PONARS Eurasia
  • About
    • Contact
    • Membership
      • All Members
      • Core Members
      • Collegium Members
      • Associate Members
      • About Membership
    • Ukraine Experts
    • Executive Committee
  • Policy Memos
    • List of Policy Memos
    • Submissions
  • Podcasts
  • Online Academy
  • Events
    • Past Events
  • Recommended
  • Ukraine Experts
Contacts

Address
1957 E St NW,
Washington, DC 20052

adminponars@gwu.edu
202.994.5915

NEWSLETTER
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Podcast
PONARS Eurasia
PONARS Eurasia
  • About
    • Contact
    • Membership
      • All Members
      • Core Members
      • Collegium Members
      • Associate Members
      • About Membership
    • Ukraine Experts
    • Executive Committee
  • Policy Memos
    • List of Policy Memos
    • Submissions
  • Podcasts
  • Online Academy
  • Events
    • Past Events
  • Recommended
  • Ukraine Experts
DIGITAL RESOURCES
digital resources

Bookstore 📚

Knowledge Hub

Course Syllabi

Point & Counterpoint

Policy Perspectives

RECOMMENDED
  • The Determinants of Assistance to Ukrainian and Syrian Refugees | New Voices on Eurasia with Volha Charnysh (Feb. 16)

    View
  • Conflicts in the North Caucasus Since 1991 | PONARS Eurasia Online Academy

    View
  • Will Ukraine Wind Up Making Territorial Concessions to Russia? Foreign Affairs Asks the Experts

    View
  • Pro-Kremlin Propaganda’s Failure in Ukraine | New Voices on Eurasia with Aaron Erlich (Jan. 19)

    View
  • Kyiv-Washington Relations in Times of Colossal War: The Ultimate Test of a Strategic Partnership

    View
RSS PONARS Eurasia Podcast
  • The Putin-Xi Summit: What's New In Their Joint Communique ? February 23, 2022
    In this week’s PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman speaks with Russian China experts Vita Spivak and Alexander Gabuev about the February meeting between Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, and what it may tell us about where the Russian-Chinese relationship is headed.
  • Exploring the Russian Courts' Ruling to Liquidate the Memorial Society January 28, 2022
    In this week’s PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with scholars Kelly Smith and Benjamin Nathans about the history, achievements, and impending shutdown of the Memorial Society, Russia's oldest and most venerable civic organization, and what its imminent liquidation portends for the Russian civil society.
  • Russia's 2021 census and the Kremlin's nationalities policy [Lipman Series 2021] December 9, 2021
    In this week’s PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with social scientist Andrey Shcherbak about the quality of the data collected in the recent population census and the goals of Vladimir Putin's government's nationalities policy
  • Active citizens of any kind are under threat [Lipman Series 2021] November 5, 2021
    In this week’s PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with Alexander Verkhovsky about the Kremlin's ever expanding toolkit against political and civic activists, journalists, and other dissidents.
  • Russia's Legislative Elections followup [Lipman Series 2021] October 4, 2021
    In this week’s PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with Tanya Lokot and Nikolay Petrov about the results of Russia’s legislative elections and about what comes next.
  • Why Is the Kremlin Nervous? [Lipman Series 2021] September 14, 2021
    In this week’s PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with Ben Noble and Nikolay Petrov about Russia’s September 17-19 legislative elections, repressive measures against electoral challengers, and whether to expect anything other than preordained results.
  • Vaccine Hesitancy in Russia, France, and the United States [Lipman Series 2021] August 31, 2021
    In this week's PONARS Eurasia Podcast episode, Maria Lipman chats with Denis Volkov, Naira Davlashyan, and Peter Slevin about why COVID-19 vaccination rates are still so low across the globe, comparing vaccine hesitant constituencies across Russia, France, and the United States.  
  • Is Russia Becoming More Soviet? [Lipman Series 2021] July 26, 2021
      In a new PONARS Eurasia Podcast episode, Maria Lipman chats with Maxim Trudolyubov about the current tightening of the Russian political sphere, asking whether or not it’s helpful to draw comparisons to the late Soviet period.
  • The Evolution of Russia's Political Regime [Lipman Series 2021] June 21, 2021
    In this week's episode of the PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with Grigory Golosov and Henry Hale about the evolution of Russia's political regime, and what to expect in the lead-up to September's Duma elections.
  • Volodymyr Zelensky: Year Two [Lipman Series 2021] May 24, 2021
    In this week's episode of the PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with Sergiy Kudelia and Georgiy Kasianov about Ukrainian President Zelensky's second year in office, and how he has handled the political turbulence of the past year.
  • Commentary | Комментарии

The Implications of the Crimean Annexation for Black Sea Security

  • May 31, 2016
  • Volodymyr Dubovyk

The Ukraine crisis altered the security landscape of the Black Sea region. This area was a relatively quiet “battlefront” during the Cold War and a rather stable region in the post-Soviet period, even with its “frozen conflicts” and the occasional flare-up of conflict, most notably the August 2008 war between Russia and Georgia. This has all changed with Russia’s annexation of Crimea and its continuous intervention in Ukraine’s east. Russia’s intervention in Crimea and the Donbas has shown that the use of force still matters, especially when it promises to achieve results more quickly and effectively than diplomacy. This lesson has reverberated across the Black Sea region. Together with the souring of Russian-Turkish relations over the conflict in Syria, the turbulence created by Russia’s actions is leading to a noticeably different strategic environment.

[Also see: Mitat Çelikpala & Dimitrios Triantaphyllou, The Changing Face of Black Sea Security, May 31]

Russia’s Increased Power Projection

Crimea has always occupied a strategic position in the Black Sea. Great powers fought for control of the peninsula for centuries. Russia’s de facto control now allows for considerably greater power projection, both in the region and beyond. Thanks to a long-term lease with Kyiv, Russia had a limited military presence in Crimea for years, but after annexing the peninsula Russia has embarked on an accelerated and ambitious military build-up. The process of expanding and modernizing the Black Sea fleet is underway, and new submarines and frigates have been commissioned. This has been coupled with an increase in land and air forces, leading to the presence of a significant joint strike force that appears to be more offensive than defensive.

New Russian military and strategic doctrines assign an essential role to Crimea. In this, Moscow’s hands are untied. Russia suspended its participation in the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) in 2007, and then withdrew in March 2015, leaving it free to militarize Crimea at will. Russia has placed in Crimea Iskander ballistic missiles, which cover large portions of the Black Sea region, including in Ukraine, Moldova, Romania, and Turkey. Russia has even emphasized its alleged right to deploy nuclear weapons in Crimea, and already there are strategic nuclear-capable bombers stationed in the peninsula.

Russian control over the Kerch Strait has also basically cut off access to and from the Azov Sea. In addition, one underappreciated outcome of Crimea’s annexation is that Russia has taken control of Ukraine’s rich offshore oil and gas resources, delivering a terrible blow to Ukraine’s ambitious plans for eventually achieving energy independence.

The Reaction of Regional Actors

This shift in Russian capabilities, however, has altered perceptions of relative power in the Black Sea region beyond Ukraine. Russia’s naval capabilities have long been vastly inferior to those of NATO and, specifically, of the largest maritime force in the region, Turkey. The latter continues to enjoy its dominance, but the trend of increasing Russian power is unsettling. These circumstances could eventually produce a local arms race.

Turkey’s role since the Crimea annexation was initially ambivalent. Ankara formally criticized Russia’s aggression and declared its support for the inviolability of Ukraine’s territorial integrity. At the same time, Turkey took no action and did not sanction Russia. In fact, Turkey benefited enormously from Western sanctions as they increased Turkish trade with Russia. The most important elements of the Russo-Turkish partnership—substantial mutual trade, energy cooperation, massive tourist influxes from Russia to Turkey—appeared to be undamaged.

This changed after Turkey downed a Russian military jet that had entered Turkish airspace at the end of November 2015. Bilateral relations are unlikely to return to pre-incident levels. The notion that the Black Sea region could be kept under a kind of Russian-Turkish condominium that preserves the region as a “lake” of peace and stability no longer looks so convincing.

Smaller regional states like Romania and Bulgaria have more reason to be alarmed. These NATO members rely fully on the alliance’s security guarantees. The U.S. and NATO military presence in these states was limited prior to the Ukraine conflict, mainly to provide support for coalition operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Romania also hosts a key new site for NATO’s European missile defense system. Both Bucharest and Sofia have been welcoming of new ideas and initiatives to boost their own defenses. However, they have grown impatient by NATO’s relatively slow efforts to adapt to the changing situation. They have expressed interest in bilateral defense and security cooperation and also seem to favor a continued—and possibly expanded—U.S. military presence.

“Frozen” Conflicts Even Further From Solutions

The strategic environment has also changed with regard to the Black Sea region’s so-called “frozen conflicts.” Since March 2014, Russia has brought Abkhazia and South Ossetia more tightly under its control. The Armenian–Azerbaijani conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh has escalated. Finally, the prospects for achieving a settlement over Transnistria, the one conflict observers believed could be solved, now seem dim, as Moscow has renewed its efforts to keep this enclave under its control.

The Limited Role of the EU

The EU has had a long history of neglecting the Black Sea region. Reacting to criticism of this, the EU launched a Black Sea Synergy program in 2008, which was quickly seen as a surrogate for a more responsible and proactive regional strategy. Even with two EU members in the region, the EU has not really become a regional player.

Moreover, the Ukraine crisis, like others the EU has been dealing with lately, has shown that the EU is far from able to pursue a coherent security, foreign, and defense policy. The EU responded to Russia’s annexation and intervention with condemnation and sanctions. But it basically subcontracted its efforts to achieve a resolution of the crisis to two of its members, Germany and France.

Stepping Up NATO

For now, NATO is trying to walk the line between developing an appropriate response to Russian aggression, on the one hand, and avoiding the start of a new Cold War, on the other. In the Alliance’s approach, the Baltic region has emerged as a priority. Whether the Black Sea region will become a similar focus for NATO remains an open question. For years, NATO has avoided formulating a concrete Black Sea strategy, but perhaps this will now change.

It has become clear that some older local security initiatives aimed at providing for the security of the region, notably “Black Sea Harmony” and “BLACKSEAFOR” have failed most dramatically. The main supporter of these initiatives is Turkey, which has traditionally opposed a greater NATO presence in the region. Now, however, it is bolstering its role not just as an individual state and regional power but as a member of a broader security alliance with 27 other countries behind its back.

This comment is derived from a PONARS Eurasias workshop held in Istanbul, February 4-6, 2016.

 


Also see:

Mitat Çelikpala and Dimitrios Triantaphyllou, The Changing Face of Black Sea Security, PONARS Eurasia Commentary, May 31, 2016

 

Related Topics
  • Black Sea
  • Dubovyk
Previous Article
  • In the News | Hовости

Alexseev/Hale survey shows Russians are not interested in further territorial expansion

  • May 31, 2016
  • PONARS Eurasia
View
Next Article
  • Commentary | Комментарии

The Changing Face of Black Sea Security

  • May 31, 2016
  • PONARS Eurasia
View
You May Also Like
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем

Kyiv-Washington Relations in Times of Colossal War: The Ultimate Test of a Strategic Partnership

  • Volodymyr Dubovyk
  • January 11, 2023
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем

Prevailing Soviet Legacies

  • Irina Busygina and Mikhail Filippov
  • December 27, 2022
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем

In Russia’s Nuclear Messaging to West and Ukraine, Putin Plays Both Bad and Good Cop

  • Simon Saradzhyan
  • December 23, 2022
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем

Ukraine’s Asymmetric Responses to the Russian Invasion

  • Nurlan Aliyev
  • July 28, 2022
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем
  • Territorial Conflict

Dominating Ukraine’s Sky

  • Volodymyr Dubovyk
  • March 5, 2022
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем

Russian Anti-War Protests and the State’s Response

  • Lauren McCarthy
  • March 4, 2022
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии

Путин и Лукашенко

  • Konstantin Sonin
  • August 29, 2020
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии

Отравление оппозиционеров в России превратилось в регулярную практику

  • Vladimir Gel'man
  • August 22, 2020

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

PONARS Eurasia
  • About
  • Membership
  • Policy Memos
  • Recommended
  • Events
Powered by narva.io

Permissions & Citation Guidelines

Input your search keywords and press Enter.