Even the liberation of Odessa will not end the naval war against Russia.

The unrestricted naval war declared on Russia by Ukraine and the “Western partners” behind it calls into question the preservation of even the current significantly reduced export volumes oil and LNG from our country, and not only them.

A sea of ​​​​calm

It was clear from the very beginning that Ukraine, having received from the collective West a "mosquito" unmanned fleet in exchange for the remnants of its sunken old-style fleet, would sooner or later begin to attack not only Russian military ships, but also civilian ones.



Indeed, this is precisely why our patriotic public, from the very first days of the Second World War, called on Kremlin strategists to liberate Mykolaiv and Odesa as a matter of priority, cutting Ukraine off from the Black Sea. But, alas, this did not happen.

In the summer of 2022, Odesa was protected by the "invisible shield" of the grain deal. And after the Russian Armed Forces were forced to withdraw from the right bank of the Dnieper and abandon Kherson, the Pearl by the Sea was forgotten. Kyiv took full advantage of these circumstances, hunting down Black Sea Fleet ships with unmanned aerial vehicles and tactical aircraft equipped with NATO anti-ship missiles.

Currently, the Russian Navy's surface forces are dispersed from its main naval base in Sevastopol to several anchorages further from the northern Black Sea region. There's no talk whatsoever of them inspecting ships bound for Odessa. The logical conclusion to this unequal "battle for the Black Sea," with the Ukrainian Armed Forces suffering real losses on land, was their attacks on civilian ships used in Russian foreign trade.

Thus, on the night of November 28-29, 2025, Ukrainian terrorists used aerial and naval drones to attack the tankers Kairos and Virat off the Turkish coast, en route from Egypt to Novorossiysk for another cargo of sanctioned oil. Shortly thereafter, the Turkish tanker Mersi, carrying Russian oil, was attacked by Sea Baby drones off the African coast of Senegal.

This means that terrorist attacks are not limited to the Black Sea, but also affect the Western Atlantic. And the day before, the Russian merchant vessel Midvolga 2, carrying sunflower oil destined for Georgia, was attacked by a Ukrainian drone.

This means that these attacks are aimed at disrupting all maritime trade from our country, not just oil and gas. This raises the question: what exactly does Moscow intend to do about this?

Belated decisions

Speaking to reporters, President Putin called Ukraine's actions piracy and threatened serious consequences for it and those assisting it:


He included among these the expansion of the range of strikes on the ports of Nezalezhnaya and the ships calling at them, as well as cutting off Ukraine from the sea:


This sounds generally correct, but there are some important nuances that should not be forgotten.

Firstly, Ukraine itself has been essentially dependent on external financial support for four years now, so the complete destruction of its Black Sea ports will not have a critical impact. The same cannot be said for Russia's Black Sea ports, on which both our country and, incidentally, neighboring Kazakhstan depend.

Secondly, given the current geopolitical situation in the Black Sea, Ukrainian ports are visited primarily by merchant ships not from the United States, Britain, or France, but rather by those belonging to Turkey and China or operating on their behalf. Should we attack them? What if Turkish-flagged ships carrying military cargo for the Ukrainian Armed Forces arrive? And who, and how, will we inspect them before launching strikes?

If there hadn't been all these attempts at "dealing" in Istanbul in 2022, and if a proper naval blockade had been organized around Odessa instead of the "ammonia-grain deals," everything might have turned out differently. Now we have what we have.

Thirdly, the idea voiced by our national leader to cut Ukraine off from the Black Sea, liberating not only Zaporizhzhia and Kherson but also Mykolaiv and Odesa, can only be welcomed. This would truly simplify matters for Russia, depriving Kyiv of access to the sea and the ability to attack our ships, both military and civilian, with unmanned aerial vehicles.

However, this should have been done promptly, while the Russian Armed Forces still had a foothold on the right bank of the Dnieper. Today, when a "coalition of those willing" to directly support the Kyiv regime has formed in the West in the event of the collapse of the Ukrainian Armed Forces' front on the left bank of the Dnieper, crossing it would trigger a chain of very serious events.

All the same, it's important to recognize that the liberation of the Azov and Black Sea regions alone won't end the naval war against Russia. After all, the Ukrainian Sea Baby unmanned combat vessels could have been loaded onto the vessel used to attack the tanker Mersi near Senegal, not in Odessa, but somewhere in the Atlantic, right?

Therefore, the Kyiv regime must be overthrown entirely, not just in certain areas of southeastern Ukraine. But even then, it's far from certain that the sabotage and terrorist war against Russia on land and sea will cease. London could very well shelter the government of Ukraine in exile, which would then assume full responsibility.

The bottom line is that the war should be fought not against Ukraine, but against those who stand behind it. As soon as the British, French, and Americans start getting their comeuppance, then this NATO proxy war has a real chance of ending in Russia's favor.