SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post

Commander Wallace · 12-10-15, 02:09 PM

[QUOTE=Aktungbby;2365094]A little background there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits Throwing in the the geopolitical issues of the Trojan War (1250 BC) The Peloponnesian War(450 BC) and Gallipoli over this waterway and 'nuthin goes outta style' in 3000 years; Putin took the impoverished Crimea back to get a rent-free port at Sebastopol and I suspect his involvement in Syria is a WWII channel-ports style ploy to expand his naval front-door to the Mediterranean with bases on the Levantine coast west of the easily closed strait. This would greatly circumvent NATO bottling up the southern 'prong' of the Russian Navy as Putin continues his dream of recreating the Stalinist Soviet Empire buffer-zone which is what the Ukraine fracas is about. .....IMHO

EDIT: http://www.activistpost.com/2015/12/is-turkey-closing-the-bosphorus-strait-escalating-with-russia.html [QUOTE]The 1936 Montreaux Convention on the Regime of the Straits governs the passage of ships both naval and civilian through the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus. Article 2 of the agreement states that “merchant vessels shall enjoy complete freedom of transit and navigation in the Straits, by day and by night, under any flag and with any kind of cargo, without any formalities.” Small and Medium naval warships and vessels must be permitted to pass through the Strait as well during times of peace with Black Sea powers able to sail any class of ship through the waterway. During times of war, the discretion is left up to the Turkish government.

Nothing new here with the exception of the Trojan and Peloponnesian War(450 BC) and Gallipoli .
I'm pretty sure I posted the same thing back in post #135.

One thing to consider. Turkey maintains control of the Dardanelle straits, the Sea of Marmara and the Bosporus These are essentially waterways in Turkey connecting the Aegean Sea and the Mediterranean to the Black Sea.
Control of these routes of passage was granted to Turkey under the 1936 Montreux Convention .
This convention has always been a source of tension between Russia and Turkey . Stalin himself chaffed at Turkish control of the straits . In negotiations of the non aggression pact between Germany and the Soviet Union, Stalin indicated a desire to take control of the straits in exchange for the signing of the non aggression pact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montre...of_the_Straits

Russia sends supplies from it's Novorossiysk naval base in the Black Sea to Russian ports in Tartus and Latakia. Russian vessels have enjoyed passage through the straits but Russian flagged vessels are now said to " wait for hours " before being allowed passage .

Logistically speaking, If Russia can't resupply their forces, then what. I'm sure supplies could be airlifted in but still. The question is, how important are the straits to Russia with regards to resupply of their forces in Syria ? How much of their economy in the form of cargo ships pass through those straits ?

If Turkey believes or considers itself in imminent danger of attack, Turkey can legally close or restrict access to those waterways Under article 20 and 21 of the Montreux convention.

The following is taken from the pages of the convention signed in 1936 .

TRADUCTION - TRANSLATION CONVENTION REGARDING THE

REGIME OF THE STRAITS SIGNED AT MONTREUX, JULY 20 TH, 1936

French official text communicated by the Permanent Delegate of Turkey to the League of Nations.

The registration of this Convention took place December 11th, 1936.

HIS MAJESTY

Article 19.

In time of war, Turkey not being belligerent, warships shall enjoy complete freedom of transit and

navigation through the Straits under the same conditions as those laid down in Article 10 to 18.

Vessels of war belonging to belligerent Powers shall not however, pass through the Straits except in

cases arising out of the application of Article 25 of the present Convention, and in cases of assistance

rendered to a State victim of aggression in virtue of a treaty of mutual assistance binding-Turkey,

concluded within the framework of the Covenant of the League of Nations, and registered and

published in accordance with the provisions of Article 18 of the Covenant.

In the exceptional cases provided for in the preceding paragraph, the limitations laid down in Article 10

to 18 of the present Convention shall not be applicable.

Notwithstanding the prohibition of passage laid down in paragraph 2 above, vessels of war belonging

to belligerent Powers, whether they are Black Sea Powers or not, which have become separated from

their bases, may return thereto.

Vessels of war belonging to belligerent Powers shall not make any capture, exercise the right of visit

and search, or carry out any hostile act in the Straits.

Article 20.

In time of war, Turkey being belligerent, the provisions of Articles 10 to 18 shall not be applicable; the

passage of warships shall be left entirely to the discretion of the Turkish Government.

Article 21.

Should Turkey consider herself to be threatened with imminent danger of war she shall have the right

to apply the provisions of Article 20 of the present Convention.

Vessels which have passed through the Straits before Turkey has made use of the powers conferred

upon her by the preceding paragraph, and which thus find themselves separated from their bases,

may return thereto. It is, however, understood that Turkey may deny this right to vessels of war

belonging to the State whose attitude has given rise to the application of the present Article.

Should the Turkish Government make use of the powers conferred by the first paragraph of the

present Article, a notification to that effect shall be addressed to the High Contracting Parties and to

the Secretary-General of the League of Nations.

If the Council of the League of Nations decide by a majority of two-thirds that the measures thus taken

by Turkey are not justified, and if such should also be the opinion of the majority of the High

Contracting Parties signatories to the present Convention, the Turkish Government undertakes to

discontinue the measures in question as also any measures which may have been taken under Article

6 of the present Convention.

12-10-15, 02:09 PM	#175
Commander Wallace Navy Seal Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Under the sea in an Octupus garden in the shade Posts: 5,338 Downloads: 366 Uploads: 0	[QUOTE=Aktungbby;2365094]A little background there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits Throwing in the the geopolitical issues of the Trojan War (1250 BC) The Peloponnesian War(450 BC) and Gallipoli over this waterway and 'nuthin goes outta style' in 3000 years; Putin took the impoverished Crimea back to get a rent-free port at Sebastopol and I suspect his involvement in Syria is a WWII channel-ports style ploy to expand his naval front-door to the Mediterranean with bases on the Levantine coast *west* of the easily closed strait. This would greatly circumvent NATO bottling up the southern 'prong' of the Russian Navy as Putin continues his dream of recreating the Stalinist Soviet Empire buffer-zone which is what the Ukraine fracas is about. .....IMHO EDIT: http://www.activistpost.com/2015/12/is-turkey-closing-the-bosphorus-strait-escalating-with-russia.html [QUOTE]The 1936 Montreaux Convention on the Regime of the Straits governs the passage of ships both naval and civilian through the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus. Article 2 of the agreement states that “merchant vessels shall enjoy complete freedom of transit and navigation in the Straits, by day and by night, under any flag and with any kind of cargo, without any formalities.” Small and Medium naval warships and vessels must be permitted to pass through the Strait as well during times of peace with Black Sea powers able to sail any class of ship through the waterway. During times of war, the discretion is left up to the Turkish government. Nothing new here with the exception of the Trojan and Peloponnesian War(450 BC) and Gallipoli . I'm pretty sure I posted the same thing back in post #135. One thing to consider. Turkey maintains control of the Dardanelle straits, the Sea of Marmara and the Bosporus These are essentially waterways in Turkey connecting the Aegean Sea and the Mediterranean to the Black Sea. Control of these routes of passage was granted to Turkey under the 1936 Montreux Convention . This convention has always been a source of tension between Russia and Turkey . Stalin himself chaffed at Turkish control of the straits . In negotiations of the non aggression pact between Germany and the Soviet Union, Stalin indicated a desire to take control of the straits in exchange for the signing of the non aggression pact. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montre...of_the_Straits Russia sends supplies from it's Novorossiysk naval base in the Black Sea to Russian ports in Tartus and Latakia. Russian vessels have enjoyed passage through the straits but Russian flagged vessels are now said to " wait for hours " before being allowed passage . Logistically speaking, If Russia can't resupply their forces, then what. I'm sure supplies could be airlifted in but still. The question is, how important are the straits to Russia with regards to resupply of their forces in Syria ? How much of their economy in the form of cargo ships pass through those straits ? If Turkey believes or considers itself in imminent danger of attack, Turkey can legally close or restrict access to those waterways Under article 20 and 21 of the Montreux convention. The following is taken from the pages of the convention signed in 1936 . TRADUCTION - TRANSLATION CONVENTION REGARDING THE REGIME OF THE STRAITS SIGNED AT MONTREUX, JULY 20 TH, 1936 French official text communicated by the Permanent Delegate of Turkey to the League of Nations. The registration of this Convention took place December 11th, 1936. HIS MAJESTY Article 19. In time of war, Turkey not being belligerent, warships shall enjoy complete freedom of transit and navigation through the Straits under the same conditions as those laid down in Article 10 to 18. Vessels of war belonging to belligerent Powers shall not however, pass through the Straits except in cases arising out of the application of Article 25 of the present Convention, and in cases of assistance rendered to a State victim of aggression in virtue of a treaty of mutual assistance binding-Turkey, concluded within the framework of the Covenant of the League of Nations, and registered and published in accordance with the provisions of Article 18 of the Covenant. In the exceptional cases provided for in the preceding paragraph, the limitations laid down in Article 10 to 18 of the present Convention shall not be applicable. Notwithstanding the prohibition of passage laid down in paragraph 2 above, vessels of war belonging to belligerent Powers, whether they are Black Sea Powers or not, which have become separated from their bases, may return thereto. Vessels of war belonging to belligerent Powers shall not make any capture, exercise the right of visit and search, or carry out any hostile act in the Straits. Article 20. In time of war, Turkey being belligerent, the provisions of Articles 10 to 18 shall not be applicable; the passage of warships shall be left entirely to the discretion of the Turkish Government. Article 21. Should Turkey consider herself to be threatened with imminent danger of war she shall have the right to apply the provisions of Article 20 of the present Convention. Vessels which have passed through the Straits before Turkey has made use of the powers conferred upon her by the preceding paragraph, and which thus find themselves separated from their bases, may return thereto. It is, however, understood that Turkey may deny this right to vessels of war belonging to the State whose attitude has given rise to the application of the present Article. Should the Turkish Government make use of the powers conferred by the first paragraph of the present Article, a notification to that effect shall be addressed to the High Contracting Parties and to the Secretary-General of the League of Nations. If the Council of the League of Nations decide by a majority of two-thirds that the measures thus taken by Turkey are not justified, and if such should also be the opinion of the majority of the High Contracting Parties signatories to the present Convention, the Turkish Government undertakes to discontinue the measures in question as also any measures which may have been taken under Article 6 of the present Convention.