Reply With QuoteSpanish/Moroccan TW within the strait itself, British Gibraltar and its TW is not affecting the actual passage, IIRC.
Although a lot of ships choose to bunker there.
Is Gibraltar strait part of international waters or British, Spanish and Moroccan territorial waters?
Spanish/Moroccan TW within the strait itself, British Gibraltar and its TW is not affecting the actual passage, IIRC.
Although a lot of ships choose to bunker there.
Last week when Clinton called them out about a report that they were trying to ship helos to Syria.Originally Posted by Az_esm
In terms of the ground situation in Syria, how would this setback affect the Syrian govt in terms of their capability? I have not come across reports of the use of gunship.
Logistically speaking, how difficult will it for Syria to have the gunships delivered to?
How many refurbished Syrian Mi-25s is Russia currently in possession of? Three was it? Honestly how much of an impact will three Hind Ds make?
If the ship is currently uninsured, the Bunkers Convention allows the RN to board and inspect the vessel anywhere in its EEZ (not just territorial waters). Russia might rather have to recall the vessel than have it put under a microscope.
An embargo is an embargo. If you set it aside for "only" 3 Hinds why have it in the first place?
Syrian army recently speeded up deployment of gunships (Mi-8 and Mi-24) in battlezones. Given that Syrian rebels do not posses MANPADs it is logical move (especially given how ground forces are loosing ground in several provinces). Howeve given that all in all SyAAF posses about 35 Hinds (including those on this ship) and rebels have no means of countering them it wouldn´t be that great setback, they can still use the one they have (at least until rebel unit penetrate air base perimeter and take them down with recoilless rifles as they´ve done once and destroyed one MiG-23).
And as for delivery of gunships, Russia can still send them by air-route, naval route is just cheaper.
thanks for the info. I wonder whether the MANPADS from Libya will make an appearance once Syria makes heavy usage of its Hind fleet.
If I had to guess they will. Up until now rebels concentrated on obtaining three types of weaponry from their smuggler contacts and from deserters
a, small arms
b, anti-tank missiles (which attainment can be seen on large amount of destroyed armour in recent weeks)
c, explosives (to use as IEDs on roads for cutting logistical lines and ambushes)
with support of gulf monarchies and Turkish intelligence and army throwing blind eye on smugglers they largely succeeded in attainment of semi-sufficient amount of these types. With deployment of Hinds I guess they will concentrate on MANPADs. All Libyan authorities (ranging from government to militia commanders) are sympathetic to their cause and wouldn´t have half problem with shipping MANPADs to some Turkish port and than handing them over to smugglers for small price (if any).
They were made 20 years ago for Syria. Too cool strategic planning for helping Assad in civil war, no?
The point was that Russia is not selling helixes for Syria. Peskov, MOF's press secretary, added that Russia is only repairing the old ones, that Syria already has.
sorry for OT, while not being a sea wolf myself, it is clear, at least to me, that the (N)orthern (A)rctic (R)oute will become a major supply artery in the nearest future - 20 years from now +/-. hopefully I will see some of the familiar faces in this joint in those times to acknowledge that I was right. that is what Columbus had dreamed of, that is what the Scandinavians had always reached to, but failed, etc.. China to Europe closest route, and IMHO the least economically expensive also, not mentioning the Mother's Russia inner riches. forget that Russia is developing rapidly - it took just 20 years for the Russians to start recreating themselves after the SU collapse (show me another world empire that did the same on such short notice). whoever mentioned the Russian bureaucratic criteria is wrong and has no knowledge of the matter. this is the Eldorado of a kind))
Well it is about time for Russia to show how far they are willing to go for Syria.
similarly, one could ask, how far will America go to push it's agenda. it could swallow Syria. then Iran - no doubt. but eventually there is always a stopper. it might be the commonality of factors or it could be one very punchy factor. you can never tell them bees.
????
I have no doubt of their effects, I have doubt about the legality of it, especially as Russia is not exactly supplying arms to Syria and the British insurer is not directly doing any sort of business with Syria; but with Russia which is a country that is under no embargo. But I'm no lawyer, so whatever.
It's perfectly legal for an insurer to drop you at moments notice its actually in the T&C of maritime insurance contracts (I have read a few). If you in any way cause an increase in exposure to risk beyond the threshold set at the time of writing the contract then they can pull cover. As for legal pursuit that would fall on stony ground in any UK court.
Posting Permissions
