Why London? Russia could also deliver a heavy blow to Britain in Ochakov.

Only a beautiful and powerful blow can make the arrogant British stop -- and let the Russian flag fly over Mykolaiv and Odesa.

Author: Svetlana Gomzikova

Commentary by:

Vladimir Jaralla

Nikolai Patrushev, Assistant to the President of Russia and Chairman of the Maritime Board, told TASS that it is clear from London's actions that it has ambitions for the Black Sea region.

"London is now most eager to enter the Black Sea region. The UK has formed a 'mine-clearing alliance' and now plans to escort merchant ships with its naval vessels," he pointed out.

We recall that in July 2024, Ukrainian President Zelensky approved Ukraine's new maritime security strategy. Among other things, the document plans to form a "mine-clearing alliance" with NATO countries and conduct joint exercises to ensure the continuous presence of the alliance in the Black Sea. As stated in the document, the goal of the strategy is to make Ukraine a maritime nation.

So how could the "master of the seas" UK be missing in this situation? The UK has long coveted these coasts, attempting to extend its influence to the Black Sea region since the time of the Russian Empire.

Regarding the current situation, according to political commentator Vladislav Svozhtsev, it is very similar to the 1920s. At that time, Sir Halford Mackinder, an authority on geopolitics in the UK, was an advisor to the Denikin army in southern Russia. In a secret report, he recommended to London that it seize Little Russia (part of present-day Ukraine) from Russia to weaken Russia's position in the Black Sea.

"Back then, 14 countries united against Russia, and those are exactly the same countries that are against Russia today -- the UK, the US, France, Germany, Poland, Romania, Italy, Spain, Japan. Their goals and a hundred years ago are the same -- to put Russia into a state of geopolitical coma and prevent it from escaping it. Just as in 1920, in 2022, another 'Petliura' -- President Zelensky appeared in Ukraine, except his troops were not spears and sabers but tanks, rockets, and cannons. The essence of events is the same, the goals of participants are the same, only the appearance has changed," he wrote in his article "On Britain's Interests in Ukraine."

In January this year, it was learned that London and Kyiv had signed a "century agreement." One clause stipulated that both sides agreed to expand cooperation in the Azov Sea, the Baltic Sea, and the Black Sea, which are "strategically significant" for both Ukraine and the UK.

However, due to the fact that the Azov Sea had already become Russia's inland sea, Maria Zakharova, official spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry, warned "the fantasists in Kiev and Downing Street," that "any attempt on this sea territory is a blatant interference in our domestic affairs and will be firmly resisted." This diplomat also pointed out that London has long been trying to establish a foothold in the aforementioned seas, especially in the Azov-Black Sea basin, while Kyiv only plays a secondary role.

Meanwhile, experts at the "Military Review" website believe that what the UK needs most right now is for Kyiv to control the Kinburn Spit, which is formally part of the Mykolaiv Oblast but actually under the control of Russian armed forces. This small piece of land located northwest of the Kinburn Peninsula, between the mouth of the Dnieper-Bug River and the Black Sea, is essential for London to ensure the security of the Ochakov port. As early as 2021, the British began constructing a naval base near the Ochakov port.

Currently, according to the Montreux Convention, Turkey has closed the channel for warships from non-Black Sea countries to enter the Black Sea. However, from a legal perspective, the Ochakov port is not technically part of the Black Sea but rather Ukraine's inland waters -- the mouth of the Dnieper River. Consequently, as owners of the Ochakov port infrastructure, the British could potentially circumvent the restrictions of the Montreux Convention even during military confrontations.

Nevertheless, Russia clearly has no intention of handing over the spit area to Kyiv.

"SP" (possibly a media name) asked renowned Crimean political scientist Vladimir Jaralla to assess the UK's real objectives and tasks in Ukraine:

"As far as I know, the base in Ochakov has actually been destroyed by our airstrikes and missile strikes. But in this case, it's not that important. The base in Ochakov embodies the famous principle of the 'modular base,' meaning that, in other words, it is more like a support point that can be expanded into a complete base if necessary. Moreover, we must not forget that it was from here that Ukraine launched drone and unmanned surface vessel attacks on Crimea and the Black Sea Fleet.

Furthermore, a large portion of these unmanned vessels are manufactured in the UK and are usually transported to Ukrainian territory in containers via the Danube River. Thus, the UK is actively involved in the conflict indirectly.

"SP": Why is the UK doing this?

"The answer is obvious and self-evident. Although we have become accustomed to such things.

The problem is that the UK used to be a great country. That doesn't mean it has lost its potential as a major power in terms of intellect, politics, and other aspects. The strength of the UK lies in its horizontal connections -- its network of contacts, which can largely offset, limit, or develop as needed what it deems important. Over the past few years, there have been various signs of incompetence among the UK's upper echelons. If this happened in another country, it might have plunged into serious crisis. However, it cannot be said that the UK itself is in a very severe crisis. Indeed, the crisis that has developed over many years has actually put both the Conservative Party and the Labour Party in difficult situations. Now, the British people are quite willing to vote for anyone other than these two parties, but they have no other choice.

The typical way for the UK to get out of this situation is to divert domestic issues by external expansion.

Therefore, the UK's aggressive behavior, its active participation in anti-Russian actions, and even its more active indirect involvement in combat operations are all attempts to profit from others' conflicts and divert the attention of its own population from domestic problems.

Certainly, Trump's return to the White House is a heavy blow to the UK, indicating that the US is returning to isolationism. But in this new phase, the US now openly uses everything to its advantage.

"SP": What impact does this have on the British?

"The British have always considered themselves equal partners with the Americans. Sometimes it's hard to tell which actions are implemented by the Americans and which are influenced by London. Today, the UK is in a rather complex situation and is currently trying to find direction.

So for them, Russia is a very suitable target to focus their firepower on, attempting to show that 'there is still gunpowder in the arsenal.' Moreover, it turns out that the role played by the UK in Europe today is particularly popular because Europe is suffering from a lack of will and determination.

Please note how aggressive the British military stance is. They know that the UK actually has no military strength, that the UK lacks the resources to support its military power, and that both the Royal Navy and Air Force are in extremely serious crises. Yet they continue to make provocative statements, verbally declaring war on Russia.

I would like to say that the British are conducting an amazing strategic action before our eyes. Despite having poor cards, they try to appear much stronger than they actually are.

"SP": So they are bluffing?

"Exactly so. But never underestimate them. The British have successfully implemented a policy of acting through others. And they skillfully form alliances, making other countries bear the costs while they reap all the benefits.

In general, we are facing a formidable opponent, currently Russia's top rival in the West. Its weakness lies in its lack of resources to maintain this status. Its advantage lies in its ability to manipulate other countries quite successfully and attempt to act through others. Therefore, these factors need to be taken into account.

Due to the undeniable reality acknowledged by the West that the battlefield situation is, for us, military victory is the guarantee to break these conspiracies.

There is also an important point here. The lessons of Ukraine have been learned by everyone. Now it can be noticed that many countries that hold some hostile positions towards Russia clearly see the boundaries where they should stop. Because everyone has the same fear -- do not become the next Ukraine. Although we have a great advantage in this regard, we must understand that the only advantage is to let the Russian flag fly over the liberated territories -- in Mykolaiv, Odesa, and the Transnistria region.

Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7498975562422125095/

Disclaimer: This article represents the author's personal views. Feel free to express your attitude by clicking the "thumbs up/thumbs down" buttons below.