Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
June 23, 2021

These Uppity Brits Need A Slap-like Lesson

The Brits were getting a bit uppity today so the Russians responded by opening fire:

A Russian patrol ship and fighter jet have fired warning shots after the British destroyer HMS Defender violated the country’s border in the Black Sea. The UK embassy's defense attaché has been summoned by officials in Moscow.

According to Russia’s Ministry of Defense, the British naval ship entered the country's territorial waters at 11:52am local time and traveled 3km inside the frontier, near Cape Fiolent, in Crimea. The peninsula is not recognized by the United Kingdom as Russian land and London believes it to be illegally occupied Ukrainian territory.

“At 12:06 and 12:08, a border patrol ship fired warning shots,” the Defense Ministry said. “(And) at 12:19, a Su-24m aircraft performed a warning bombing (4 OFAB-250) ahead of the course of the USS Defender.”

Four minutes later, at 12:23, the destroyer left Russian territory.

The Brits denied that any shots were fired at(!) them:

UK Defense Ministry claimed that HMS conducts an "innocent passage through Ukrainian territorial waters in accordance with the international law" and rejected Russian Defense Ministry’s claims that warning shots were fired or bombs were dropped in the destroyer’s path.

"The Royal Navy ship is conducting innocent passage through Ukrainian territorial waters in accordance with international law," the Defense Ministry press service said in its Twitter Wednesday, referring to the internationally recognized right to sail through territorial waters of a country provided they mean no harm. "We believe the Russians were undertaking a gunnery exercise in the Black Sea and provided the maritime community with prior-warning of their activity. No shots were directed at HMS Defender and we do not recognize the claim that bombs were dropped in her path."

The Defense Ministry also claimed that the destroyer was traveling in an "internationally recognized traffic separation corridor."

That is non-denial denial. Warning shots are never directed AT the target.

A BBC journalist on board of the British ship does not think that it was just an 'innocent passage':

The crew were already at action stations as they approached the southern tip of Russian occupied Crimea. Weapons systems on board the Royal Navy destroyer had already been loaded.

This would be a deliberate move to make a point to Russia. HMS Defender was going to sail within the 12 mile (19km) limit of Crimea's territorial waters. The captain insisted he was only seeking safe passage thorough an internationally recognised shipping lane.

Two Russian coastguard ships that were shadowing the Royal Navy warship, tried to force it to alter course. At one stage one of the Russian vessels closed in to about 100m (328ft).

Increasingly hostile warnings were issued over the radio - including one that said "if you don't change course I'll fire". We did hear some firing in the distance but they were believed to be well out of range.

As HMS Defender sailed through the shipping lane it was buzzed by Russian jets. The Captain, Vincent Owen, said the ship detected more than 20 military aircraft nearby. Commander Owen said his mission was confident but non-confrontational.

The BBC reporter phoned his report in. One can hear Russian jets buzzing the ship.


bigger

Innocent passage with loaded weapons? That is a no no. Passing a battle ready warship through Russian territorial water without necessity? There are no 'shipping lanes' in that area but lots of room to the west to pass around Crimea.

So no. The Brits were clearly seeking a confrontation. There was also a U.S. spy plane flying in the area to record the Russian reaction.


bigger

This came just hours after the U.K had signed an agreement with the Ukraine for the "enhancement of Ukrainian naval capabilities":

Contractual work will now begin to implement the following projects:
  • Missile sale and integration on new and in-service Ukrainian Navy patrol and airborne platforms, including a training and engineering support package.
  • The development and joint production of eight fast missile warships.
  • The creation of a new naval base on the Black Sea as the primary fleet base for Ukraine and a new base on the Sea of Azov.
  • Babcock will participate in the Ukrainian project to deliver a modern frigate capability.
  • A Government to Government sale of two refurbished Sandown class mine countermeasure vessels.

The editor of the Chinese Global Times says that Britain should receive a "slap-like lesson" for today's incident. That is probably a good idea. But Russia tends to not react hasty over such issues. Revenge is best served cold.

Unrelated to the above a slap-like lesson was given to Britain today when U.S. Secretary of State Tony Blinken arrived in Germany:

"I think it's fair to say that the United States has no better partner, no better friend in the world than Germany," Blinken said. He is scheduled to meet with Chancellor Angela Merkel and Foreign Minister Heiko Maas.

London will not like that statement.

Next week NATO will run its Exercise Seabreeze in and near to the Black Sea in which soldiers and sailors from some 30 nations will take part. In light of today's provocation the Russian military will probably prepare some surprises for them.

Posted by b on June 23, 2021 at 16:15 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page

The United Kingdom is America's pet attack poodle and exists to nip at the heels of the American Empire's "enemy nations" around the world.

The UK will eagerly pant and perform stupid tricks just for a pat on the head from its American master--even as the United States rewards it other pets with high praise like Tony Blinken's compliment that the USA has "no better partner, no better friend in the world" than its German schnauzer.

The bottom line is America does not have allies.

The American Empire only has bitches on a leash.


Posted by: ak74 | Jun 24 2021 3:25 utc | 101

Posted by : Donny Matter @ 30 Nice article .. reminds me of one a while back in which US Air Force planes were "patrolling" similar area with weapons armed. The key point .. documenting Russia's standard response plan. <= I think the British intrusion into Russia controlled space was created as an illusion, needed to hide the events going on in Belarus..?


Posted by: Ex-Barfly @ 87 You guys are living in a dead paradigm. The fake pandemic has revealed that the conflicts between nation states are now mere theatrics, and may have been so for some time. The elites of the world work together behind the scenes.

<=I agree the nation state is a divide and conquer, highly-coordinated, interconnected at the top and bottom, externally-managed mind and behavior indoctrination and control system. Eight billion persons in the world are sorted, divided, and stuffed into one of 256 different nation states (cells). Inside these nation state, communications between the people are isolated from the people in the other nation states, and the rule of law and MSM propaganda are applied to mind-control thoughts and to enforce regulated conforming behaviors.

The nation state system is a population differentiator; it operates 24/7. The people trapped inside of any one of the nation states are taught to hate the people in the other 255 nation states. Access to the information coming from the governed in the other 255 nation states is selectively blocked so those isolated in one nation state cannot be informed about those in the other 255 nation states. Within the one, engineered hate-enraging contents are broadcast by MSM as propaganda.

One at a time isolation, controlled access to information, and rule of law regulated behaviors separately tailored to each nation state enables Oligarch every opportunity to manipulate all of the people in the entire world at the same time. Its nearly invisible how such a system works, but essentially one big interconnected 256 member system allows private persons to control every between nation event and every between nation behavior that occurs in the world.

Posted by: snake | Jun 24 2021 3:54 utc | 102

"...the failure of the Donbass Republics to capture Odessa also adds complications for Russia."

: karloff @33

I don't know how you come to that conclusion.

1. Russia has not even recognised the Donbass Republics and its only purpose seems to be to compel them to re accede to Ukranazistan with some amount of local autonomy, which, of course, can be rescinded at any time later.

2. Even if the Donbass Republics had liberated Odessa, it would not therefore be of any use to Russia.

3. It was not the Donbass armies who "failed" to liberate Odessa. They were deliberately stopped from liberating even Mariupol and Slovyansk by the Putinist regime. Even Putin cultists like the Faker (Andrei Raevsky of the Junkyard Of The Faker) admit this but try to justify it by pretending that the Donbass armies were too incompetent and had to be reined in by Russia so that they did not overextend themselves.

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Jun 24 2021 3:58 utc | 103

The Donbass armies would have been crushed had they pushed the offensive, that is pretty obvious. They are a completely defensive force and have zero ability to take major urban areas. It isn't that they are incompetent, but they lack the firepower and training to wage an offensive war.

If Putin did indeed rein them in, and that is unsupported conjecture, he did Donbass another big favor. However, I don't believe the Donbass army leadership was stupid enough to get themselves slaughtered for nothing.

Posted by: Haassaan | Jun 24 2021 4:32 utc | 104

Donbass? Russia controls the peace in a number of frozen conflicts that flare up from time to time. Donbass and Syria recently added to the list. Russia's stated purpose on moving into the Syria conflict was to bring about conditions for negotiations. Russian negotiators along with Sunni Russian federation military police have been successful in reconciling Syrian militia groups with the government. All that remains now is the Turks and the Americans. Russia is using the Turks to take control of the Jihadis. Russia has ways and means the result of which is Erdogan keeping the headchoppers under control. There is no chance of resolving the frozen conflicts while US is a power in the world. It is only with the fall of the US that these problems can be fully resolved. Syria survives, the people of those small republics or whatever the term is survive. No new conflicts are started. Georgia is the only country to have made the mistake of attacking Russian peace keepers.
I can't see Putin as the type who thinks the frozen wars as the end and final result. I take it his plan for finally resolving these issues involves the US not being the world power or hegemon that it is.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Jun 24 2021 5:20 utc | 105

BS - The whole incident was manufactured by VMF electronic spoofing of the AIS ship tracking system. Defender was well outside Russian territorial waters.

Posted by: Mike A. | Jun 24 2021 5:35 utc | 106

The Brits have been doing this kind of stuff for years. It's usually about air space, first time a ship is involved, I think.

They tend to do it in the summer, god time if you want news coverege. What back fired this time was the stern response. Makes the royal navy look stupid. Hence the denial, witch in turn makes the whole nation look stupid.

Posted by: Jörgen Hassler | Jun 24 2021 6:09 utc | 107

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Jun 24 2021 5:20 utc | 105

Yes, that was well-said. I think he keeps them frozen to keep us stymied too. As long as they are frozen they occupy the minds and resources we are already short of (and piss off the cretins behind it). In chess, one freezes the position on one part of the board so as to apply resources elsewhere. For Russia, it acts as a stall, a fending-off, while they get on with their development agenda. If Putin tried to force a solution, he would have to apply more resources, undertake more risk, and enable more propaganda attacks. That was the original idea, to make Russia over-stretched, to repeat Berzerkski's "win" in Afghanistan. They still want to prove Vietnam was not a mistake, our military brass.

I saw this articulated fairly clearly by Dugin of one of those fellows a while back, avoiding entanglements while getting on with development. Avoiding a final split with Europe is part of the equation too, having them finally wind up part of Eurasia, keeping Nordstream II, etc. And in the end, restraint now helps win back Ukraine later.

Posted by: Bemildred | Jun 24 2021 6:22 utc | 108

This incident is akin to a game of chicken, but with both cars relatively safely confined to their own lanes, intending to pass each other in close proximity but without collision -- the only potentially hazardous factors are the respective drivers' nerves. The British rightfully assumed that the Russian coast guard wouldn't categorize a single destroyer skirting along the edge of their territorial waters as an actual threat, and the Russians rightfully assumed that the destroyer's role was strictly symbolic and relegated a potential naval incident to a formally diplomatic one. The destroyer kept communication channels open and responded to hails, from what I understand, but ignored instructions to alter course, prompting the Russian coast guard to expend munitions in an attempt to get the point across. This detail is being contested by the British mod, presumably because doing so would raise embarrassing questions. Meanwhile, Russian mod praised the restraint shown by the coast guard in dealing with the incident, thereby implying that standard protocol may have involved more active measures, such as attempting to apprehend or sink the vessel.

The most ludicrous details come courtesy of the British mod and the twitter commentary surrounding the incident. The notion that this was meant to be 'innocent passage' is surreal, and the way in which it was instantly refuted by the presence and commentary of a BBC reporter aboard the vessel was the cherry on top. Prior to this, the international association of Twitter parrots discounted the incident as Russian hackers spoofing public ship tracking services, before promptly being shut down by British mod and the BBC, which they, as per tradition, pretend not to notice in homage to the British mod and the warning shots by the Russian coast guard. Finally, a major flaw in the fallback argument of Ukrainian territorial waters, for those who don't recognize the Crimean referendum as legitimate, is that these waters have never in the history of mankind included the waters around the Russian operated Sevastopol Naval Base, and such freedom of navigation stunts would have been acted on as provocations even prior to 2013. In fact , I think the very notion that a state can give another state permission to move military hardware through disputed territory without making it party to the conflict is, mildly speaking, a very dubious proposition.

Posted by: Skiffer | Jun 24 2021 6:28 utc | 109

Just watched how the British attention seeking was presented on the New Zealand TV News
Laughable really. The destroyer captain was "maintaining international shipping lanes in a non confrontational manner" How do these pricks sleep at night? Probably only after a good session at that British hobby of being whipped by a dominatrix or some other perversion

Posted by: Ike | Jun 24 2021 6:35 utc | 110

In response to Mike A.@106,

BS - The whole incident was manufactured by VMF electronic spoofing of the AIS ship tracking system. Defender was well outside Russian territorial waters.

Ignoring the mod statement of Defender navigating Ukrainian territorial waters (which presumably extend much further than Russian ones) and the BBC reporter on board Defender claiming to have "completed transit through Russian occupied Crimea's territorial waters" in a "deliberate move" (which presumably is the reporter's own deluded fantasies), what would be the point of spoofing the AIS in manufacturing this incident, when the coast guard could just as readily intercept the Defender outside Russian territorial waters and, if faced with counter-claims with appeals to ship tracking intelligence, take up your position and disregard the AIS as having been unreliable? Who is this electronic spoofing meant to convince?

Posted by: Skiffer | Jun 24 2021 7:03 utc | 111

Smoothiex12 has a post up on the incident, and another above it with respect to Merkel-Macron's recent outreach to Russia:

Not Again.

"Now two aspects.
1. Military: BBC correspondent onboard of HMS Defender actually confirmed both artillery shots and bombing. Media also state that the crew of HMS Defender was on their stations during the incident and that indicates that they were doing this "on purpose". My hope is that British Admiralty, known today as Navy Department, understands that under such circumstances the issue here is not Russia easily sinking anything Royal Navy may decide to get into the Black Sea, but the fact that Russia, without going nuclear, can rearrange stones in London in such a way that those in British Defense Ministry who will survive will have to find proper new building to have a place to work, or serve.

I hope they explained this simple fact to all fine lads who man Royal Navy ships, together with the fact, that there will be no United States to help UK in case cretins in London unleash conflict, because there will be no United States. In fact, seeing UK--a secondary power, which has near zero real military capability and a real GDP smaller than that of Indonesia, and even that due to non-productive service economy--trying to play games adults play is rather funny, but it is also dangerous and it may come down to provocation resulting in Royal Navy ship sunk and squealing UK running to the US and NATO for support. British used to be really good at assessing forces, evidently not anymore. Well, they better look up basic salvo equations and see for themselves how many leakers are possible even against the most advanced Royal Navy's ECM and AD. I'll give a hint--many. I am sure Russians know what it takes to deal with Aster family. In other words, UK militarily is at best a lap dog with minimal military capability which is good only for starting the war, in which UK will cease to exist as a country, forget military force, in a matter of 20-30 minutes. I am sure someone knows this in London. After all, Russia is not exactly Argentina, and even there, at Falklands, the Royal Navy had its nose bloodied pretty badly."

Posted by: Bemildred | Jun 24 2021 7:08 utc | 112

More from BBC:
https://twitter.com/Archer83Able/status/1407866212604907526

Posted by: Wolle | Jun 24 2021 9:06 utc | 113

Posted by: Jörgen Hassler | Jun 24 2021 6:09 utc | 107

Yeah, this is nothing burger. Nothing new. Even during cold war there were cases of "ramming" (nudging them actually) warships to direct them out of territorial waters. It is dick showing contest, and Russia isn't playing it the way Brits expected.

Posted by: Abe | Jun 24 2021 9:09 utc | 114

@33 karlof1 "failure of the Donbass Republics to capture Odessa"

You mean failure to capture Mariupol, right?

Posted by: pepa65 | Jun 24 2021 9:10 utc | 115

@33 karlof1 "failure of the Donbass Republics to capture Odessa"

You mean failure to capture Mariupol, right?

Posted by: pepa65 | Jun 24 2021 9:10 utc | 115

They did not capture Odessa either....

Once I read that the control of Mariupol would be tricky. Donetsk and area to the south -- Mariupol -- are quite dry and are supplied with water like Crimea was, with a canal from Northern Donets, and the Republics lost the control of the northern end of the canal. But cutting off water from Donetsk would cut it from Mariupol too.

In the meantime, Crimea suffered the worst flood in 100 years with severe damage to property, but it reports enough water for its cities for a year in reservoirs. Perhaps, unlike in California, a multi-year drought ended.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 24 2021 10:54 utc | 116

Crimea has a huge value to Russia, strategic and sentimental. Sentiments are important, because they trap Russian "liberals", who decrease Western support when they approve Russia having Crimea, and domestic support (which was already meager) when they disapprove, and zigzagging/evading does not help much.

Donbass is a key to Ukraine. Ukraine is ruled by phonies pretending to be fanatic Ukrainian nationalists. The previous government, in Poroshenko time, had more genuine fascists. This is not a stable construct.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 24 2021 11:03 utc | 117

I hope the Russians realize that when the time comes to actually shoot at the hostiles that they shoot to kill. No light machine gun rounds hitting on a harmless part of the ship. They need to hit hard and with the intention of not just disabling the warship but quickly sinking it. Pulling your punches in a fight with the empire, and even its poodles, is how you lose that fight. Hitting hard is how you earn respect from primitives.
Posted by: William Gruff | Jun 23 2021 17:13 utc | 7


I hope MoA readers remember an MoA story from a few years ago when Russian Naval Forces fired blank (non exploding) Cannon Shells at the superstructure of a ship belonging to an uppity Russian Neighbor trying to challenge a defacto Russian Blockade.
Sorry, I've forgotten which uppity neighbor was involved, probably Ukraine, but I thought at the time that The Russian gambit of making a few shell-sized holes in the offending ship was a nice way of saying "See What You Nearly Made Me Do!"

I can't imagine the Bloodthirsty US-UK Christians going to that much trouble to avoid slaughtering Innocent Pawns. And it had the desired effect - the Pawns retreated.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 24 2021 11:38 utc | 118

@Piotr Berman #116
Sentimental, yes.
Avoid seeing this region in the hands of a foreign power, yes.
But Crimea could disappear to the bottom of the Black Sea and it would not change anything in Russia's port capabilities (trade and Black Sea fleet).
Everything has been developed since the early 2000s in the Krasnodar Krai.
But "amusingly" this is never mentioned in the Western media, which continues to present Crimea as Russia's only access to the Black Sea (...)
Search by yourself and you will find multiple articles with this lie and almost none mentioning the work done in the bay of Novorossiysk (container terminal and navy base), ditto for the new wheat export terminal in Taman (the one in Novorossiysk being at maximum capacity, not to mention the saturation of road and rail access)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Taman

Posted by: Kristof | Jun 24 2021 12:09 utc | 119

AP
Russia says next time it may fire to hit intruding warships
MOSCOW (AP) — Russia is prepared to target intruding warships if they fail to heed warnings, a senior Russian diplomat said Thursday in a tough statement in the wake of a Black Sea incident in which a British destroyer sailed near Crimea in an area that Russia claims as its territorial waters. . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | Jun 24 2021 13:13 utc | 120


Max:

What is the power hierarchy of the Monetary Imperialism?
Here is a version that was shared. Any better?
– TOP: evil royals (Windsor, Orange, Hapsburg,...) + few more old money

– THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS (masterminds):
Rothschilds, Warburgs + others, the INNER CIRCLE

I'd like to refine that part.

First of all, there are classes of evil royal.

Let's take Windsor and Orange. They were the two countries that sent ships to make mischief in the Black Sea.

The Head of State of the Netherlands is King Willem-Alexander. He became king when his mother abdicated and was crowned on 30 April 2013.

He then became a Knight of the Garter on 23 October 2018.

What do we know about this order? Wiki is helpful as a starting point:
Quotes from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Garter

Appointments are at the sovereign's sole discretion, and are usually in recognition of a national contribution, for public service, or for personal service to the sovereign.[2] Membership of the order is limited to the sovereign, the Prince of Wales, and no more than 24 living members, or Companions. The order also includes supernumerary knights and ladies (e.g., members of the British royal family and foreign monarchs).


Each June, on Garter Day, the members of the Order, wearing their habits and garter insignia, meet at Windsor Castle. When any new Knights of the Garter are due for installation, an investiture ceremony is held in the Throne Room of Windsor Castle on the morning of Garter Day.[17] This ceremony is attended by all Knights Companions of the order, wearing the ceremonial habits and garter insignia, and also by their spouses. The wording of the oath sworn by the new knights at this ceremony and of the Admonitions addressed to them in turn by the prelate and chancellor of the order when the several items of insignia are placed upon them are extremely similar to the traditions of the past.[37][38]

Following to item [38]

Each new Knight is obliged to take one oath: ‘loyally to keep and observe the statutes of the said
Order as far as within his loyal ability he is able’
. The new Knight then gives thanks to the
Sovereign and receives the congratulations of the existing Knights of the Garter.


Therefore, like most other European monarchs (and Akihito of Japan) Willem-Alexander joined an organisation over which Queen Elizabeth is sovereign. In order to join he had to swear an oath to follow orders.

The point is that the House of Orange has sworn an oath to obey the House of Windsor.

There is but one top dog issuing orders and coordinating the royalty trades union in its attacks on Russia.

Posted by: John Cleary | Jun 24 2021 13:32 utc | 121

Posted by: John Cleary | Jun 24 2021 13:32 utc | 121

Thank you for sharing that, Order of the Garter stuff: Frankly, it sounds very juvenile. What a racket. ANd they sell-out so cheap. Preening buffoons.

Posted by: Bemildred | Jun 24 2021 14:01 utc | 122

@121 ".....like most other European monarchs...."

And like most European monarchs they are directly related to the Romanovs. Who were murdered by Bolsheviks. One wonders if this isn't partly the reason for the anti-Russian feeling in Europe.

Posted by: dh | Jun 24 2021 14:32 utc | 123

Bemildred | Jun 24 2021 14:01 utc | 122

"Frankly, it sounds very juvenile."

Yes, it does. That is the point.

It is power acting in plain sight. Who can take seriously such preening buffoons?

Crafty Albion.

Posted by: John Cleary | Jun 24 2021 14:46 utc | 124

Exercise Sea Breeze is to commence Monday. It is an annual affair for twenty years now. This year the 32 countries invited include such naval powerhouses as Moldova, Senegal, Albania.

Given that this is an affair for amateurs and hotheads, and that the master of ceremonies is a declining power thrashing about in the water, the possibility of further provocation is quite high. Russia will be on a hair trigger. Of course Russia has the resources to send every ship involved to the bottom in a minute. Then should we have tit for tat? Strategically it could make more sense for Russia to make use of the full target list from the start and permanently end future provocation.

Making Latvia and Tunisia feel included and important is not a good reason to risk nuclear conflagration. Wisest course would be for US to scrub the exercise. US will not act wisely.

corvo @ 17

Thank you for the correction. Read that quite recently, should have checked it better. Growing up in Chicago I have known masses of Russian Jews. A few qualified that by saying they were Odessa Jews. In 2014 they all became Ukrainian Jews. They fly the blue and yellow flag right next to the Star of David and don’t worry if the blue and yellow comes with a wolfsangel. Ukrainian language (or dialect) classes have become popular.

Most of Ukraine is not inhabited for that long. Jewish population began with estate agents (rent collectors, tax collectors) for absentee lords. Most from Warsaw, some from Vilnius, a few from Vienna. They liked Ukraine. They have at least as much claim to the land of Ukraine as they do to the land of Palestine. The Ukrainian experience was good for them. They want the real estate. These are people who always get what they want. They do not back down.

Many commentators have posited that the Biden admin is operated by Obama. Obama does have family background (Stanleys), his political career began when Lester Crown gave him the touch. Crown is Krinsky, Lithuanian Jews. Crown is General Dynamics. Crown has a senior share in JP Morgan Chase. Crown is head of remaining US mafia since marrying Junius Myer Schine’s daughter ( Crown and Schine both heavily involved in Kennedy assasination). Crown absolutely rules City of Chicago and State of Illinois. Please note the outsize role Chicago has long had in US politics. Crown is also the power behind Clintons. Will these people risk nuclear war for a real estate deal? Absolutely.

Posted by: oldhippie | Jun 24 2021 15:22 utc | 125

@ John Cleary (#124),

Thanks for sharing your insights. Appreciate it.

Agree on classes (hierarchy) within each level/group. Even in the political group there is a hierarchy starting with presidents/pms, speaker/committee chairperson, senators/parliamentarian, governors, upcoming political puppets... Same for the bureaucrats, particularly in Finance.

Are you saying that the House of Windsor is the Sauron? Who are the Sauron & Saruman in this hierarchy? Gandalf and Aragorn are searching for them.

How will one define the “Ring of Power”?

Posted by: Max | Jun 24 2021 15:29 utc | 126

Short remark about the black sea as a "dead end": It is for the NATO, but not for the Russian Federation. In fact, all small missile corvettes of the RF navy can travel from the White Sea and the Baltic Sea down to the Caspian and the Black sea through the Russian river and canal network. All of them are able to fire Calibr missiles, and them most modern ones hypersonic Kinchal equally. The Buyan class coastal and river corvettes will be able to do the same soon.

Five of the small ships e.g. of the Karakurt class have the firepower of the pathetic Zumwalt shipwreck :). They have stealth ability, and by their size and versatility, may hide in a bunker anywhere in Russia before firing missiles in a 2500-5000km radius.

Posted by: aquadraht | Jun 24 2021 15:44 utc | 127

Craig Murray weighs in:

Warmongering British Actions in the Black Sea

The legality of the British action is, at very best, moot. In realpolitik, it is an act of brinkmanship with a nuclear power and further effort to ramp up the new Cold War with Russia, to the benefit of the military, security services and armaments companies and the disbenefit of those who need more socially useful government spending. It is further an act of jingoist populism for the neo-liberal elite to distract the masses, as the billionaires’ incredible wealth continues to boom.

[More at the link]


!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 24 2021 15:46 utc | 128

Thanks for the link, Jackrabbit, read that too. As to the international law aspect, that is a clear and closed case. There are disputed territories, even whole countries, since a long time, and often recurring. West Germany claimed the "lost territories" in the east after WWII from 1945 to to 1970s when the affair was finally settled by the Moscow and Warsaw treaties. The northern Kuriles are still claimed by Japan and so on.

The international customary law says that actual statehood is constituted by exerting the actual and real control about the civil and military affairs in a given territory. That does not waive disputed claims but constitutes stability. Violating these rules is an act of war.

Anyway, no NATO warship would have dared to cross into the waters of Gdansk or Kaliningrad claiming to do an "innocent course" in German littoral waters. They were not as insane as BoJo at those time.

Posted by: aquadraht | Jun 24 2021 16:13 utc | 129

Posted by: aquadraht | Jun 24 2021 15:44 utc | 127

The reason for using ships to fire missiles with range between 300 and 2000 km was a treaty that was convenient for USA, and because of idiocy of what passes for American leadership (Trump/Biden class), this treaty is cancelled. So now Russian can use these missiles anywhere. On the "positive side", missiles packed into "anti-ballistic" installation in Romania and other places can also exceed 300 km range. The whole concept of hindering start of a war, so it would not take few minutes but days, with time for negotiations and keeping things further from going nuclear was step-by-step abandoned, purposely to foster the arms race. One American official bragged that "we have" good experience in running it until the opponent is ruined.

If the aim is not simply profits and avoiding spending money on something useful for the own population, this is a miscalculation. The logic of any group with one-sided aims is to maximize their gains, and thus MIC perfected methods of wasting money. Add a cheap rubble, and the cost of developing weapons in Russia is several times smaller. On top of it, Russian avoid unnecessary programs, and they have orders of magnitude smaller aims, a budget that is ten times smaller than American (or even smaller) is plenty. In the same time, the bloat in NATO weapon structure (and pricing) assures that non-eastern European forces are barely adequate or even inadequate -- luckily, hard to check.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 24 2021 16:21 utc | 130

Posted by: Kristof | Jun 24 2021 12:09 utc | 119

It is absolutely true that essential ports and military installations are in Krasnodar Krai, Novorissiysk is the main port of Russia (or the second), but military always want to have adequate perimeter, in this case, Crimea and Abkhasia. And if you threaten the essential perimeter, the reaction is swift.

My theory is that in the situation where the West contest the legality of Russian presence in Crimea and of the construction of Crimean bridge, would they destroy the bridge the West would claim full rightness and correctness of the action. Russians want a signal that pilots and seamen doing it would not return from such an action.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 24 2021 16:33 utc | 131

@ Jen 88 - here's a fun drill and bass remix

Strong Britain Great Nation

Posted by: lex talionis | Jun 24 2021 16:49 utc | 132

@Piotr Berman #131
"...would they destroy the bridge the West would claim full rightness and correctness of the action."
The agreement to built the bridge was signed in 2010 at Gelendzhik, the construction was supposed to be completed before the 2014 Olympics.
----------------------
Wiki:
In 2010, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed an agreement to build a bridge across the Kerch Strait,and Russia and Ukraine signed a memorandum of mutual understanding on the construction of the bridge on 26 November 2010.

Lenta:
https://lenta.ru/news/2010/04/25/bridgebuilding/

ps: The usual lies, this is so common that the myth of Crimea as Russia's only access to the Black Sea is very present, even here in some of the comments...
"...For Russia to assert power in the waters, control of Crimea - which contains its main Black Sea port at Sevastopol and controls the Kerch Strait leading to the nearby Sea of Azov - is essential."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9716689/Russian-military-fires-warning-shots-British-destroyer-fighter-jet-drops-bombs-path.html

Posted by: Kristof | Jun 24 2021 16:57 utc | 133

Max | Jun 24 2021 15:29 utc | 126

"How will one define the “Ring of Power”?"

Hi Max.

The Ring of Power is the Treason Felony Act of 1848.

The reason it is the ring of power is that it is employed to control the actions of the civil service. And it can be so deployed because of the terrible drafting ("any person whatsoever..within the United Kingdom or without..any act or deed..)

Yes indeed, there are myriad other laws. But they must be enforced by civil servants like the judiciary, like the constabulary, like the military and so on. And if those civil servants know that to enforce those laws would in itself be construed by the monarch as breaching the TFA they will not enforce them. They will find some excuse and deploy it with great bluster. The monarch always strikes first!

Let me give you a couple of examples. First, look at what happened when the TFA was challenged as contrary to the Human Rights Act:

https://archive.fo/44P7i

The Lords considered the matter, concluded the act was illegal, but then shied away from striking it down.
Ten years later the old witch was still at it, controlling the civil service, hiding behind the abolition nonsense:

https://archive.fo/7gmLt

The second example should be right up your street. The BCCI affair:

https://archive.fo/jvQ0h

https://archive.fo/EuoTw

The liquidators - accountants Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu - dropped the case after the chancellor of the high court said it was no longer in the best interests of creditors for the litigation to continue.

You see? There was no finding by the court. It just "forced" the complainant to drop the matter.

Just like the court never ruled on the legality of the TFA in 2003.

Amongst many quotes is this one:

"I am delighted that the allegations of dishonesty against 22 staff of the Bank of England have been unconditionally withdrawn," the Bank's governor, Mervyn King, said.

Surprise! Mervyn King is now a Knight of the Garter!


With all these links this may not go through. If not I will repost in pieces.

Posted by: John Cleary | Jun 24 2021 18:07 utc | 134

HMS Defender ventured into Russian territorial waters in a new NATO provocation in support of Banderistan's clown-in-chief.

At this rate they will have to rerun "Bryan's Life" in the mess-halls of the Royal Navy ships so that they learn the song that became popular among the British sailors who awaited their rescue in the cold waters of the Atlantic after being sunk by the Argentines during the Falklands War (Historical)

Posted by: Dodgone | Jun 24 2021 21:15 utc | 135

Please consider.

If:
· A captain and/or officers recognizes that they have been given orders that constitute a war crime in the form of baiting an enemy into attacking.
· The same people are well aware of the buildup of "friendly" forces behind them that will take advantage of the coming loss of life and ship.
· They also recognizes they have no escape from repercussions of not following orders however illegal (the Nuremberg trials was/is hypocritical ideological and political twaddle devoid of any realism) except to seem to follow those orders despite it resulting in the intended loss of ship and crew.

Would they then not have no choice but to do everything up and as close to to the very limit that they dare but ultimately only to fail deliberately? To perhaps be a little more "off the course" than intended? A little deeper into Russia? A little closer to Sevastopol?

Is this not what this could look like?

Are we looking at a sabotaged Gulf of Tonkin style false flag?

- - -

1. Either way the Russians should be commended; then again when isn't that the case? :)

2. In general ordinary Brits and ordinary Europeans and ordinary Poles don't hate Russians or Russia. When most people vote they seldom vote on geopolitics unless a single topic has risen to the top eg. Brexit. Now maybe they should, but they're not. Russia is well aware of this.

Hence it is easy to for them to stay (as in quell) any blood-lust.

Only one more of many other things to appreciate about Russia and Russians :)

It is how we should be as well. Most people believe they are this way but those in charge clearly are not and might not ever have been. This is the problem.

Posted by: Sunny Runny Burger | Jun 24 2021 23:03 utc | 136

Btw a nitpick, it's "Life of Brian", and they should have all seen it already (or maybe that's only my age speaking).

It's a very good song to sing in dire circumstances and very good advice in general; more "British" or simply "more human" (in a positive sense) than all the nonsense such as Churchill etc.

Posted by: Sunny Runny Burger | Jun 24 2021 23:18 utc | 137

YouTube video from BBC reporter on board HMS Defender

https://youtu.be/MLPYAKL-f2M

The opening sequence clearly shows the crew going to action stations and loading armaments.

This is followed by the BBC reporter's comment that HMS Defender isjust leaving the port of Defender and is preparing for action.

This is clear evidence that "Defender" was aware of the fact that it would soon be entering Russian waters resulting in a provoked Russian response to the incursion.

The video and commentary clearly demonstrates hostile intent on the part of HMS Defender. The conduct of HMS Defender cannot be understood as "innocent passage" within the meaning of UNCLOS.

The Russian forces were entitled to take all steps deemed necessary to defend their national interests against this incursion by a foreign warship demonstrating hostile intent.

Posted by: Sushi | Jun 24 2021 23:41 utc | 138

Just returned to YouTube to review the video posted at #138.

Using search term "HMS Defender Black Sea" the #138 link was the fourth item returned by search. Using the identical search term 15 minutes later results in an alternate BBC item being displayed. This is talking heads commentary and appears to lack the onsite footage and reporting found in https://youtu.be/MLPYAKL-f2M.

Curious. The original footage clearly contradicts the assertions of UK MoD and UK PM.

Posted by: Sushi | Jun 25 2021 0:24 utc | 139

I watched the video once and noticed the complete lack of fear on the crewmen. It was if they were confident that they were not really going to be actually attacked and knew that it was an act of brinkmanship on their behalf.

Posted by: arby | Jun 25 2021 0:38 utc | 140

Just to point out that the relevant section of the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas is Article 30: Non-compliance by warships with the laws and regulations of the coastal State.

It says this:
"If any warship does not comply with the laws and regulations of the coastal State concerning passage through the territorial sea and disregards any request for compliance therewith which is made to it, the coastal State may require it to leave the territorial sea immediately"

It is undeniable that the Russians insist that they are the "coastal State" with respect to that sentence.

That the UK refuses to recognize that claim is of no concern to the Russians, and they certainly could not be expected to alter their behavior towards that warship simply because the UK pokes its tongue out and waggles its hands in the general direction of Moscow.

It is axiomatic that a British warship in transit within 12nm of Crimea is utterly incapable of complying with Russian laws and regulations, precisely because the UK has been loud in its refusal to recognize Russian sovereignty over the Crimea. There really can't be any arguing that point i.e. if the UK doesn't recognize Russian sovereignty over the Crimea then a UK warship is going to be incapable of complying with Russian laws and regulations in the waters surrounding Crimea.

Seems to me pretty clear-cut that from the RUSSIAN perspective they behaved impeccably, and it was the British warship that is violating the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas.

The BRITISH perspective is indefensible, amounting to a deliberate provocation and a marked interference in a territorial dispute that it has no business sticking its nose into.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Jun 25 2021 2:00 utc | 141

Meanwhile in waters near Hawaii in about the same time frame - a large task force of the Russian Pacific Fleet with 20 surface warships, submarines, support vessels, and TU-142 Bears was involved in a training exercise to sink a carrier strike group.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/06/23/russia-practiced-destroying-enemy-carrier-strike-group-while-carl-vinson-was-nearby.html

Posted by: Mike A. | Jun 25 2021 2:35 utc | 142

Again, this case is similar to US activities in the South China Sea for several years, i.e. not recognizing sovereignty and territorial rights.
from Defense One:
Black Sea Incident Shows Russia's Determination to Claim Waters Illegally

“This was really [an] important step in communicating to the Kremlin that their claims to Crimea are in fact illegal,” said Ben Hodges, who commanded U.S. Army Europe until 2018. “And that nobody in the world recognizes those claims, and therefore, these waters are Ukrainian waters, exactly as the Royal Navy said yesterday.” . . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | Jun 25 2021 3:05 utc | 143

Meanwhile in the air near Taiwan also in the same time frame - 28 Chinese warplanes, some nuke capable, flew an incursion into Taiwan's Air Defense Identification Zone. Just one of many this year, but the largest foray to date.

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/Taiwan-reports-largest-incursion-yet-by-Chinese-air-force2

Posted by: Mike A. | Jun 25 2021 3:12 utc | 144

Apparently these days international approval is needed for land-grabs, unlike when the US took Texas, Puerto Rico, Philippines, Hawai'i, Guam, Panama Canal Zone and other such places.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Jun 25 2021 3:15 utc | 145

@ Mike A 144
>Taiwan is not a country so it really doesn't rate an ADIZ.
>Taiwan's ADIZ covers a large area outside the province, including some of mainland China.
>The US has regularly flown in China's ADIZ, and the US has said it would ignore the Chinese ADIZ.
>The US ADIZ was the antecedent for other ADIZ's, and it does not cover aircraft not terminating flight in the US. Other countries are more strict.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Jun 25 2021 3:24 utc | 146

@142 et seq Mike A. + Don Bacon

Thanks - that's quite a story. A lot of shadowplay going on, it seems.

Russia practices destroying a US carrier fleet with overwhelming force. UK warship plays grab-ass on the Russian border. Hardly an equivalence.

My surmise on military maneuvers is that they are one step away from real life - of course, training and drills come as close as they can for realism - and by the same token the forces gathered are also only one step away from being hurled into reality, if so ordered.

One day we think we're dealing with symbolism, but the next day the military posture of equivalence says the symbols can light on fire at any point.

Thus far I see the Russians and Chinese vastly ahead on firepower, and unequivocably in the lead on seriousness of mission - but I'm not a military hand by any means.

Posted by: Grieved | Jun 25 2021 3:38 utc | 147

Mike A. 144
Taiwan is part of China. For a time after the defeated nationalists were ensconced on the island, they still represented China at the UN. Now the UN recognizes the PRC government as the government of China. China is willing to allow a one country two systems type of arrangement that allows this part of China to be at peace and have normal relations with the mainland.
If Taiwan declares independence it immediately comes under the control of the US and that is something the PRC will not allow.

US has got itself in a spot here. It is pushing Taiwan to declare independence, but if it does, China would immediately take the island, which in itself is ok for the yanks as it would be great propaganda material, but the problem is, the US auto industry depends on Taiwan for computer chips. Those in power in Taiwan at the moment are totally loyal to the US so it doesn't hurt for the mainland to keep the shadow of the guillotine hanging over their heads.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Jun 25 2021 4:02 utc | 148

144 Mike A. An "intrusion" into anyone's Air Defense Identification Zone is a nothing. Such an ADIZ has no legal standing under any international law.

You need to understand that when someone declares an ADIZ they aren't claiming sovereignty over that airspace. They aren't even claiming authority over that airspace.

All they are doing is demanding that anyone who flies into that ADIZ must identify themselves to that air-defense establishment so that military isn't caught unawares.

Well, sure, they can demand that as much as they like, and nobody is under any obligation - none whatsoever - to accede to that demand.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Jun 25 2021 6:17 utc | 149

143 Don Bacon You should read Craig Murray's post on this, because IMHO he has it exactly right.

As in: IF the British refuse to recognize Russia's annexation of the Crimea THEN the unavoidable corollary is that the British accept that Crimea is under Russia's belligerent occupation. The UK can't hold to the former without also accepting the latter, otherwise its position is incoherent.

Well that has consequences i.e. under international humanitarian law the UK is obliged to recognize that Russia possesses "authority" over Crimea and the territorial waters off Crimea. If it doesn't then Crimea is simply a nothingness where anarchy reigns supreme which, obviously, is absurd.

Therefore to sail a British warship inside those waters without complying with Russian laws and regulations is to challenge Russia's authority over Russian-occupied territory.

As in: the Russians are entitled to view that as an act of war, not as an act of "innocent passage".

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Jun 25 2021 6:28 utc | 150

It seems the brits cannot leave the russians alone, can they?

Posted by: Smith | Jun 25 2021 8:12 utc | 151

The sheer chutzpah of this act of luncacy and that of imposing more sanctions on Belarus occurred on the anniversary of the start of the Great Patriotic War.

What the story needs is a catchy sea chanty. The Last of (Barrett's) BoJo's Privateers with apoligies to the late great Canadian folk artist Stan Rogers. Change searching for American gold to Russian "and one big ball (Zirocn) stoved us in God damn them all".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIwzRkjn86w

Posted by: Tom | Jun 25 2021 10:01 utc | 152

Yeah, Right @150

Craig Murray's analysis is especially interesting because he is very generally anti-Russia (and anti-China). His anti-Russian prejudice even pokes its snout out in the thread that follows the article you refer to, in which he maintains the usual guff about the Russians occupying Crimea and Crimea having no right of self-determination except for the "Tatars".

So what does it mean if even someone with an anti-Russia bias such as Murray is immediately saying that Britain is totally in the wrong?

Posted by: Herr Ringbone | Jun 25 2021 10:43 utc | 153

Diversion. NATO has been preparing a real war with China, not Rusia. The beauty of it is that Rusia acts as if it does not know about it.

Posted by: Kim Jong Il | Jun 25 2021 11:30 utc | 154

Some are trying to excuse this as a UK trying to influence USA. Essentially the same excuse made for Israeli aggression against Iran. Renegade allies? LOL.

But I doubt UK would take a piss in the Black Sea without USA OK.

In that regard, this stunt is interesting as it comes days after the Biden-Putin meet.

Did they hope the Russians would meekly accept the transit of a British warship through Crimean waters because Biden held out the promise of better relations?

Stunt or a bold stratagem? What do you think?

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 25 2021 13:14 utc | 155

UK warship's violation impossible without US consent

Posted by: arby | Jun 25 2021 13:29 utc | 156

Sorry, didnt read althrough all the comments.

Did readers notice that the site of the planned new Ukrainian naval base is home to the 'Azov Battalion'?

And if you're wondering why the UK not USA then maybe:

"U.S. Congress blocked military aid to Azov on the grounds of its white supremacist ideology"

The uk, helping to build a naval base for neo nazis on Russia's doorstep.


The uk is still America's little bitch.

Posted by: Keith Granger | Jun 25 2021 13:32 utc | 157

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 25 2021 13:14 utc | 155

The Russians called it "reconnaissance in force", and that is what I would call it too.

For comparison, Subotai or Hulagu, I forget which, expedition to the gates of Vienna is also called a "reconnaissance in force". (Had to be Subotai, I think.)

And that is pretty much what I think it was too. An attempt to get the Russian to show more of their hand.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subutai

Posted by: Bemildred | Jun 25 2021 13:36 utc | 158

Again, guys, the US has been doing this sort of "FONOPS" [freedom of navigation operations] thing in the South China Sea (and other less-publicized places) for years. The only new twist is that the US ordered its UK puppet to do it and it's against Russia. This is not a unique UK slip-up. Here's the last annual FONOPS report, Mar 16, 2021. No doubt the Defender will make the next report. "This year, with historic coastal state efforts to undermine the international law of the sea, U.S. forces challenged 28 different excessive maritime claims made by 19 different claimants throughout the world. The FON Report is made public to transparently signal the U.S. rejection of these maritime claims." The US hasn't ratified the UNCLOS, UN convention of the law of the sea, but as the world hegemon it must show the flag in every ocean, sea and bay. (It's done it in a Russian bay recently.) The only difference here is that it's the subordinate UK flag.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Jun 25 2021 13:48 utc | 159

Mike A. 142

"The Russians say that their exercises occurred about 2,500 miles southeast of the Kuril Ridge islands."

So that's about 2000 miles west of Hawaii, in the middle of nowhere.

Posted by: Stephen Lane | Jun 25 2021 15:17 utc | 160

The UK needs to lose its imperial delusions. Sending gunboats to the Crimea is as mad as – well, sailing an aircraft carrier expressly to threaten the Chinese. There are those who see this activity as evidence of the UK’s continued great power status. I see it as evidence of lunacy.

Posted by: lah | Jun 25 2021 23:16 utc | 161

When the boat leaves Odessa she could re-run the whole thing going the other way. That will keep the Russkies guessing.

Posted by: quasi_verbatim | Jun 27 2021 17:10 utc | 162

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.