In an ominous development, Kiev is suggesting the continuation of the collapsed Black Sea Grain Deal without Russia’s participation and with apparent NATO protection, writes M.K. Bhadrakumar.
Joint exercises of the Rusian Northern and Black Sea Fleets. President Vladimir Putin on deck of the Marshal Ustinov missile cruiser in the Black Sea, observing firing of Kalibr cruise missiles and Kinzhal hypersonic aeroballistic missile, Jan. 9, 2020. (President of the Russian Federation/Wikimedia Commons)
By M.K. Bhadrakumar
Indian Punchline
The NATO Summit in Vilnius earlier this month signaled that there is absolutely no possibility of talks to settle the Ukraine war in the foreseeable future. The war will only intensify, as the U.S. and its allies still hope to inflict a military defeat on Russia although that is clearly beyond their capability.
On July 14, Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of U.S. joint chiefs of staff said that Ukraine’s counteroffensive is “far from a failure” but the fight ahead will be “long” and “bloody.” Milley has a reputation for speaking what the White House wants to hear, no matter his professional judgment.
Indeed, on July 19, the Biden administration announced additional security assistance of about $1.3 billion for Ukraine. The Pentagon said in a statement that the announcement “represents the beginning of a contracting process to provide additional priority capabilities to Ukraine.”
That is to say, the U.S. will be using funds in its Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative program, which allows the administration to buy weapons from industry rather than pull from U.S. weapons stocks.
According to the Pentagon, the latest package includes four National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS) and munitions; 152 mm artillery rounds; mine-clearing equipment; and drones.
Meanwhile, in an ominous development, no sooner had Russia let the U.N.-brokered grain deal expire on July 17, than Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky disclosed that he had sent official letters to U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan suggesting the continuation of the grain deal without Russia’s participation.
From left, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg with U.S. President Joe Biden and Turkey’s Erdogan on July 12 in Vilnius. (NATO)
On the very next day, Kiev followed up with an official letter to the U.N.’s International Maritime Organization spelling out a new maritime corridor passing through Romania’s territorial waters and exclusive maritime economic zone in the north-western part of the Black Sea.
Evidently, Kiev acted in concert with Romania (a NATO member country where the 101st Airborne Division of the U.S. army is deployed). Presumably, the U.S. and NATO are in the loop while the U.N.’s imprimatur is being arranged. It goes without saying that NATO has been working on a new maritime route in the Black Sea for some time already.
This is a serious development, as it seems a precursor to involving NATO in some way to challenge Russia’s domain dominance in the Black Sea.
NATO’s Vilnius Summit Communique on July 11 forecast that the alliance is gearing up for a vastly enhanced presence in the Black Sea region, which has been historically a Russian preserve, where it has important military bases.
The relevant paragraph in the NATO Communique said:
“The Black Sea region is of strategic importance for the Alliance. This is further highlighted by Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. We underline our continued support to Allied regional efforts aimed at upholding security, safety, stability and freedom of navigation in the Black Sea region including, as appropriate, through the 1936 Montreux Convention. We will further monitor and assess developments in the region and enhance our situational awareness, with a particular focus on the threats to our security and potential opportunities for closer cooperation with our partners in the region, as appropriate.” [Emphasis added.]
Four things to note:
- One, the Ukraine conflict has been singled out as the context; the focus is on Crimea;
- Two, “freedom of navigation” means an assertive U.S. naval presence; reference to the 1936 Montreux Convention hinted at the role of Turkey, both as a NATO member country and the custodian of the Dardanelles and Bosporus straits;
- Three, NATO flags its intention to enhance its “situational awareness,” which as a military term involves four stages: observation, orientation, decision and action. Situational awareness has two main elements, namely, one’s own knowledge of the situation and, secondly, one’s knowledge of what others are doing and might do if the situation were to change in certain ways. Simply put, the NATO surveillance of Russian activities in the Black Sea will intensify; and,
- Four, NATO seeks closer cooperation with “our partners in the region” (read Ukraine).
Map of the Black Sea and some prominent ports around it. Sea of Azov and Sea of Marmara also labelled. (Norman Einstein, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 3.0)
Most certainly, a new maritime route in northwestern and western regions of the Black Sea along Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey (all of which are NATO member countries) will cut off the Russian garrison in Transnistria (Moldava) and would boost Kiev’s capability to strike at Crimea. The NATO involvement would complicate any future Russian operations to liberate Odessa as well, which is historically a Russian city.
Apart from the huge legacy of culture and history, Odessa is a port head for the industrial products of Russia and Ukraine.
The Togliatti-Odessa ammonia pipeline (which Ukrainian saboteurs blew up recently) is one of the best examples. The 2,471 km pipeline, the longest ammonia pipeline in the world, connected the world’s largest ammonia producer, TogliattiAzot, in Russia’s Samara region with Odessa Port.
In strategic terms, without control over Odessa, NATO cannot force project in the Black Sea region or hope to resurrect Ukraine as an anti-Russia outpost. Nor can NATO advance toward the Transcaucasus and the Caspian (bordering Iran) and Central Asia without dominating the Black Sea region.
And for the same reasons, Russia cannot afford to cede the Black Sea region to NATO, either. Odessa is a vital link in any land bridge along the Black Sea coast connecting the Russian hinterland with its garrison in Transnistria, Moldova (which the U.S. is eyeing as a potential NATO member.) In fact, Crimea’s security will be endangered if hostile forces establish themselves in Odessa. (The attack on the Kerch Bridge in October 2022 was staged from Odessa.)
[Russia has been attacking Odessa over the past week, Al Jazeera reports, in retaliation against the second, recent attack on the Kerch Bridge.]
Traffic in 2019 on the Crimean Bridge, built to show Russia’s resolve to hold Crimea after the 2014 annexation. (Rosavtodor.ru, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 4.0)
Clearly, the entire U.S. project on the new maritime route is intended to preempt Russia from gaining control of Odessa. It factors in the strong likelihood that with the Ukrainian offensive floundering, Russia may soon launch its counter-offensive in the direction of Odessa.
From the Russian perspective, this becomes an existential moment. NATO has virtually encircled the Russian Navy in the North Sea and the Baltic Sea (with the induction of Sweden and Finland as members). The freedom of navigation of the Baltic Fleet and the dominance in the Black Sea, therefore, become all the more crucial for Russia to freely access the world market round the year.
Moscow has reacted strongly. On July 19, the Russian Ministry of Defense notified that “all vessels sailing in the waters of the Black Sea to Ukrainian ports will be regarded as potential carriers of military cargo. Accordingly, the countries of such vessels will be considered to be involved in the Ukrainian conflict on the side of the Kiev regime.”
Russia has further notified that “the north-western and south-eastern parts of the international waters of the Black Sea have been declared temporarily dangerous for navigation.”
The latest reports suggest that the Black Sea Fleet of warships are rehearsing the procedure for boarding foreign ships sailing to Ukrainian waters. In effect, Russia is imposing a sea blockade of Ukraine.
In an interview with Izvestia, Russian military expert Vasily Dandykin said he would now expect Russia to stop and inspect all ships sailing to Ukrainian ports:
“This practice is normal: There is a war zone there, and in the past two days it has been the scene of missile strikes. We’ll see how this will work in practice and whether there will be anyone willing to send vessels to these waters, because this is very serious.”
The White House has accused Russia of laying mines to block Ukrainian ports. Of course, Washington hopes that NATO moving in as the guarantor of the grain corridor, replacing Russia, would have resonance in the Global South.
Western propaganda caricatures Russia as creating food scarcity globally. Whereas, the fact of the matter is that the West didn’t keep its part of the bargain reciprocally to allow the export of Russian wheat and fertilizer, as has been acknowledged by the U.N. and Turkey.
[Related: World Hunger & War in Ukraine]
What remains to be seen is whether beyond the raging information war, any NATO country would dare to challenge Russia’s sea blockade. The chances are slim, the daunting deployment of the 101st Airborne Division in next-door Romania notwithstanding.
M.K. Bhadrakumar is a former diplomat. He was India’s ambassador to Uzbekistan and Turkey. Views are personal.
This article originally appeared on Indian Punchline.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
I voted for Biden. I am ashamed to have done so; the democratic process has made me responsible. The facts are all out and it’s not a pretty picture. All that has been said in the comments here are accurate but despite that, what do we do now or what can we do–vote for someone else who may have the same dangerous predilection? Presumably but ostensibly we live in a democracy. The present conflict in Ukraine is not about that. It’s about s an empire fighting against a nation’s sovereignty. The frightening thing about this is that the empire doesn’t know it has been whipped.
With its poor track record, NATO would be well advised not to be drawn into any move in the Black Sea that would bring it into direct conflict with Russia. Not only would it likely lose, but would certainly risk starting WWIII!
Turkiye, as the gatekeeper, should also not risk totally alienating Russia by letting NATO ships through the straits. Erdogan is already on thin ice with Putin, and would pay a heavy price if he bowed to NATO pressure. He would find himself isolated even more.
I found this article to be profoundly saddening. Why does NATO insist on destroying any hope of peace and cooperation? Its whole “defensive” aims were never needed even during the US-dominated Cold War, and all the offensive actions seems to start from the USA. What is wrong with having a real European Safety agreement, obviously including Russia? as outlined at the end of 2021 but tossed out by NATO and the USA? The people of most countries want peace, but are never listened to, just propagandised.
The answer is money and power–very simple. However, how that all works is complicated and a result of three-quarters of a century of consistent work by an emergent intel cartel (in the West), financial oligarchs, and a multitude of corporations from military contractors to the entertainment industry. It’s not a conspiracy but a network of interests that coalesced after the first Cold War ended. The whole thing is fueled by lies that approach the Orwellian in the West. If you have studied game-theory it makes more sense.
“there is absolutely no possibility of talks to settle the Ukraine war in the foreseeable future”
It would be more accurate to say there is no possibility of a NATO victory in the foreseeable future, either by combat or by talks.
Talks in the current circumstances would be seeking terms for surrender.
That would be a good thing. The terms of the defeat will only keep getting worse. NATO provoked a war of choice, and lost it.
Our neocons just keep starting wars and then losing them. The cure is to get rid of the neocons, not to fight on in Forever Wars at their behest.
Getting rid of the Neo-cons is like executing the messenger who approaches your army to discuss peace or surrender. Yes, of course these unethical and unempathic crooks need to be removed, but what about their paymasters, and what about the Intelligence Services who serve the Western Empire, and all the other bought and fully paid for place-men who serve the Empire , and most important of all, what about the Trillionaire Club who own America and more.
The latest moves clearly suggest that the western alliance has no intention of bringing the war to an end anytime soon. Mind you, the Black Sea shenanigans will not be a game-changer. The outcome of the war will not be changed, only the number of soldiers who will be killed, overwhelmingly Ukrainian, and the extent of infrastructure that will be destroyed. The military impotence of NATO will be further exposed for all the world to see. The big question is whether the neocons calling the shots want World War-III to start now or in the next chapter of warmongering against China.
.
I look way back at US History when Russia was supposed to be taking down Hiroshima—sigh—- but “Give Them Give Hell, Harry,” was a creepy little man and wanted to play by bombing up Japan while the Japanese were in DC working on a plan! . I view NATO as an acronym meaning , “Nasty Attitude Toward Others” aka NATO.
I look at the state of the planet here, and the insane way of America spending soooooo much money by placing of U.S military stationed ALL OVER the world—– and I am horrified that those in charge seem to have NO CONCEPT of what is happening weatherize on the planet! HOW CAN more freaking war make any nation better?????? Neither party seems to have any idea of a leader who could work to make the entire planet a better place…. and sadly after freaking over the planet—where do these insane (and said to be leaders—–)why do these creepy people think that WAR is ever the answer?????
A beautiful, clear presentation and map. Are we looking at a new phase of “the counter-offensive,” now shifting to the water–the target Crimea? I fear Biden rubbing his hands at the prospect of distraction from his bribery problems.
” I fear Biden rubbing his hands at the prospect of distraction from his bribery problems.”
It looks like the bribery problems are not going away.
In fact, it looks as though evidence is emerging that suggests the possibility that Z has been blackmailing B all along on the basis of Biden Crime Family doings in the Ukraine. Meanwhile Z has, obvoiusly, been richly rewarded for playing his part.
Where is Shakespeare when we need him!
Whom will we cast as the two corrupt overlords, and their spouses in crime, Lady Biden and Lady Zelensky?
They are both odious little men, their ladies vain and ambitious.
Avaricious irrational, deranged criminals govern the US/NATO nations. Their kind got rid of JFK and his brother in no time.
Ever since Zelensky chose state suicide over a reasonable settlement of Russian grievances, he has been seeking one thing alone: For NATO or the US to join his war against Russia. World War Three would be reckless in the extreme and would beg the question of nuclear war in Europe and the U.S. Once Zelensky chose war, he made Ukraine desperate and now ultimately alone. The photo ops from Vilnius showed Zelensky’s isolation. As Europe has come to realize that Zelensky’s Ukraine cannot be saved. Zelensky’s gambit has already sacrificed Ukraine and a whole generation of Ukrainians. An epic tragedy of one million human lives.
Clearly, this is an existential issue for Russia, but not at all for NATO and the US. As such, Russia cannot afford to back down, but it seems that Biden is intent on pressuring Russia even further. Biden has the most aggressive and counterproductive foreign policy of any administration in my lifetime, and I expect more disasters looming on the horizon because of this extreme belligerence. The question everyone should be asking is whether Biden will back down, or double down. Our futures depend on what decision he makes.
Biden will double down. His hero complex is in charge of this old man. Waning virility compensated by visions of smashing the USA’s 1950’s Cold War nemises to prove to the world he could accomplish what the others could not. Hatred occludes sound judgment. What happened to Icharus?
“His hero complex is in charge of this old man”
Strange, i thought it was Jill. But you are probably right Selina. However, are their level heads to prevail? Will they let him fly too close to the sun?
Please shut down nuclear subs, nuclear bombs, depleted uranium ammunition, depleted uranium tank shells, and nukey plants. Our ocean water is already polluted. So sad.
Wha…! Off subject.
Respectfully Vayk, I disagree. HelenB has a legitimate concern about radioactive materials in all of their forms. While others may focus their attention on the politics or warfare objectives, depleted uranium shells are polluting Ukraine with toxic poisons. The global state of ocean pollution is of grave concern to anyone who eats fish or wishes to swim or boat in ocean waters. These concerns are foremost to any rational being and rarely off-subject in any discussion. Wars create desperation, which leads to various abuses of human beings and the environment. Nuclear war is a foremost concern of the Ukraine conflict. As are the potential for leaks from damaged power plants. The variety of radioactive risks in war are a primary reason for concern.
With the recent strikes against the port of Reni, the truckers stated that they won’t return there; leaving only Constanta as a loading port..Will it be NATO trucks hauling UA grain to Constanta? Lithuania today offered to establish a shipping hub at a Baltic port, with EU money, whose logistics would be difficult..
Sultan Erdogan might do a backdoor deal while yet again stabbing Russia in the back, in hopes of finally joining the EU gravy train..
Not much wiggle-room for Ukraine’s fascist-loving Sugar Daddies..
Bryce, it is not likely that there will be an EU left or ready to accept Turkey, no gravy train in sight. But what if Hungary and Turkey walked out of NATO, maybe payback time? Sweden and Finland can fund NATO wars and are welcome Ukraine has been bled to death, and will never be welcome after the last Ukrainian is gone.
Renate, the folly of NATO is that it only serves to reproduce the network of alliances that preceded and precipitated World War One. Anyone who has ever read a book about the origins of WW1, has seen that the web of alliances between European countries forced all of Europe into a war that no one needed or wanted. By creating NATO, we showed our intent to repeat the same WW1 mistake while (inexplicably) expecting a different result. NATO was born obsolete. Watching Hungary and Turkey oppose the E.U. uniparty is always pleasing. Both Orban and Erdogan are clever enough to reek havoc on a monolithic NATO/E.U. while staying onside just enough to retain an inside vote as well. NATO and the E.U. both need a potent insurgency. If not an outright revolution. The NATO moves by Finland and Sweden are merely a chance to opt in for free defense spending largess offered by the U.S. Caveat Emptor. What passes for U.S. ‘leadership’ will own both countries, once they enter NATO. As evidenced by the Nordstream pipeline demolition.