dark light

  • Rodolfo

Russia Black Sea Fleet presence in Ukraine extended for 25 more years

An agreement on the extension of the Russian Black Sea Fleet presence in Ukraine after 2017 might be simultaneously ratified by the Russian and Ukrainian parliaments next Tuesday, a Russian parliamentary speaker said.

Russia and Ukraine on Wednesday signed an agreement extending Russian naval presence in the Crimea for 25 years after 2017, when the current lease is due to expire. The document was signed following negotiations between Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and his Ukrainian counterpart Viktor Yanukovych.

“The signing of the document by the presidents of Russia and Ukraine on the extension of the Black Sea Fleet presence in Ukraine is an event which undeniably has a significant meaning for the provision of strategic security and stability not only in the Black Sea region, but also in Europe as a whole,” Boris Gryzlov, the speaker for the Russian parliament’s lower house, the State Duma, said.

Under the new agreement, the lease on the Sevastopol base may be further extended by another five years after the current agreement expires in 2042.

Gryzlov said that considering the importance of the issue, he immediately spoke with his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Lytvyn.

“We have agreed that the Russian and Ukrainian members of parliament will use all efforts to ratify the agreement simultaneously. I believe that it might be on Tuesday. As for us [Russia] we are ready to consider this issue at tomorrow’s session of the State Duma,” Gryzlov said.

Yanukovych has pledged to move Ukraine away from the pro-Western stance of former President Viktor Yushchenko, who vowed that Russia would have to look for a new main base for its Black Sea Fleet once the original deal expired in 2017.

The Ukrainian opposition, however, earlier said any prolongation of Russian military presence would require amendments to the Constitution as well as a national referendum.

MOSCOW, April 21 (RIA Novosti)

Oranges are furious. Just another political storm coming to Ukraine.

Geopolitical consequences? Please opinions!

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

635

Send private message

By: Lonevolk - 15th July 2010 at 13:17

I’m more interested in what the Russians hope to gain from this. They’re paying exhorbitant amounts of money to maintain a fleet they can’t afford. Most of the Black Sea Fleet’s ships will be retiring in the coming decade and the construction rate for new vessels is hardly enough to replace them, even if we disregard the other fleets. In my opinion the Russian Navy should have taken this opportunity to cut their losses and downsize by retiring the Black Sea Fleet by 2017(when the ships themselves retire).

The Black Sea Fleet isn’t going anywhere soon for several reasons.

– First and foremost for historical / nationalist reasons
– Economic reasons (current and planned Oil and Gas pipelines in the area)
– Proximity and access to the Mediterranean
– Presence in the Ukraine and proximity to the Caucasus and Balkans (areas of interest for Russia)

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

12,674

Send private message

By: swerve - 13th July 2010 at 18:01

Ummm… how about “since before Soviet times”… as the Imperial Russian Navy’s Black Sea Fleet was based there.

Yep. Sevastopol was founded 1783, for the specific purpose of providing a base for the Imperial Russian Black Sea fleet.

134 years as an Imperial Russian naval base, 5 years under German/White Russian/Ukrainian nationalist control, 69 years the USSR, & 19 years as a Russian base on the territory of independent Ukraine – so far.

And give up and easy to defend area along with access to the Mediterranean and the Middle East?

Quite a ludicrous proposition!

Can you explain this? How does a Black Sea Fleet at Sevastopol give “access to the Mediterranean and the Middle East”? How is Sevastopol an ‘easy to defend area”, compared to Novorossiysk?

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

118

Send private message

By: Clampipe - 13th July 2010 at 16:02

I’m more interested in what the Russians hope to gain from this. They’re paying exhorbitant amounts of money to maintain a fleet they can’t afford. Most of the Black Sea Fleet’s ships will be retiring within a decade and the construction rate for new vessels is hardly enough to replace them, even if neglecting the needs of the other fleets. In my opinion the Russian Navy should have taken this opportunity to cut their losses and downsize by retiring the Black Sea Fleet.

And give up and easy to defend area along with access to the Mediterranean and the Middle East?

Quite a ludicrous proposition!

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,232

Send private message

By: Witcha - 13th July 2010 at 13:44

I’m more interested in what the Russians hope to gain from this. They’re paying exhorbitant amounts of money to maintain a fleet they can’t afford. Most of the Black Sea Fleet’s ships will be retiring in the coming decade and the construction rate for new vessels is hardly enough to replace them, even if we disregard the other fleets. In my opinion the Russian Navy should have taken this opportunity to cut their losses and downsize by retiring the Black Sea Fleet by 2017(when the ships themselves retire).

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

209

Send private message

By: foxmulder - 25th April 2010 at 17:58

This is the most expensive base on the world. If the figures are true, Ukraine will have more than 4billion$ indirectly every year which is a great deal for them.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,360

Send private message

By: Bager1968 - 23rd April 2010 at 06:24

He also said that the fleet had been stationed in Sevastopol since Soviet times and the local infrastructure was set up for the naval base.

Ummm… how about “since before Soviet times”… as the Imperial Russian Navy’s Black Sea Fleet was based there.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,190

Send private message

By: Rodolfo - 22nd April 2010 at 16:19

From RIAN

Ukraine’s Constitutional Court has ruled that the extension of Russia’s lease on a naval base in Crimea conforms to the country’s Constitution, Foreign Minister Kostyantyn Hryshchenko said on Thursday.

The lease agreement, signed on Wednesday, extends Russian naval presence in the port of Sevastopol for 25 years after the current lease expires in 2017, and may be further extended by another five years.

The Ukrainian opposition earlier said any prolongation of Russian military presence would require amendments to the Constitution as well as a national referendum.

Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych said the country would benefit from the extension of the lease agreement as Ukraine would be receiving money on a cash basis for the lease, opposite to writing off the debts for the use of the Russian natural gas.

“Considering that the annual lease fee for the presence of the Black Sea Fleet was $97.850 million, this is the sum which was used in offset settlements every year to reduce the debt for natural gas consumed by Ukraine,” he said, explaining that Ukraine had accumulated debts for gas supplies since it gained independence in 1990s.

“We have agreed that Russia will give a considerable discount [on gas prices] for the next 10 years,” Yanukovych said.

He also said that the fleet had been stationed in Sevastopol since Soviet times and the local infrastructure was set up for the naval base.

KIEV, April 22 (RIA Novost)

Russia will pay higher rent for its naval base in Ukraine starting in 2017 and payments will be made in hard cash, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said on Thursday.

The lease agreement, signed on Wednesday, extends Russian naval presence in the port of Sevastopol for 25 years after the current lease expires in 2017, and may be further extended by another five years.

MOSCOW, April 22 (RIA Novosti)

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,544

Send private message

By: Wanshan - 21st April 2010 at 22:42

:eek::o Unlikely.

So was the Russians getting continued use of Krimea bases. So we though the sale of Mistrals to Russia to be. Bummer for Sevmash if this should happen (which is indeed unlikely)

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,190

Send private message

By: Rodolfo - 21st April 2010 at 22:41

We might even see Kuznetsov dock again in the Ukraine for overhaul?

:eek::o Unlikely.

It wasn’t the Oranges that destroyed the economy. That belongs to no party. It was just straight up corruption.

Off-course but the Orange obsession to confront Russia even damaging self-interest played a big part also. Add also a self-damaging ultra-neoliberal economic path and you will have the same effects seen i.e. in Russia in 1998 and in Argentina in 2001.

Anyway, given the low productivity of Russian shipyards and the shortage of repair spaces in Russia, it will be interesting to see if some Russian vessels are sent to Nikolayev

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

158

Send private message

By: CayceG - 21st April 2010 at 21:57

It wasn’t the Oranges that destroyed the economy. That belongs to no party. It was just straight up corruption.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,544

Send private message

By: Wanshan - 21st April 2010 at 21:56

Furthermore this will be a blessing deal for the heavily damaged (by the Oranges) Ukrainian economy.

We might even see Kuznetsov dock again in the Ukraine for overhaul?

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,190

Send private message

By: Rodolfo - 21st April 2010 at 21:32

The Oranges are a minority now.

Yeap but they are a minority of more than 40%. They are furiously screaming on the subject.

They’re an extreme just like the pro-Russians are the opposite extreme. This is a pro-Russian decision,

Fully agreed. Ukraine seems as an extremely polarized country and that’s bad because of the never fading tensions between both visions.

but if one looks at Ukraine’s economy and especially the well being of Crimea, this is in the best interest of the nation. I don’t expect Ukraine to make giant concessions to Russia (or the EU). Especially if Yanukovich wants to retain power.

Actually I think Mr Yanukovich got a very favorable deal if you consider that the discount on gas prices is around 40 billinos for the 25 years (with current gas values). This in exchange of a base ALREADY SETLED! I think giant concessions were obtained from Russia and not given to Russia.

Furthermore this will be a blessing deal for the heavily damaged (by the Oranges) Ukrainian economy.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

158

Send private message

By: CayceG - 21st April 2010 at 21:20

Nothing will change in Ukraine. It’ll be like it is now and how it has been the last few years. It will just last 25 years longer.

The Oranges are a minority now. They’re an extreme just like the pro-Russians are the opposite extreme. This is a pro-Russian decision, but if one looks at Ukraine’s economy and especially the well being of Crimea, this is in the best interest of the nation. I don’t expect Ukraine to make giant concessions to Russia (or the EU). Especially if Yanukovich wants to retain power.

To be honest, I think Yanukovich will opt for a middle of the road stance with regards to Russia or the EU. Just because they move toward Russia and away from the EU doesn’t mean they’re abandoning relations.

Sign in to post a reply