Russia-Ukraine Black Sea Military Crisis: On The Brink Of War


…from SouthFront

On November 25, the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) Border Service was forced to open fire on and damage Ukrainian warships, which were carrying out hostile actions and advancing in Russian territorial waters in the Black Sea off Crimea.

After the short close-quarter firefight, two Ukrainian ships were taken towed and one ship escorted by Russian forces to the Russian port of Kerch. The Ukrainian side said that 6 service members had been injured in the incident. The Russian side says that 3 Ukrainian servicemen had been slightly injured. They received medical help and there is no threat to their lives.

The data available from both sides, Ukrainian and Russian, demonstrates that the Ukrainian warships intentionally entered Russian territorial waters and were moving more deeply into them. Such a military action with the to be expected loud political coverage is not possible without a direct order from the Ukrainian top military-political leadership.

From the beginning, the Ukrainian side claimed that it informed the Russian side about the planned displacement of its ships into the Sea of Azov through the Kerch Strait. The Russian side says that there has been no request on this issue.

Even if the Ukrainian side had indeed somehow informed the Russians, it still needed to wait for an answer and permission from the Russian authorities. As the further developments showed, the Ukrainian side had received no answer/permission from the Russian side.

The existence or absence of the Ukrainian request to the Russians is irrelevant. The fact is that the Ukrainian warships violated Russian territorial waters threatening navigation in the area and provoking the Russian side.

For more than 5 hours, the Russian side had been avoiding any action to stop and block warships of the de-facto “unfriendly state” in its territorial waters. Only at about 19:00 local time, the FSB Border Service did employ real measures to put an end to the hostile actions of the warships of the de-facto “unfriendly state” in Russian territorial waters.

Summing up the existing data, it can be concluded that:

  • When the Ukrainian warships entered Russian territorial waters, there was an attempt to block the advance of the Ukrainian naval group. One of the ships of the FSB Border Service provoked a maritime collision incident with a Ukrainian ship by putting its own hull on the vector of the Ukrainian warship’s advance.
  • Within the next few hours, there was a close escort of the Ukrainian ships by the Russian naval group. Apparently, both the groups were inside or near Russian marginal waters.
  • In a couple of hours, there was a firefight incident between the Russian and Ukrainian naval groups.
  • The Ukrainian Navy recognizes that the incident happened near the borderline of the Russian 12-nautical miles zone.
  • The Ukrainian naval group was completely dominated by the Russian naval group.
  • There were casualties among Ukrainian service members.
  • Warships of the Ukrainian naval group suffered damages.
  • The Ukrainian naval group was blocked and then escorted/towed by the Russian naval group to Kerch.

There is no doubt that the leadership of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, particularly Commander-In-Chief Petro Poroshenko, gave the order to stage an action, which could cause casualties among at least military personnel. The command and servicemen of the Ukrainian Navy made every possible effort to fulfil this order.

The Russian side seemed to try to avoid an armed clash and likely attempted to solve this crisis via military-diplomatic channels for at least several hours. However, it failed to do this.

The existing data allows us to conclude that the current Ukrainian political leadership bears most of the responsibility for the November 25 maritime incident.

As to what developments we should expect in the following days, we can expect that.

The Ukrainian government will employ its propaganda and oppressive power to boost the image of Russia as the aggressive foe of Ukraine. This will lead to the escalation of tensions in the conflict zone in eastern Ukraine as well as tensions in the contact zone between Russian and Ukrainian forces in the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov.

If this fails, this incident could lead to a full discreditation of the current Ukrainian political leadership, particularly President Poroshenko, and his US supervisors.

It is important to note that overnight on November 26 the situation started escalating in eastern Ukraine  where the Ukrainian Armed Forces opened a massive artillery fire on villages and towns controlled by the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) at 21:48 local time.  This could indicate that the Poroshenko regime is intentionally fueling military tensions in the region in order to start a new conflict.

Overnight on November 26, Poroshenko held a meeting with the military cabinet and announced the introduction of martial law. Furthermore, the Ukrainian Armed Forces were brought to “full” combat readiness.

The introduction of martial law allows the delay of the 2019 presidential election in Ukraine, which is currently set to be held on March 31, 2019. According to polls, Poroshenko would be highly likely to lose his presidential post were the election to take place now. The armed conflict and martial law may allow him to change the situation in his favor.

Such a conflict would also allow Ukraine’s “Western partners” to boost their military presence in the country and nearby regions thus further destabilizing the situation.

Due to the nature of independent content, VT cannot guarantee content validity.
We ask you to Read Our Content Policy so a clear comprehension of VT's independent non-censored media is understood and given its proper place in the world of news, opinion and media.

All content is owned by author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT.

About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy


  1. You proved nothing and continue to display bigotry and ignorance by assigning characteristics to an entire people. People are people, regardless of where they come from or their ethnic background and to attempt to differentiate between them by applying stereotypes is plain wrong, something that only leads to conflict and division, which is something I have always and will always rail against.

  2. Oh dear, you just made yourself look rather foolish indeed. Can’t you grasp the importance of checking sources – something you have failed to do here. Firstly, the Daily Star is NOT a reliable source, it is a low brow tabloid dirt sheet owned by a notorious Israeli linked Jewish pornographer called Richard Desmond, I wrote an article several months ago about this when one of Desmond’s papers published an entirely fake story about Russia preparing to invade Western Europe. Secondly, if you had bothered to check what Adm. West actually said, you would know that he said nothing about sending a Type 45 to Kerch and in fact, the RN ship in question is an unarmed, non-combatant maritime survey vessel. A Type 45, HMS Duncan, is currently on station in the Black Sea but West has said nothing about using her to ensure freedom of anything anywhere. So get your facts straight before issuing these childish outbursts of bile and vitriol otherwise you just make yourself look stupid, lazy and most of all, a deeply bigotted and racist purveyor of nonsensical hatespeech.

  3. re: “Brits with Bombs!”

    Very interesting in hearing about this. I’d love to know more. Links please. Can you comment further..?

  4. No one besides China has the manpower to fight a major land war and even smaller turf battles will be a drain. A nuclear slug fest will become the easiest option, unfortunately for mankind.

Comments are closed.