Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

Russian forces in the Mediterranean - Wk14/2021
April 09, 2021



https://russianfleetanalysis.blogspot.com/2021/04/russian-forces-in-mediterranean-wk142021.html

https://tass.com/world/1284455

Sudan has suspended the effect of its agreement signed with Russia to build a naval base in the country, Al Arabiya TV reported on Wednesday.

According to the channel, the agreement "signed by Moscow with the previous regime" is suspended "until it is approved by the legislature." Khartoum has already notified Moscow.

Could be the US playing a hand in creating an opportunity to meddle in Sudan's politics and scupper the deal.

slasher wrote:

Could be the US playing a hand in creating an opportunity to meddle in Sudan's politics and scupper the deal.

Nothing surprising, north african arab countries are like weather.

However it says suspended not cancelled

George1 wrote:However it says suspended not cancelled

Most sovereign contracts are written with suspended clauses and usually is the first step.

Rasisuki Nebia wrote:Not surprising to say the least, they even backtracked on the whole Ethiopia dam and want to re-negotiate AGAIN with US mediation, as if the last 10 years didn't happen

It is one of the most strategic places in the world. Just up the way from Djibouti. Where everyone else is piled up in. 


This was never going to be that easy. The US will do everything it can to stop it. Including overthrowing govt's. 


Let's just see if Russia can counter and make the plan work again. It's a long term effort. 

Does Sudan actually have SU-35's? On Wiki its listed as 4 in service with 36 on order.

mnztr wrote:Does Sudan actually have SU-35's? On Wiki its listed as 4 in service with 36 on order.

Hmmm that's what it says.

They also have Frogfoots. They took delivery of an S-300 in 2019. All of their air force missiles are Russian. Helicopters. 

Looks like Russia has some leverage here

Might just be that they realise how important this is and that perhaps they could get a better deal.

Of course if it all goes tits up, it is better to do so before it starts.

Sudan says will review naval base agreement with Russia

In late April, Sudan announced it was suspending an agreement with Russia to build a naval base in the country

CAIRO, June 2. /TASS/. Sudan will review its naval base agreement with Russia, because some of its provisions are harmful for the country’s interests, Sudanese Chief of General Staff Muhammad Othman al-Hussein said in an interview with the Blue Nile TV channel on Tuesday.

"At the moment, we are negotiating a possible review of this agreement, to ensure that our interests and our profits are taken into account," he said. "Some of the document’s provisions entail certain harm for Sudan."

"The agreement was signed under the previous regime, but it was never ratified by the legislature, as required by the international treaty approval procedure," the official went on. "Therefore, those agreements are not yet legally binding for us, and we have the opportunity to introduce amendments and changes to the agreement on military cooperation with Russia in the Red Sea, taking into account our interests."

The general went on to say that the deal will be put into practice if it is mutually beneficial and does not harm Sudan’s interests.

"That is why we are reviewing it, in a bid to determine Sudan’s interests with regard to this agreement. That is what the latest talks [with the Russian side] were all about. We seek advantages for ourselves in implementing this deal," he said.

At the same time, Muhammad Othman al-Hussein said his country was "open for military cooperation with the United States."

"Previously, Sudan had to limit its military cooperation only to Russia and China. Today, after the state was excluded from the list of state sponsors of international terrorism, we can cooperate with America and Western nations," he said.

However, the official denied any connection between the review of the deal with Moscow and improvement of relations with Washington.

In late April, Sudan announced it was suspending an agreement with Russia to build a naval base in the country. According to the channel, the agreement will be suspended "until it is approved by the legislature," which is non-existent at the country so far.

The news broke out in early December 2020 that Russia and Sudan had struck the agreement to build a naval logistical support and maintenance facility in the African country. The naval logistics base is designed for carrying out repairs, replenishing supplies and for the crewmembers of Russian naval ships to have a rest. Sudan will hand over to Russia for free for the entire period of the agreement’s duration the territory and the real estate that comprises the coastal zone and the water area with the mooring front (the berths for the floating craft). The military and civilian personnel should not exceed 300 people and may be increased upon agreement with Sudan, the document stipulates.

The agreement will be in effect for 25 years with automatic extension for 10 years, if neither party notifies the other party in writing through diplomatic channels no less than twelve months before the expiry of the relevant period about its intention to terminate it.

Former president Omar Bashir, who held the post for 30 years, was ousted as a result of a military coup on April 11, 2019.

https://tass.com/defense/1296945

INF never applied to the navy and all the small fleet combatants in Russia are Navy assets.
This is just another asymmetric answer from Russia the hawkish US and its vassal states.
"Yes, you can put a stationary on land Mk41 silo in Poland and Romania. We will be struck them within minutes with our assets, while our cruise missiles will just sit still on a lakeshore, waiting for a launch command. "
I can't get rid of a feeling, that Russkies vastly overestimated ze vezt capabilities in coming decades, making their own decisions back in the 00s.
Now, they have ended up with systems overpassing the competitors by a factor. Some of them, not needed, and overwhelming, to be honest ...

GarryB wrote:

True that, yet it would be nice to recuperate some "Londoners" and "dissidents" and their billions . I mean billions stolen by them.

Didn't Teresa May threaten Putin that they would be investigating super Rich Russians in the UK for the purposes of putting pressure on them... and he said go right ahead because most of them are there evading Russian tax law anyway.

They got British citizenship like many dictators, criminals before them from Africa, Asia or Latin America.  As for "Ruskies", one bought his son even tittle:  Baron of Hampton and Siberia. So no, there will be no investigation unless somebody would refrain to criticize / support of anti-Russian info war IMHO

If they confiscate money wont return to Russia. Will go for the greater good

Arrow wrote:Ships can launch missiles from rivers and lakes. They are under the cover of the Russian AD and are perfectly safe.

Technically feasible but unlikely to be implemented. There are already plans to add Zircon to land based tactical missiles. No INF anymore.
Small Rocket Ships would serve as sea deterrence component IMHO  or platforms in case of local wars like Syria.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:
They got British citizenship like many dictators, criminals before them from Africa, Asia or Latin America.  As for "Ruskies", one bought his son even tittle:  Baron of Hampton and Siberia. So no, there will be no investigation unless somebody would refrain to criticize / support of anti-Russian info war IMHO

Keeping the wealthy dissidents with the money they robbed is nothing unusual in UK history.
They have played that game for centuries.
From the Russian perspective, the only change would be that back in the 90s and 00s, some of those thugs run&covered in Israel.
But as Israel does not care about the political agenda much, they used to be safe there only until the money last and deported shortly after.
While they are perfectly safe in UK, being used as anti-Russian ammo till the end of their days, like Berezovsky.

The concept of river-sea ships armed with cruise missiles and, in the future, hypersonic missiles is very innovative.

The reality is that trade and transport and commerce happens on their rivers so they need police or patrol boats to manage that... I rather suspect these "river boats" are designed as coastal boats that can be transferred by internal canal system rather than actual intent to use them on rivers operationally.

"Yes, you can put a stationary on land Mk41 silo in Poland and Romania.

AEGIS Ashore is clearly an INF treaty violation... the real question is why did they put up with it at all?

I can't get rid of a feeling, that Russkies vastly overestimated ze vezt capabilities in coming decades, making their own decisions back in the 00s.
Now, they have ended up with systems overpassing the competitors by a factor. Some of them, not needed, and overwhelming, to be honest ...

They didn't bankrupt themselves in either research and development or mass production and have ended up with new technologies that give them an enormous advantage in a range of technology areas that they can move forward and exploit in the near future.

They got British citizenship like many dictators, criminals before them from Africa, Asia or Latin America. As for "Ruskies", one bought his son even tittle: Baron of Hampton and Siberia. So no, there will be no investigation unless somebody would refrain to criticize / support of anti-Russian info war IMHO

It was just a display of ignorance from May as usual who believes the BS of Putin and every rich Russian being in league together working to bring down the west.

It was funny at the time because I seem to remember reading about a few that shifted resources back to Russia and others who were afraid their money would be taken off them... either by Putin or by the UK... it might have been what the UK was squeezing the Skrypals over perhaps...

If they confiscate money wont return to Russia. Will go for the greater good

As far as Putin is concerned that money was lost a long time ago... seeing it being seized from them might stop others following the same path...

You break the rules in Russia you can escape prosecution and perhaps even keep some of your illgotten gains by claiming persecution by Putin.

Browder did it, and that dick that was doping athletes in Russia and got caught and ran to the US did it too.

Technically feasible but unlikely to be implemented. There are already plans to add Zircon to land based tactical missiles. No INF anymore.
Small Rocket Ships would serve as sea deterrence component IMHO or platforms in case of local wars like Syria.

Cheaper to put them in standard shipping crates... then any truck or train or river barge can carry them in enormous numbers while remaining on the move... amongst millions of other real shipping crates...

GarryB wrote:
AEGIS Ashore is clearly an INF treaty violation... the real question is why did they put up with it at all?

But of course, it is, Raytheon admits that clearly of both them being double purpose.
On the other hand, I still remember how that madness started, 20 years ago, with Busch's speech.
And what we were talking about that days.
Both soon-to-be-created bases in US vassal states in Europe were supposed to host a GBI, which is a fully operational silo system for Minuteman III ICBMs.
From Moscow's perspective, it was a real red line they could not ignore at any circumstances. Imagine a MIRV capable base located 1500 km from Moscow and 1000 km from Peter. This is when the decisions were made in Russia, and this is when a need of doomsday weapon and hypersonic one became clear. You can decapitate us, but we can do the same. You can kill us, but we will kill you all, and turn your entire economy into rubbles by devastating & radiating the whole coast.
As it turned out finally, GBI in Europe was not finally approved/accepted/call that any name. It ended up with a factor of that threat because as long as those Mk41s won't have serious hypersonic weaponry to be put into them, a Tomahaws salvo can be considered as a joke only. Considering the scale of success achievable by the mighty Muricans in that field, Russkies can sit&watch for a next decade.

Arrow wrote:I wonder what influenced the change in the US decision to deploy the GBI in Europe.  Any behind-the-scenes talks with Russia?

The murkans finally admitted to themselves that GBI is a POS system and is essentially useless.

The most interesting part of it is when they have blurred the submergence markings.

Really odd
Especially since they nearly immediately follow it up with uncensored closeup of the bow one from the dinghy & the other one later.

That is happened to them quite often
I believe that it is a result of combining materials shot on different time and purpose.

Russia looks into Navy Arctic Fleet creation — source

TASS did not receive any official information on the fleet creation

SEVASTOPOL, October 7. /TASS/. A new division of the Russian Navy, the Arctic Fleet, may be created to ensure the Northern Sea Route's safety, a source in the Navy told TASS on Thursday.

"The Russian Arctic Fleet, a new structure, is under consideration. It will be a separate formation within the Navy, and its responsibility will be to ensure the safety of the Northern Sea Route and the Arctic coast in the area of responsibility of the Northern and Pacific fleets," the source said.

According to the source, the creation of this fleet will allow the Northern and Pacific fleets to focus on solving combat missions. "The plan is that the infrastructure of the new association will be separate from the Northern and Pacific fleets. In the future, it will have ships and special equipment suitable for the Arctic," the agency's source said.

TASS did not receive any official information on the fleet creation.

The Navy is a branch of the Russian Armed Forces and consists of operational and strategic formations: the Baltic, Pacific, Black Sea fleets and the Caspian flotilla. There are separate branches of the Russian Navy which are naval aviation, marines and coastal missile and artillery troops.

https://tass.com/defense/1346611