[Politics] Russia invades Ukraine (24/02/2022)

[Sid and the Sharknados]

This is from Wiki... I don't know if all of this correct but I do believe Sevastopol was leased by Russia (not owned).

"In 1997, Russia and Ukraine signed the Partition Treaty, establishing two independent national fleets and dividing armaments and bases between them.[9] Ukraine also agreed to lease major parts of its new bases in Sevastopol to the Russian Black Sea Fleet until 2017. During the presidency of Victor Yushchenko (January 2005 – February 2010) the Ukrainian government declared that the lease would not be extended and that the fleet would have to leave Sevastopol by 2017.[10]"

They extended the lease (rather controversially on Ukraine's side) in April 2010, up to 2042.

Update: Ukraine, Russia ratify Black Sea naval lease - Apr. 27, 2010

As protesters threw eggs and set off smoke bombs, Ukraine's parliament on Tuesday extended the Russian Black Se… - Apr. 27, 2010. By Interns

archive.kyivpost.com

Russia cancelled that treaty in 2014 after occupying Crimea.

 

[raymondo]

They extended the lease (rather controversially on Ukraine's side) in April 2010, up to 2042.

Update: Ukraine, Russia ratify Black Sea naval lease - Apr. 27, 2010

As protesters threw eggs and set off smoke bombs, Ukraine's parliament on Tuesday extended the Russian Black Se… - Apr. 27, 2010. By Interns

archive.kyivpost.com

Russia cancelled that treaty in 2014 after occupying Crimea.

Thanks, I suspected as much but couldn't find a link. Good research .

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Don't you come on here with common sense details like that.

This forum is for posting 400 page treaties from 1936, in French, with the pre-WW2 Soviet Union and Yugoslavia as signatories.

(All the while, innocent Ukrainians are getting killed by shiploads of Russian weapons from upstanding nations like Iran, while Turkey has both the power and the opportunity to stop them, and fails to do so).

Look, I think the Russian invasion is as horrendous as the next person (unless the next person happens to be the twat I work with who I had a row with at a Christmas party the other day who was saying "Russia's a country we have so much in common with" and "Putin only wants the Donbas" and how it's generally all somehow the West's fault.

But like it or not, the treaty governing ships being allowed through the Bosphorus does not allow Turkey to unilaterally stop Russian ships that are officially based in the Black Sea from passing from the Mediterranean. Largely because it was originally written to make sure that the Soviet Union would be able to do that.

When Russia has tried to move other ships through, Turkey has stopped them:

Turkey rejects Russia's request for navy ships to pass Bosporus

Invoking 1936 convention, Ankara turns back non-home based vessels

asia.nikkei.com

Incidentally, you missed a golden opportunity to highlight that the Montreux Convention was also signed on behalf of the King of Bulgaria, the King of Greece, and the Emperor of India.

 

[sparkie]

Russia owned the port at Sevastopol even when Crimea was under Ukrainian control so that’s been Russian territory since pre-2014

Leased not owned.

 

[Eric the meek]

wiki says it's been in Black Sea since 2022, damaged in previous attack. before that it was being used to supply Russian base in Syria.

I don't think wiki actually says it has been in the Black Sea since 2022, does it?

Russian landing ship Novocherkassk - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

All it does, is give snapshots in time:

March 2022 - Novocherkassk was docked in the port of Berdiansk in southern Ukraine.
25 March 2022 - A Ukrainian missile attack damaged Novocherkassk.
June 2022 - Russian state media outlet TASS claimed that Novocherkassk was one of twelve landing ships in the Black Sea that could launch an amphibious operation in Ukraine. However, Novocherkassk was not confirmed to be repaired, and its status remained unknown.
24 August 2022 - it was reported Novocherkassk was out of action due to lack of spare parts to repair it.

After that, there are no entries until 26 December 2023, which we all know about.

 

[Eric the meek]

Look, I think the Russian invasion is as horrendous as the next person (unless the next person happens to be the twat I work with who I had a row with at a Christmas party the other day who was saying "Russia's a country we have so much in common with" and "Putin only wants the Donbas" and how it's generally all somehow the West's fault.

But like it or not, the treaty governing ships being allowed through the Bosphorus does not allow Turkey to unilaterally stop Russian ships that are officially based in the Black Sea from passing from the Mediterranean. Largely because it was originally written to make sure that the Soviet Union would be able to do that.

When Russia has tried to move other ships through, Turkey has stopped them:

Turkey rejects Russia's request for navy ships to pass Bosporus

Invoking 1936 convention, Ankara turns back non-home based vessels

asia.nikkei.com

Incidentally, you missed a golden opportunity to highlight that the Montreux Convention was also signed on behalf of the King of Bulgaria, the King of Greece, and the Emperor of India.

Thank you Sid.

I fear I may have given you a bum steer, rendering everything we argued about, (Turkey, Bosporus, Montreux Convention), all, all of it, completely irrelevant.

The reason is, I don't think the Novocherkassk was even going through the Bosporus at all. I think it was going in the opposite direction, through Russia's inland waterways to the Caspian Sea, and on to an Iranian port on the southern Caspian sea coast.

I'm still working on this, and location data is scarce, but I did find this.

Vesselfinder puts it in Volgograd, 400km inland from the Sea of Azov, on Nov 30. There is a connecting canal between the Volga and the Don, which flows into the Caspian Sea.

https://www.vesselfinder.com/?mmsi=273350350

Caveat: There are two vessels named Novocherkassk. One is a cargo ship, the other has scarce data against it. That's our girl.

If all this is true, my apologies to the forum for going down a Bosporus-shaped cul-de-sac. The fog of war.

 

[brighton_dave]

Thank you Sid.

I fear I may have given you a bum steer, rendering everything we argued about, (Turkey, Bosporus, Montreux Convention), all, all of it, completely irrelevant.

The reason is, I don't think the Novocherkassk was even going through the Bosporus at all. I think it was going in the opposite direction, through Russia's inland waterways to the Caspian Sea, and on to an Iranian port on the southern Caspian sea coast.

I'm still working on this, and location data is scarce, but I did find this.

Vesselfinder puts it in Volgograd, 400km inland from the Sea of Azov, on Nov 30. There is a connecting canal between the Volga and the Don, which flows into the Caspian Sea.

https://www.vesselfinder.com/?mmsi=273350350

Caveat: There are two vessels named Novocherkassk. One is a cargo ship, the other has scarce data against it. That's our girl.

If all this is true, my apologies to the forum for going down a Bosporus-shaped cul-de-sac. The fog of war.

I don't think any apologies are needed here. There is much information I personally gather from this thread from very knowledgeable people including you!
It is very good to see people still posting as it is too quiet elsewhere.
I got lost with the geography in any case, never a strong area of mine!
Nice to see an image of the Novocherkaask beyond repair and hear that 33 murderers are lost...

 

[beorhthelm]

I don't think wiki actually says it has been in the Black Sea since 2022, does it?
...
However, Novocherkassk was not confirmed to be repaired, and its status remained unknown.
24 August 2022 - it was reported Novocherkassk was out of action due to lack of spare parts to repair it.

After that, there are no entries until 26 December 2023, which we all know about.

we can infer from lack of repair and being out of action that it's not been sailing anywhere.

 

[Eric the meek]

we can infer from lack of repair and being out of action that it's not been sailing anywhere.

Yes we can, but our inference might be right or wrong.

But It might be prudent to treat such wiki entries with a pinch of salt though, given Russia's interest in keeping the movements of the Novocherkassk from eagle-eyed Ukrainians. After all, it went up like a rocket. Or rather, several thousand rockets.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Thank you Sid.

I fear I may have given you a bum steer, rendering everything we argued about, (Turkey, Bosporus, Montreux Convention), all, all of it, completely irrelevant.

The reason is, I don't think the Novocherkassk was even going through the Bosporus at all. I think it was going in the opposite direction, through Russia's inland waterways to the Caspian Sea, and on to an Iranian port on the southern Caspian sea coast.

I'm still working on this, and location data is scarce, but I did find this.

Vesselfinder puts it in Volgograd, 400km inland from the Sea of Azov, on Nov 30. There is a connecting canal between the Volga and the Don, which flows into the Caspian Sea.

https://www.vesselfinder.com/?mmsi=273350350

Caveat: There are two vessels named Novocherkassk. One is a cargo ship, the other has scarce data against it. That's our girl.

If all this is true, my apologies to the forum for going down a Bosporus-shaped cul-de-sac. The fog of war.

It's all interesting, even if it isn't relevant to this particular ship.

Good to keep this thread higher up on the board for a while anyway.

 

[Sirnormangall]

Thank you Sid.

I fear I may have given you a bum steer, rendering everything we argued about, (Turkey, Bosporus, Montreux Convention), all, all of it, completely irrelevant.

The reason is, I don't think the Novocherkassk was even going through the Bosporus at all. I think it was going in the opposite direction, through Russia's inland waterways to the Caspian Sea, and on to an Iranian port on the southern Caspian sea coast.

I'm still working on this, and location data is scarce, but I did find this.

Vesselfinder puts it in Volgograd, 400km inland from the Sea of Azov, on Nov 30. There is a connecting canal between the Volga and the Don, which flows into the Caspian Sea.

https://www.vesselfinder.com/?mmsi=273350350

Caveat: There are two vessels named Novocherkassk. One is a cargo ship, the other has scarce data against it. That's our girl.

If all this is true, my apologies to the forum for going down a Bosporus-shaped cul-de-sac. The fog of war.

No need to apologise - the role of the Bosporus is relevant and the debate about it has been interesting and educational

 

[Sirnormangall]

It seems that Navaltny has been found, relocated to a new prison. I find it strange that he’s still alive. They could bump him off whenever they choose and I can’t work out why they don’t unless they’re worried about martyrdom.

 

[jcdenton08]

Ukraine war: US releases last military aid for Kyiv for now

The funds are the final tranche of aid the White House can allocate without fresh approval from Congress.

www.bbc.co.uk

Why can’t ignorant Republicans see the importance of backing Ukraine? Ukraine falling to Russia would be a terrible precedent in so, so many ways. Give them what they need until Russia backs down, claims victory anyway and that their “special military operation” was a success and then the bloodshed can end.

This is exactly the kind of world politics the USA should be getting involved with, not bombing the crap out of Iraq for no reason other than greed.

 

[Eric the meek]

Putin is not happy.

Ukraine war: Putin ‘orders revenge raids’ in Crimea after humiliating warship attack

Photos show Novocherkaask landing ship appearing to be completely destroyed

www.independent.co.uk

 

[raymondo]

It seems that Navaltny has been found, relocated to a new prison. I find it strange that he’s still alive. They could bump him off whenever they choose and I can’t work out why they don’t unless they’re worried about martyrdom.

I think they don't see a reason to bump him off at the moment. His fairly regular appearances in captivity are a warning to other Putin critics. Also there is currently no major wave of anti -Putinism that Navalny's existence might bolster. (Just my opinion...who knows really?).

 

[jcdenton08]

I think they don't see a reason to bump him off at the moment. His fairly regular appearances in captivity are a warning to other Putin critics. Also there is currently no major wave of anti -Putinism that Navalny's existence might bolster. (Just my opinion...who knows really?).

Absolutely agree.

 

[raymondo]

Interesting map I saw on a twatter thread, saying that Russian ships with less than 4 metre draught can navigate these routes. May not be news to all of you, but it is certainly something I haven't considered fully before.

 

[Eric the meek]

Interesting map I saw on a twatter thread, saying that Russian ships with less than 4 metre draught can navigate these routes. May not be news to all of you, but it is certainly something I haven't considered fully before.

Very good Raymondo.

We should probably have clocked the route the weapons are taking a bit earlier. Given his antithesis to Nato, why would Putin even countenance transporting vulnerable shiploads of weapons through a narrow strip of water surrounded on both sides by a member of Nato? He would - of course - find another route and/or method of transport.

What I'm really interested in (and won't find out anytime soon), is how Ukraine became aware that the Novocherkassk was transporting weapons/ammunition. Was it satellite imagery from the US? Was it a process of tracking the ship's movements, using the eyes of friendly locals in the town of Feodosiya? Locals who saw the ship as it left, and noticed it was lower in the water as it arrived back several weeks later?

The fact that Ukraine sussed it out, and acted on it, has implications not just for the future Russian import and transport of weapons/ammunition from Iran, but also for Russia's ability to control the population of a part of a nation that stubbornly doesn't want to be a part of Russia.

Edit: antipathy, not antithesis

 

[A1X]

Ukraine war: US releases last military aid for Kyiv for now

The funds are the final tranche of aid the White House can allocate without fresh approval from Congress.

www.bbc.co.uk

Why can’t ignorant Republicans see the importance of backing Ukraine? Ukraine falling to Russia would be a terrible precedent in so, so many ways. Give them what they need until Russia backs down, claims victory anyway and that their “special military operation” was a success and then the bloodshed can end.

This is exactly the kind of world politics the USA should be getting involved with, not bombing the crap out of Iraq for no reason other than greed.

 

[raymondo]

Very good Raymondo.

We should probably have clocked the route the weapons are taking a bit earlier. Given his antithesis to Nato, why would Putin even countenance transporting vulnerable shiploads of weapons through a narrow strip of water surrounded on both sides by a member of Nato? He would - of course - find another route and/or method of transport.

What I'm really interested in (and won't find out anytime soon), is how Ukraine became aware that the Novocherkassk was transporting weapons/ammunition. Was it satellite imagery from the US? Was it a process of tracking the ship's movements, using the eyes of friendly locals in the town of Feodosiya? Locals who saw the ship as it left, and noticed it was lower in the water as it arrived back several weeks later?

The fact that Ukraine sussed it out, and acted on it, has implications not just for the future Russian import and transport of weapons/ammunition from Iran, but also for Russia's ability to control the population of a part of a nation that stubbornly doesn't want to be a part of Russia.

Yes indeed, all of those possibilities .

Yesterday, on a related thread to the above, frequent Ukrainian poster MAKS suggested there was info/ intel that there were c. 4000 shells on that ship. Of course...now I can't find his post or recall the source he mentioned . Given the size and duration of the explosions (from the videos I've seen) I'd imagine a cargo of shells far more likely than drones (I have zero skills in such a judgement and happy to be corrected by anyone on here ).