Elimination of the Montreux Convention: What Russia Wins and Losses


The mode of entry and stay of US warships in the Black Sea is determined by the Montreux Convention, which imposes a lot of inconvenient restrictions on the Pentagon. But what if this international legal document will soon sink into oblivion? What inconveniences or, on the contrary, benefits can our country derive from this?


Turkey actually controls its Bosporus and Dardanelles straits, but its sovereignty over them is limited by the Convention signed in 1936. According to it, civil courts have the right of free passage both in peacetime and in wartime. The regime of the use of the straits by military vessels is seriously different for the Black Sea and non-Black Sea states. It is believed that the main threat to southern Russia is the US Navy ships, which regularly visit the Black Sea for 21 days on a rotational basis. The visits of the destroyers Donald Cook and Porter from the Mediterranean Sea and the response to this from the Russian Aerospace Forces are constantly causing a stir in the Russian media and social networks. But what if American aircraft carriers and attack submarines get the right to enter the Black Sea?

The question is not so idle. President Erdogan announced his "construction of the century" - the bypass water canal "Istanbul", which should unload the Bosphorus. Ankara plans to drastically reduce or even completely stop shipping along this strait from the Marmara to the Black Sea. And that can change a lot. Russian Ambassador to Turkey Alexei Yerkhov commented on these prospects as follows:

There is a Montreux convention. This is an international document of 1936 ... The presence or absence of an additional waterway does not change the international legal regime established by the convention.

Alas, this is not entirely true. Of course, the mere appearance of a bypass channel does not invalidate the Convention. However, the actual commissioning of “Istanbul” will give Ankara a reason to raise the issue of revising the provisions of this international legal document as inconsistent with modern realities. And there's nothing you can do about it, you can't hide your head in the sand. The only question is in what direction the changes will take place and how beneficial or unprofitable it will be for our country.

Let's figure it out. The first thing that comes to mind is that the US Navy will have free access to the Black Sea and then we will all get a "kirdyk". But if you think about it, then everything is not so simple. It should be borne in mind that Turkey today is conducting an active neo-Ottoman policies throughout the macroregion. And this is very much disliked not only by Russia, but also by many Turkish NATO allies. Ankara is building its "logistic superpower", gradually gathering around itself a coalition of Turkic-speaking countries in Central Asia. There is a promising supranational integration project, the imperial ambitions of the "Sultan" Erdogan. At the same time, Turkey clearly will not leave the North Atlantic Alliance, which serves as a deterrent for Russia. Ankara is playing with both the West and the East at the same time.

It is obvious that the Turks will revise the Montreux Convention only in their favor. But why then would President Erdogan freely launch ships and submarines of the US, British or French navies into the Black Sea? First, Moscow will clearly refuse to sign a document containing such provisions. Secondly, Ankara will hardly welcome NATO's excessive military presence in its "fiefdom". Then why review it at all?

It can be assumed that Turkey will achieve only an exception from the restrictions on passage through its straits for aircraft carriers without a nuclear power plant, so that the American ones do not fall under them. Recall that earlier we toldthat Ankara has already built its own light aircraft carrier "Anadolu" according to the Spanish project, which is formally classified as a universal landing ship, and plans to build a full-fledged one. The Middle East Eye reported that President Erdogan even wanted to buy a Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier from the UK, but London refused. In return, the British offered to sell the project and provide technical assistance in construction.

It is possible that in the foreseeable future we will see in the Turkish navy something very reminiscent of a British aircraft carrier. Despite the popular opinion that such a ship is just a "big target", an aircraft carrier as part of the AUG can be quite effectively involved in conflicts around disputed islands in the Eastern Mediterranean and on the African coast. In addition, your aircraft carrier is beautiful and very solid as a visual symbol of a resurgent empire. Most likely, we will see him on the Black Sea. No, the Turkish fleet will hardly fight against the Russian, but the very fact of the presence of the Turkish AUG near the Ukrainian coast will be an additional trump card in Ankara's support for Kiev and a means of political pressure on the Kremlin on the issue of Crimea and Donbass.

In other words, if Turkey will revise the Montreux Convention, it will be in its own favor, in order to pull the blanket over itself as much as possible. For Russia, this is not very pleasant, but not fatal. If you wish, you can even see some positive, because with the commissioning of the Istanbul canal, logistics will obviously become simpler, and export by sea from our Black Sea ports will accelerate.
68 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
    Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 8 February 2021 15: 18
    +2
    Several dozen planes, and most likely helicopters, because the Yankees are not ready to sell the F-35 to Ankara today, they will not frighten the Russian Federation and will not change the balance of power. The Turkish is most likely not an aircraft carrier, due to Ankara's lack of carrier-based aircraft and pilots, but a helicopter carrier, this is a show-off, nothing more.
  2. Bulanov Offline Bulanov
    Bulanov (Vladimir) 8 February 2021 15: 25
    +3
    The Black Sea is a shooting range for the coastal artillery of the Black Sea Fleet. NATO members can only puff themselves up until the start of hostilities with Russia. If after the beginning they stay in the Black Sea, they will go to the bottom, into hydrogen sulphide.
    1. Cyril Offline Cyril
      Cyril (Kirill) 8 February 2021 15: 48
      -11%
      For some reason, the coastal artillery of the Black Sea Fleet did not let the enemy fleet sink to the bottom in the Crimean War, and in the Second World War it was also somehow not so successful that it would act very successfully against the Germans and their allies.
      1. 123 Online 123
        123 (123) 8 February 2021 16: 23
        +9
        For some reason, the coastal artillery of the Black Sea Fleet did not let the enemy fleet sink to the bottom in the Crimean War,

        So the enemy fleet did not particularly attack Sevastopol, and the artillery contributed to the defense.

        and in the Second World War, too, somehow it was not so good that it acted very successfully against the Germans and their allies.

        This is an outright lie and an insult to fallen heroes am Only an ignorant "bulk" can speak like that. Coastal artillery was the basis of the defense of Sevastopol, the artillerymen stood to the end. Do not touch their feat with your sticky hands. negative

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lL4Qi4Bkwk
        1. Cyril Offline Cyril
          Cyril (Kirill) 8 February 2021 19: 20
          -11%
          This is an outright lie and an insult to fallen heroes

          I didn’t say anything about the heroes at all, I spoke about artillery. For those in the tank, let me explain - the effectiveness of coastal artillery (like any other type of troops) depends not only on the heroism of the personnel. Even if they were heroes a thousand times, but in conditions of interruptions, and then lack of ammunition, they could not do much against the enemy fleet. Unlike you, real artillery fires shells at the enemy, not angry commentators. Well, your desire to look for insults everywhere is from your children's complexes.

          Coastal artillery was the basis of the defense of Sevastopol, the artillerymen stood to the end.

          Right, they stood up to the end. Nevertheless, the enemy managed to secure the blockade of the city from the sea, and subsequently to take it.

          Do not touch their feat with your sticky hands.

          do not judge others by your palms.
          1. 123 Online 123
            123 (123) 8 February 2021 19: 46
            +8
            I did not say anything about the heroes at all, I spoke about artillery. For those in the tank, let me explain - the effectiveness of coastal artillery (like any other type of troops) depends not only on the heroism of the personnel.

            ABOUT!!! Are we talking about efficiency? In my opinion, you said "did not act well"? Again by. The actions of the coastal artillery were extremely effective, otherwise the defense would have collapsed much earlier.

            Even if they were heroes a thousand times, but in conditions of interruptions, and then lack of ammunition, they could not do much against the enemy fleet.

            Nevertheless, they did a lot and even more than others could in their place. When the shells ran out, the enemy infantry was demolished with blank shots. There was such a thing. You insult the memory of their feat. This is disgusting. However, I'm not surprised if you think that Crimea is occupied. These heroes and their associates destroyed the Nazis' dream of Crimea, now there are people who are capable of destroying your dream of giving Crimea to their masters. To your regret, you have nothing to bring them in your teeth, kicks with the master's boot await you for this, and this is well deserved.
            And yes, in my opinion you have a place in one cell in Navalny.

            Right, they stood up to the end. Nevertheless, the enemy managed to secure the blockade of the city from the sea, and subsequently to take it.

            Blockade? Was she within range of coastal artillery fire? Or did you expect her to chase enemy ships across the sea? If we talk about our time, the Black Sea is being shot through by missile systems.
            The type of troops - "Rocket Forces and Artillery" provide a reliable defense of the Crimea, you and your masters will not see it as their own ears.
            1. Cyril Offline Cyril
              Cyril (Kirill) 8 February 2021 20: 01
              -7
              Are we talking about efficiency? In my opinion, you said "did not act well"?

              "not very successful" means not very effective.

              Again by.

              Yes, you're past again.

              The actions of coastal artillery were extremely effective, otherwise the defense would have collapsed much earlier.

              She spoiled the blood of the Germans and their allies - this is indisputable. But she did not let the fleet go to the bottom. This was what was discussed in the conversation you got into with your "valuable opinion."

              You insult the memory of their feat. This is disgusting.

              Nowhere have I ever insulted the memory of the feat of the defenders of Sevastopol, including the artillerymen. Stop projecting your childish complexes on me.

              These heroes and their associates destroyed the Nazis' dream of Crimea, now there are people who are capable of destroying your dream of giving Crimea to their masters. To your regret, you have nothing to bring them in your teeth, kicks with the master's boot await you for this, and this is well deserved.

              And then Ostap suffered again ... calm down, take a pill, at your age it's bad to worry.

              And yes, in my opinion you have a place in one cell in Navalny.

              See how you yourself would not be there first.

              Blockade? Was she within range of coastal artillery fire?

              См карту https://bellabs.ru/30-35/Maps/Map-Sevastopol_1941-42_3.gif

              If we talk about our time, the Black Sea is being shot through by missile systems.

              But the range of missiles and shells is not the only factor ensuring their effective action against the enemy fleet.

              you and your masters cannot see it as your own ears.

              I have no owners, calm down already your children's complexes.
              1. 123 Online 123
                123 (123) 8 February 2021 20: 25
                +6
                She spoiled the blood of the Germans and their allies - this is indisputable. But she did not let the fleet go to the bottom. This was what was discussed in the conversation you got into with your "valuable opinion."

                Do not lie, it was about the possibility of a modern Black Sea Fleet. To quote your opponent ....

                The Black Sea is a shooting range for the coastal artillery of the Black Sea Fleet. NATO members can only puff themselves up until the start of hostilities with Russia. If after the beginning they stay in the Black Sea, they will go to the bottom, into hydrogen sulphide.

                You got in with your nasty remarks about the actions of artillery in the past.

                See how you yourself would not be there first.

                In general, it is more correct to write in Russian earlier, "first" is the lexicon of half-educated people and idiots like "young people will be piled up." However, you are not far from them. My chances of being there are less than yours, at least in this context. I don’t think Crimea is occupied.

                See map

                Will I see German and Romanian ships there within range of coastal artillery fire?

                But the range of missiles and shells is not the only factor ensuring their effective action against the enemy fleet.

                And what will prevent NATO ships from sinking?

                I have no owners, calm down already your children's complexes.

                Are you looking for a master? Is this what explains your vag enthusiasm?
                1. Cyril Offline Cyril
                  Cyril (Kirill) 8 February 2021 20: 48
                  -4
                  Don’t lie, it was about the possibility of a modern Black Sea Fleet.

                  The capabilities of the Black Sea Fleet and coastal defense have increased - but the capabilities of the fleets of potential adversaries have also increased.

                  Actually in Russian it would be more correct to write it earlier, "first" is the lexicon of half-educated people and idiots like "young people."

                  Thanks for the amendment (indeed, my mistake), but you would first learn how to write correctly "in Russian", or something. And at the same time distinguish Moscow from Minsk.

                  I have less chance of being there than you

                  Yes, yes, yes, in 1937 informers on "enemies of the people" also thought so, yeah.

                  Will I see German and Romanian ships there within range of coastal artillery fire?

                  It reads:

                  The location of the battery (armed with 305 mm guns) made it possible to fire in a circular sector (0-360), i.e. by land, by ground targets, by manpower, armored vehicles and field artillery of the enemy. Therefore, battery No. 35, like battery No. 30, later became the basis of the artillery fire system in the heroic defense of Sevastopol. The firing range of the batteries allowed them to keep a huge territory around Sevastopol under fire from their guns: in the north up to Bakhchisarai inclusive, and in the south up to Simeiz and the Baydarskie gates.

                  From Sevastopol to Bakhchisarai about 50 km, to Simeiz - about 60 km. Now look at the map, the distance from Sevastopol to the line of the naval blockade is easy to calculate. Although, it may be difficult for you.

                  And what will prevent NATO ships from sinking?

                  The actions of carrier-based aircraft (this is if there are aircraft carriers in the Black Sea), naval air defense and electronic warfare systems, cruise missiles. There are enough countermeasures.

                  Are you looking for a master?

                  Nope.

                  Is this what explains your vag enthusiasm?

                  My enthusiasm stems from the amusement I get when I see you spinning in a frying pan and pushing to project your complexes onto me.
                  1. 123 Online 123
                    123 (123) 8 February 2021 21: 22
                    +5
                    Yes, yes, yes, in 1937 informers on "enemies of the people" also thought so, yeah.

                    Like you and knocked yes

                    From Sevastopol to Bakhchisarai about 50 km, to Simeiz - about 60 km. Now look at the map, the distance from Sevastopol to the line of the naval blockade is easy to calculate. Although, it may be difficult for you.

                    For the gifted, I repeat the question. Will I see ships within range of artillery fire on the map? The map in blue on light blue says "Blockade from the sea. In the composition of 150 aircraft, 20 torpedo boats and several submarines." In theory, the targets could be torpedo boats, although this is not a suitable target for cannons of this caliber, but the map does not indicate what exactly they were located there. This is just a conventional line. The use of coastal artillery against aircraft and submarines is a rather dubious business. I hope even you understand this.

                    The actions of carrier-based aircraft (this is if there are aircraft carriers in the Black Sea), naval air defense and electronic warfare systems, cruise missiles. There are enough countermeasures.

                    Are you a science fiction writer? We bear to calm you down. The aircraft carrier is a good target. The first on it will work out complexes from the Black Sea coast (direction of the North Caucasus) and aviation. Air defense of the Americans does not shine with reliability, the Americans themselves admit the lag in electronic warfare. In terms of missiles, they are backward collective farmers who have not yet mastered hypersound. Moreover, it is aggression and full-scale war. The Yankees will not go for it because they will get a nuclear hypersonic oar right on the brazen red muzzle. Biden's walking mummy will turn into a real one.

                    My enthusiasm stems from the amusement I get when I see you spinning in a frying pan and pushing to project your complexes onto me.

                    How do you manage to write this wrigglingly? laughing You are pathetic in your fruitless attempts to get out. And disgusting in insulting veterans. negative
                    1. Cyril Offline Cyril
                      Cyril (Kirill) 9 February 2021 20: 15
                      -3
                      Like you and knocked

                      People like me do not see around the "enemies of the people", "the fifth column" and "bourgeois spies", so no, they did not knock.

                      For the gifted, I repeat the question.

                      Are you asking yourself?

                      Will I see ships within range of artillery fire on the map? The map in blue on light blue says "Blockade from the sea. In the composition of 150 aircraft, 20 torpedo boats and several submarines."

                      That's right, on the map "blue on blue" is the line of the enemy fleet, which carried out the blockade. And this is not "just a conventional line" - it shows the location of the enemy forces.

                      In theory, the targets could be torpedo boats, although this is not a suitable target for guns of this caliber. The use of coastal artillery against aircraft and submarines is a rather dubious business.

                      Firstly, the Sevastopol garrison had guns of various calibers, including medium (100-180 mm), which could also finish off enemy boats.

                      Secondly, coastal artillery could work quite successfully on submarines of those times, because most of the time they (submarines) were on the surface.

                      Thirdly, the anti-aircraft artillery that was part of the garrison also worked on the aircraft. Nevertheless, German aviation was able to establish complete dominance in the skies.

                      Are you science fiction?

                      Nope.

                      We carry you to calm you down

                      Splatter your saliva here, not me :)

                      The aircraft carrier is a good target.

                      He never works alone. Although, in your pink reality everything can be.

                      Air defense of the Americans does not shine with reliability

                      SM-6 missiles quite successfully shot down imitators of Soviet / Russian supersonic anti-ship missiles:

                      On October 24, 2014, during the exercise, SM-6 missiles were successfully repelled against low-flying subsonic and supersonic targets imitating the corresponding anti-ship missiles. At the same time, a successful interception of the GQM-163A supersonic training target (corresponding in characteristics and flight profile to the rocket P-270 "Mosquito" (its maximum speed is 2,5 M), and the BQM-74 subsonic training target. Both targets were intercepted while flying at ultra-low altitude, with over-the-horizon launches of the SM-6. The launch vehicle itself did not see training targets beyond the radio horizon, and intercepted them using SM-6 active homing heads. Thus, the high efficiency of the SM-6 was demonstrated against any types of modern weapons.

                      the lag in electronic warfare is recognized by the Americans themselves

                      First, some American experts have recognized this.

                      Secondly, they recognized not the technical superiority, but the level of training and organization of Russian electronic warfare.

                      Thirdly, the Americans' shipborne electronic warfare equipment does not need to be better than the Russian ones - it is enough for them to disrupt the control of missiles flying towards the ships.

                      In terms of missiles, they are backward collective farmers who have not yet mastered hypersound.

                      In Russia, only "Daggers" are in service with hypersonic weapons. It is not known exactly how effective they are against moving targets in the face of counteraction by naval air defense, electronic warfare and aviation.

                      Moreover, it is aggression and full-scale war.

                      My opponent's initial comment says that the enemy's fleet will be destroyed by coastal artillery. I answered exactly to this, about a full-scale war, etc., etc., my opponent did not speak. Before getting in with your "valuable opinion", take the trouble to first find out what you are getting into.

                      The Yankees will not go for it because they will get a nuclear hypersonic oar right on the brazen red muzzle. Biden's walking mummy will turn into a real one.

                      Ostap suffered again. Are your pills no longer working?

                      How do you manage to write this wrigglingly?

                      It's simple - I'm not wriggling. In this case, the only participant and record holder is you.

                      And disgusting in insulting veterans.

                      You are hallucinating again, you see what is not. There was no insult to the veterans on my part. You should be treated for the disorder. Although, perhaps, this is already incurable.
                      1. 123 Online 123
                        123 (123) 9 February 2021 21: 52
                        0
                        People like me do not see around the "enemies of the people", "the fifth column" and "bourgeois spies", so no, they did not knock.

                        Make no mistake, they did it for mercantile reasons, to take a vacant place at work, a room in a communal apartment, and so on.

                        That's right, on the map "blue on blue" is the line of the enemy fleet, which carried out the blockade. And this is not "just a conventional line" - it shows the location of the enemy forces.

                        Do you want to dull again? sad Reread it again. Submarines, aircraft, torpedo boats. Which of them should the 305 mm guns work on?

                        Firstly, the Sevastopol garrison had guns of various calibers, including medium (100-180 mm), which could also finish off enemy boats.

                        And who told you that they were not shot at? Or do you believe they were constantly on this line?

                        Secondly, coastal artillery could work quite successfully on submarines of those times, because most of the time they (submarines) were on the surface.

                        I have not read such stupidity for a long time. The submarine is surfaced within the reach of coastal guns. belay Bravo admiral laughing Bingo good

                        Thirdly, the anti-aircraft artillery that was part of the garrison also worked on the aircraft. Nevertheless, German aviation was able to establish complete dominance in the skies.

                        Anti-aircraft guns were supposed to break through the air blockade at a distance of 12 km from the coast? sad The domination of German aviation in the air is a characteristic phenomenon for the first half of the war, as well as for the Soviet in the second half, and it is conquered by aircraft and not by anti-aircraft artillery. And yet, anti-aircraft guns and coastal artillery are not the same thing. You are simply stubborn and do not want to admit that you are wrong.

                        He never works alone. Although, in your pink reality everything can be.

                        You are right, in my reality, maybe what are you in the big question wink



                        SM-6 missiles quite successfully shot down imitators of Soviet / Russian supersonic anti-ship missiles

                        The simulators are old American missiles, do they have simulators with Onyx characteristics? In addition, the rearmament of the SM-6 is not proceeding at Stakhanov's pace, they use missiles of more ancient modifications.

                        Secondly, they recognized not the technical superiority, but the level of training and organization of Russian electronic warfare.

                        In 2016, U.S. Air Force General Breedlove admitted that the Pentagon had neglected electronic warfare for the past two decades, giving the Kremlin an edge in this area. The commander of the US ground forces in Europe, Lieutenant General Ben Hodges (Ben Hodges) said that the Russian success in electronic warfare in Syria is "incredible." In 2015, as Russia stepped up its hostilities in Syria, Lieutenant General Edward Cardon said the United States "is not moving forward (in developing electronic warfare) at a fast enough pace as emerging threats require." In the same year, it became clear to the American military that Russia, thanks to its investments in electronic warfare, could surpass everything that is available in the West.

                        Thirdly, the Americans' shipborne electronic warfare equipment does not need to be better than the Russian ones - it is enough for them to disrupt the control of missiles flying towards the ships.

                        Do they know how?

                        In Russia, only "Daggers" are in service with hypersonic weapons. It is not known exactly how effective they are against moving targets in the face of counteraction by naval air defense, electronic warfare and aviation.

                        We won't know until we try. Can American air defense and aviation be able to shoot down hypersonic targets? Have they tried? On what? winked
        2. Cyril Offline Cyril
          Cyril (Kirill) 8 February 2021 19: 29
          -1
          So the enemy fleet Sevastopol did not particularly attack

          During the siege, the Allies conducted six massive artillery bombardments Sevastopol from land and the sea

          and the artillery contributed to the defense.

          Nobody argues with this. But my opponent was talking about the fact that in the event of a mess, coastal artillery will not just "contribute to the defense", but will completely destroy the enemy's fleet by sending it, quote:

          then they will go to the bottom, into hydrogen sulfide.
          1. 123 Online 123
            123 (123) 8 February 2021 19: 53
            +4
            Nobody argues with this. But my opponent was talking about the fact that in the event of a mess, coastal artillery will not just "contribute to the defense", but will completely destroy the enemy's fleet by sending it, quote:
            then they will go to the bottom, into hydrogen sulfide.

            I completely share his opinion. Just one clarification, cannon artillery and missile weapons are used in a complex, each at an effective range. This is one branch of the army and they operate in one formation. You have caught on to this minor inaccuracy and are running wild, denigrating the feat of the fallen soldiers. negative
            1. Cyril Offline Cyril
              Cyril (Kirill) 8 February 2021 20: 07
              -3
              I completely share his opinion.

              Duc who would have doubted.

              Just one clarification, cannon artillery and missile weapons are used in a complex, each at an effective range. This is one kind of troops and they operate in one formation.

              Once again, for those in the tank, the range of missiles and projectiles is not the only factor that ensures the effectiveness of defense against the enemy fleet. I understand that your parish school did not know anything about the accuracy of the hit, the means of ship-borne missile countermeasures, etc., etc. But you can read about it at least a little, isn't it?

              You are caught on this minor inaccuracy

              The phrase "will send the enemy fleet to the bottom" is not a "minor inaccuracy", but banal bragging. People who are allegedly proud of the fact that they so honor and love the history of their country should know from this very history cases when bragging and overestimating their forces, underestimating the enemy led to disastrous results.

              denigrating the feat of the fallen soldiers.

              So far, only you are "being blackened". I did not say anything about the heroism of the fallen defenders of Sevastopol.
          2. isofat Offline isofat
            isofat (isofat) 8 February 2021 20: 19
            +2
            Quote: Cyril
            But my opponent was talking about the fact that in the event of a mess, coastal artillery will not only "contribute to the defense", but will completely destroy the enemy's fleet ...

            Cyril, the main thing in the words of your opponent, whom I support, is that the enemy will be destroyed... And what difference does it make to you who destroys it and how?
            1. Cyril Offline Cyril
              Cyril (Kirill) 8 February 2021 20: 23
              -2
              Cyril, the main thing in the words of your opponent, whom I support, is that the enemy will be destroyed.

              First, the main thing in my opponent's words is that the enemy's fleet will be launched to the bottom by coastal artillery. He said that and nothing else.

              Second, are you a visionary? Do you know what will come in advance? Who told you that given the current state of the Russian army and navy on the southern borders, as well as the state of the army and navy of potential adversaries, the enemy will surely be destroyed?
              1. isofat Offline isofat
                isofat (isofat) 8 February 2021 20: 42
                -1
                Quote: Bulanov
                NATO members can only puff themselves up until the start of hostilities with Russia. If after the beginning they stay in the Black Sea, then they will go to the bottom, into hydrogen sulfide.

                This is what your opponent said. Before these words, the phrase sounded:

                Quote: Bulanov
                The Black Sea is a shooting range for the coastal artillery of the Black Sea Fleet.

                Why did you decide that the enemy would be destroyed solely by artillery forces? This was not explicitly mentioned anywhere. The artillery has its own tasks.

                Now about the seer. Our enemy will go to Hell ... yes
                1. Cyril Offline Cyril
                  Cyril (Kirill) 8 February 2021 20: 50
                  -1
                  Why did you decide that the enemy would be destroyed solely by artillery forces?

                  Because he did not mention any other types of troops.

                  Now about the seer. Our enemy will go to Hell ...

                  Clear. Bragging again for no reason.
                  1. isofat Offline isofat
                    isofat (isofat) 8 February 2021 21: 04
                    0
                    Quote: Cyril
                    Because he did not mention any other types of troops.

                    Never mind, the important thing here is that the enemy goes to Hell. And this is not bragging. Many people think so. You probably forgot the words of Vladimir Vladimirovich?
                    1. Uneven Offline Uneven
                      Uneven (VADIM STOLBOV) 9 February 2021 09: 48
                      0
                      You probably forgot the words of Vladimir Vladimirovich?

                      About the retirement age, re-presidency, or the inviolability of the constitution?
                    2. Cyril Offline Cyril
                      Cyril (Kirill) 9 February 2021 20: 33
                      -1
                      Never mind, what matters here is

                      What matters here is what my opponent wrote in his comment. But your insinuations about blood pressure - yes, it is not worth thinking about it.

                      You probably forgot the words of Vladimir Vladimirovich?

                      Below you have already answered this :)
                      1. isofat Offline isofat
                        isofat (isofat) 9 February 2021 21: 55
                        0
                        Cyril... Me with lord Uneven We will definitely discuss why the liberal government did not justify the president's credit on the issue of the retirement age.

                        Well, with you ... we sort of discussed everything. Calm down, don't wave their fists after the fight. smile
                      2. Cyril Offline Cyril
                        Cyril (Kirill) 10 February 2021 09: 51
                        -1
                        why the liberal government did not live up to the president's credit on the retirement age.

                        So, is this "liberal" government to blame for the fact that at first he said one thing, and then - the exact opposite?)

                        Well, with you ... we sort of discussed everything.

                        "Discussed" is too loud a word. You are not yet mature enough for the discussion process.

                        Calm down, after a fight, they don't wave their fists.

                        So don't wave :)
    2. Ivan Ivanov_20 Offline Ivan Ivanov_20
      Ivan Ivanov_20 (Ivan Ivanov) 13 February 2021 15: 07
      +1
      Yeah. 250 days of defense of Sevastopol is of course an unsuccessful operation ..
      1. Cyril Offline Cyril
        Cyril (Kirill) 13 February 2021 15: 25
        -1
        unsuccessful, because it ended with the loss of the city.
        1. isofat Offline isofat
          isofat (isofat) 13 February 2021 15: 50
          0
          Quote: Cyril
          Unsuccessful, because it ended with the loss of the city.

          Yes, on May 9, 1944, the Nazis lost the city. Soviet troops liberated the city of Russian glory Sevastopol. A year later, the Nazis capitulated. laughing
          1. Cyril Offline Cyril
            Cyril (Kirill) 13 February 2021 16: 27
            -1
            So no one argues with this. But in 1942 the city was lost by our
            1. isofat Offline isofat
              isofat (isofat) 13 February 2021 17: 39
              0
              Cyril, war is always a loss. Our defenders of the city for 250 days fettered the forces of the fascists, as much as they could, frustrating the plans of the enemy. This is what he said Ivan Ivanov_20.
              1. Cyril Offline Cyril
                Cyril (Kirill) 13 February 2021 18: 49
                -1
                war is always a loss. Our defenders of the city for 250 days fettered the forces of the fascists, as much as they could, frustrating the plans of the enemy. This is exactly what Ivan Ivanov_20 said.

                The "success" or "failure" of military operations is determined not by their duration, but by the results achieved. In 1942, the results were, unfortunately, not on the side of the USSR and Crimea.

                The heroism of the defenders of Crimea and Sevastopol is another topic.
                1. isofat Offline isofat
                  isofat (isofat) 13 February 2021 19: 13
                  0
                  Cyril, for each of their "luck" the Nazis paid a price that was not originally planned. from these "successes" their defeat developed. The plan for a lightning war (blitzkrieg) was covered.
                  1. Cyril Offline Cyril
                    Cyril (Kirill) 13 February 2021 19: 31
                    -1
                    for each of their "luck" the Nazis paid a price that was not originally planned. from these "successes" their defeat developed. The plan for a lightning war (blitzkrieg) was covered.

                    Certainly. But they could not defend the city, prevent its blockade and capture, thereby further violating the plans of the Germans.

                    If we look at the war as a whole, yes, the Germans eventually lost. But we are considering a specific situation, the defense of Sevastopol in 1941-1942, and the effectiveness of coastal artillery in its context. The result was not in favor of this efficiency.
                    1. isofat Offline isofat
                      isofat (isofat) 13 February 2021 20: 02
                      0
                      As much as they could and could, thanks to our fathers, grandfathers ... all the Soviet people. It is possible that in this century it is our turn to beat the foe.
                    2. Cyril Offline Cyril
                      Cyril (Kirill) 13 February 2021 20: 58
                      -1
                      As much as they could and could, thanks to our fathers, grandfathers ... to the entire Soviet people

                      This is undeniable, and no one denies their heroism. Initially, this was not discussed at all.

                      It is possible that in this century it is our turn to beat the foe.

                      Better not to have to do this.
                    3. isofat Offline isofat
                      isofat (isofat) 13 February 2021 21: 14
                      0
                      Good boy. yes
  • white gentleman Offline white gentleman
    white gentleman (Ivan) 8 February 2021 19: 53
    -3
    Quote: Bulanov
    before hostilities with Russia

    by that time, Russia itself will die out, in a natural way. These are dry statistics.
  • amateur Offline amateur
    amateur (Victor) 8 February 2021 15: 49
    +4
    Ankara is building its "logistics superpower", gradually gathering around itself a coalition of Turkic-speaking countries in Central Asia.

    In Central Asia, they didn't care about Turkey and its Erdogan. In 91-95 years in Uzbekistan, with the light hand of KIA, Turkey was appointed "the elder brother" and began to focus almost everything on it. Before the curiosities, the Turkish diplomatic numbers were given series 01 (for information: the Americans of the 10 series, and for Russia - 07 (who understands Eastern superstitions, they will understand humor)). In 1994, the then Prime Minister of Turkey, Tansu Chiller, came to Tashkent, who promised and signed such "Golden Mountains" that there is nowhere else. And when, after her departure, they began to sign real contracts, Turkish businessmen began to demand state guarantees of loans from the Uzbek side. When they were shown the agreement signed by Chiller that the Turkish government is the guarantor for the Uzbek-Turkish contracts, the Turks said directly: "Our government is bankrupt and its economic obligations are worthless." After that, economic ties went to naught. And when it turned out that Uzbek students were taught mainly radical Islam and recruited agents among them, the students were also recalled. And in Central Asia, the Chinese are quoted, who really invest a lot of money, Russia (out of habit and because of the connected economies) and the US, which everyone is afraid of.
  • 123 Online 123
    123 (123) 8 February 2021 16: 07
    +2
    It can be assumed that Turkey will achieve only an exception from the restrictions on passage through its straits for aircraft carriers without a nuclear power plant, so that the American ones do not fall under them.

    What do you mean get it? Erdogan will make a formidable face or ask very convincingly? The Turks can insist on this, but this is a subject of negotiations.
  • Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 8 February 2021 16: 08
    0
    IMHO, from empty to empty.
    In the article itself:

    the appearance of a bypass channel does not invalidate the Convention

    Logistics ... What, is there something in the way? No, everyone swims freely - in the article itself.

    And what if they want to? What if they don't want to? What if a meteor, environmentalists, warming, aliens ...?
    1. Digital error Offline Digital error
      Digital error (Eugene) 8 February 2021 19: 51
      0
      Quote: Sergey Latyshev
      suddenly a meteor, environmentalists, warming, aliens

      This is called "risk hedging". Amendments to the Constitution - from the same opera.
    2. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 9 February 2021 08: 14
      +1
      Quote: Sergey Latyshev
      the appearance of a bypass channel does not invalidate the Convention

      Logistics ... What, is there something in the way? No, everyone swims freely - in the article itself.

      What does it mean to swim freely? Erdogan wants to close the Bosphorus just because everyone is floating there.
      1. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
        Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 9 February 2021 12: 14
        0
        Close? So just take and close?

        Not a word about this in the article.

        Unload - in the article (i.e. increase bandwidth)
        1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) 9 February 2021 14: 26
          0
          Quote: Sergey Latyshev

          Not a word about this in the article.

          Unload - in the article (i.e. increase bandwidth)

          Yes, really?

          Ankara plans to drastically reduce, or even completely stop shipping along this strait from the Marmara to the Black Sea. And that can change a lot.

          What does "stop shipping" mean?
          PS
          You at least read what you comment on ...
          1. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
            Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 9 February 2021 15: 44
            0
            Shl. Found. There is such a thing.
            The truth is near. "must unload the Bosphorus"
            And about some such mysterious plans ("drastically reduce" - which is logical, the world is developing, "or even stop shipping altogether" - which is doubtful) is not explained.

            So, on the one hand, you wrote, and on the other, the words are different, and the idea is strange.
            1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
              Marzhecki (Sergei) 10 February 2021 06: 59
              0
              I am not faced with the task of chewing everything in a row, I, within a certain number of signs per article, do a squeeze of the very essence of the question. Anyone interested in the news feed can additionally read on the topic, google it on their own.
  • Praskovya Offline Praskovya
    Praskovya (Praskovya) 8 February 2021 16: 43
    -1
    Our land-based anti-ship installations cover the entire Black Sea area. Let all the American ships come in. Well, the Black Sea will become smaller, so what?
  • Igor Berg Offline Igor Berg
    Igor Berg (Igor Berg) 8 February 2021 16: 56
    0
    Quote: Sapsan136
    Several dozen planes, and most likely helicopters, because the Yankees are not ready to sell the F-35 to Ankara today, they will not frighten the Russian Federation and will not change the balance of power. The Turkish is most likely not an aircraft carrier, due to Ankara's lack of carrier-based aircraft and pilots, but a helicopter carrier, this is a show-off, nothing more.

    with the threat of a real war, everything will appear ... remember the Desert Storm ... something like that, out of nothing, such a sickly fist appeared to liberate Kuwait
    1. forsagd Offline forsagd
      forsagd (Dmitry Smirnov) 10 February 2021 13: 36
      0
      Of course everything will appear, but it will appear on both sides. I think there is no need to explain who is preferable in terms of logistics.
  • Igor Berg Offline Igor Berg
    Igor Berg (Igor Berg) 8 February 2021 16: 58
    +1
    Quote: Praskovya
    Our land-based anti-ship installations cover the entire Black Sea area. Let all the American ships come in. Well, the Black Sea will become smaller, so what?

    it will not become smaller .. what if they are destroyed before that?
  • Eduard Aplombov Offline Eduard Aplombov
    Eduard Aplombov (Eduard Aplombov) 8 February 2021 17: 11
    +1
    I'm curious, so many copies have already been broken about Erdogan about his politics, his ideas of a collector of Islamic states and at the same time he has no less enemies both in Turkey itself and in the West and next to Turkey, in order to maintain his power almost repression in turkey, he is satisfied with all this despite the fact that Erdogan himself is an old man and his life, reasonable including coming to an end, will drop skates not today or tomorrow, he has someone behind his back who will continue his ideas and deeds or a lot will simply collapse after him
    to implement his main ideas of restoring his empire dozens of years are needed, followers of his ideas are needed. Are there any?
  • gorenina91 Offline gorenina91
    gorenina91 (Irina) 8 February 2021 18: 01
    -5
    Elimination of the Montreux Convention: What Russia Wins and Losses

    - Is it possible that Russia can win something in the Black Sea; sitting locked up and constantly relying on the "mercy" of Turkey (will Turkey let loose - or not let it out); while all NATO members, all and sundry, drive into the Black Sea to admire the Black Sea coast ...
    - What can the Russian Black Sea Fleet count on ??? - What can he do, trapped in this "shallow puddle" ...
    - Since the time of FF Ushakov, this Black Sea Fleet has not shown itself so much ... - not in WWI (when two German cruisers "Goeben" and "Breslau" were in full control of the Black Sea) ...; and in the Second World War; when the Germans and Romanians in 1944 managed to evacuate from the Crimea by sea - about 40 of their soldiers ... to Romania ... - And they could have thwarted all this "evacuation" and put everyone to the bottom ... - And the military aviation then turned out to be not up to par (and the Germans and air defense, then on the ships did not have any ... - so one nonsense ... ... - sailed on what would have to ... - And the weather was flying ...
    - And today ... - what's the use of the fleet if it cannot enter the operational space without "obtaining permission" ...
    1. Ulysses Offline Ulysses
      Ulysses (Alexey) 8 February 2021 19: 17
      -1
      - Is it possible that Russia can win something in the Black Sea; sitting locked up and constantly relying on the "mercy" of Turkey (will Turkey let it out - or not);

      Let it out, won't go anywhere ...

  • ck9999999 Offline ck9999999
    ck9999999 (C K) 8 February 2021 19: 05
    +1
    The convention cannot be canceled. And in general, why climb into a properly working motor ?! 8)
  • Binder Online Binder
    Binder (Miron) 8 February 2021 21: 55
    -3
    AUG is for the oceanic expanses; in the Black Sea, the Americans do not need these connections at all. The entire coast, with the exception of the annexed Crimea and a small section from the Kerch Strait to the Georgian border, is at the disposal of NATO members - build airfields, bases, even if the devil is bald - Ukrainians, Romanians, Bulgarians, Turks, Georgians will definitely not object, and Crimea turns out to be in the zone of action of front-line aviation , I generally keep quiet about CD ...
    1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 9 February 2021 08: 16
      +2
      Quote: Bindyuzhnik
      AUG is for the oceanic expanses; the Americans do not need these connections at all on the Black Sea.

      There was not a word about American AUGs in the article. Everything is chewed up there.

      annexed Crimea

      Can't we settle down? First bring the Golan back to Syria, then use the word "annexation", hypocritical Israelis.
      1. Binder Online Binder
        Binder (Miron) 9 February 2021 17: 29
        -4
        Quote: Marzhetsky
        Return the Golan to Syria first

        And you, Mr. Marzhetsky, want to write this nonsense over and over again? The Golan has been the land of the Jewish people since antiquity, and will never be Syrian.
        1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) 10 February 2021 06: 57
          +2
          And Crimea is the Russian land. Therefore, I will write about the Golan, until you settle down about the "annexation", Israeli hypocrite.
          PS
          Russia has much more historical rights to Crimea, Donbass and Novorossia than you have to the Golan.
          1. Binder Online Binder
            Binder (Miron) 10 February 2021 17: 29
            -3
            Quote: Marzhetsky
            Russia has much more historical rights to Crimea, Donbass and Novorossia than you have to the Golan.

            Nonsense full.
          2. Cyril Offline Cyril
            Cyril (Kirill) 13 February 2021 19: 35
            -2
            Russia has much more historical rights to Crimea, Donbass and Novorossia than you have to the Golan.

            No, less. Russia itself voluntarily gave these territories to another country. At that moment, they ceased to be "primordially Russian".

            Israel did not give the Golan to anyone itself. Moreover, he captured them from the enemy, who unleashed a war against him. I doubt that the capture of the Golan can be justified by the "primordially Jewish" character of this territory (I generally think that "primordiality" is an argument for the uneducated), but it is quite possible to justify it as a "trophy of war" like our Kaliningrad.
  • Vladest Offline Vladest
    Vladest (Vladimir) 8 February 2021 22: 55
    -2
    This is for futurists. On REN TV.
  • Leonid Anoshenko (leonid anoshenko) 9 February 2021 17: 43
    -1
    what is such a "deterrent" from which deterrent?
  • Yaroslav V. Offline Yaroslav V.
    Yaroslav V. (Yaroslav Vedunov) 9 February 2021 23: 27
    0
    Why not sign a ban on the entry of any military ships into the Black Sea, and any country. Make a peaceful water area ...
  • isofat Offline isofat
    isofat (isofat) 10 February 2021 10: 40
    -1
    Quote: Cyril
    "Discussed" is too loud a word. You are not yet mature enough for the discussion process.

    Well, since you have nothing more to argue with me ... hi
  • forsagd Offline forsagd
    forsagd (Dmitry Smirnov) 10 February 2021 13: 27
    +1
    In the event of a conflict, Americans will spit on all conventions. The Black Sea, in fact, and not de jure, is protected not by the Montreux convention, but by the Army and the Russian Navy. Catching an aircraft carrier at gunpoint in the Black Sea is probably much easier than in the ocean, and the Americans are unlikely to risk such an expensive toy and especially several thousand crews with a high probability of loss. They know how to count money and ratings.
  • forsagd Offline forsagd
    forsagd (Dmitry Smirnov) 10 February 2021 13: 38
    0
    Quote: Praskovya
    what if they are destroyed before that?

    Who will destroy before? Navalny?
  • nikolai.shupenin 10 February 2021 13: 47
    0
    the sea is closed and only for those who live here.
  • Andrey Gladkikh Offline Andrey Gladkikh
    Andrey Gladkikh (Andrey Gladkikh) 10 February 2021 23: 53
    +1
    For some reason, the author does not pay attention to the fact that the Convention establishes a regime not for the Bosphorus, but for the Black Sea straits. That is, the Dardanelles too. And if the Bosphorus bypass water canal can bypass, then the Dardanelles cannot be bypassed by any construction projects of the century. Therefore, our ambassador is absolutely right when he says that with the introduction of the bypass channel, the convention regime does not change.
  • Alexander F Offline Alexander F
    Alexander F (Alexander Fedulov) 12 February 2021 17: 24
    0
    The only thing that I do not understand for what and who needs aircraft carriers in the Black Sea. Not only is the aircraft carrier a huge target, but also the range of aircraft of 1000 km covers from any airfield of the Black Sea countries included in the NATO bloc. I cannot understand the meaning of Turkey's construction of an aircraft carrier for operation in the Black Sea, and even more so for NATO. There are airfields and air bases in Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey and Italy, what is the point for NATO to have an aircraft carrier there?