a conflict erupted in the Mediterranean region? A Russia fleet will be present in the Mediterranean. The situation will be inherently dangerous. Russia believes Naval presence (missile showdown) in the Mediterranean will deter US invention in a Middle East and Israeli escalation.
6. Israel is increasing imports of Chinese products improving Israel/China economic relationships
7. Germany Rahr claims they were the economic aid that has helped stabilize Russian economy. Germany would like to invest in Russian oil and gas and increase imports of energy.
Report
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=firSf_fomW0
1. Israel, Turk, and US Navy is practicing in the Mediterranean sea, as a humanitarian operation, but it doesn't hurt to send another message that NATO is ready.
2. Three Navies speaking three different languages, how to cooperate, and how to communicate with other navies.
3. The training and coordination ready, if assistance is needed.
4. The biggest Israeli warship, the Sapphire was included in the practice. The Sapphire blocks weapons transport to Syria.
5. What would happen, if a conflict erupted in the Mediterranean region? A Russia fleet will be present in the Mediterranean. The situation will be inherently dangerous. Russia believes Naval presence (missile showdown) in the Mediterranean will deter US invention in a Middle East and Israeli escalation.
6. Israel is increasing imports of Chinese products improving Israel/China economic relationships
7. Germany Rahr claims they were the economic aid that has helped stabilize Russian economy. Germany would like to invest in Russian oil and gas and increase imports of energy.
Answer this Question
Related Questions
Ask a Question
Buy Mahalo Dollars with Credit Card or PayPal
Top Members
Most Popular Tags
Categories
- Anonymous
-
Arts & Design
-
Beauty & Style
-
Books & Authors
-
Business
-
Cars & Transportation
-
Consumer Electronics
- Coupons Deals
-
Education
-
Entertainment
-
Environment
-
Fitness
-
Food & Drink
- From Email
- From Iphone
- From Twitter
-
Health
-
History
-
Hobbies
-
Home & Garden
-
How Tos
-
Humor
-
Jobs
-
Legal
-
Local
-
Love & Relationships
-
Mahalo Answers Community
-
Money
-
Music
-
News
-
NSFW
-
Parenting
-
Pets
-
Science & Mathematics
-
Services
-
Shopping
-
Social Science
-
Society & Culture
-
Sports
-
Technology & Internet
-
Travel
-
Video Games
Welcome New Members
- marknadal, November 27, 2009 10:31 PM
- darcar1020, November 27, 2009 10:30 PM
- andrewpreston, November 27, 2009 10:28 PM
- kswn1, November 27, 2009 10:20 PM
- ashleyw2, November 27, 2009 10:19 PM
Mahalo Dollars are the currency of Mahalo Answers.
Each Mahalo Dollar costs $1.
Once you earn more than 40 Mahalo Dollars, you can request to be paid via PayPal. Each Mahalo Dollar is currently worth $0.75 when paid out via PayPal. Learn More
1. In 2008, Russia naval build in the Mediterranean joins with Syria.
2. The aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov was sent into the Mediterranean from Murmansk
3. In 2007, Russia launched its north sea flotilla in the Mediterranean to demonstrate its military strength.
4. Included in the exercise were Admiral Levchenko and Admiral Chabanenko anti-submarine ships.
5. Joined by flagship Moskva a guided missile cruiser and four additional ships
6. Admiral Kuznetsov carries 47 warplanes (mostly Su-33) and 10 helicopters
7. Russia is reactivating its cold war naval bases in Syria's Tartus and Latakia ports