Tag: Russia in Syria

Categories
Quick Analysis

Syrian Crisis a Danger to World

The dangers in Syria may be even more serious than most believe. As tensions escalate over a chemical attack on civilians, the region moves closer to direct conflict between Israeli and Syrian forces, and, most troubling, a potential clash, whether on purpose or accidentally, between American and Russian militaries. The use of outlawed weapons has been a “red Line’ issue for the United States, although President Obama ignored his own ultimatum, and chose instead to believe what turned out to be insincere Kremlin promises to eliminate Bashar al-Assad’s illegal weaponry.

CBS News reports that “Syrian opposition activists and rescuers said …that a poison gas attack on the rebel-held town of Douma near the capital of Damascus killed at least 40 people. The alleged attack has been denied by the Syrian and Russian governments. Russia is Syria’s closest ally and has a major military presence in the country. Reports of the latest attack, which appeared to target civilians and young children, could not be independently verified.”

The BBC  reports that “The Syrian-American Medical Society said more than 500 people were brought to medical centres in Douma, in the Eastern Ghouta region, near the capital Damascus, with symptoms “indicative of exposure to a chemical agent”, including breathing difficulties, bluish skin, mouth foaming, corneal burns and “the emission of chlorine-like odour”.

Moscow, which denies that the Syrian government is responsible, seeks to be the dominant player in the region for a number of reasons it deems critical. Its economy depends heavily on selling energy to Europe, and a controlling position in the Middle East renders this easier. Additionally, in keeping with even pre-Communist Russian goals, it seeks access to warm-water ports for its navy, which Putin has strengthened significantly.  Assad’s willingness to allow the Kremlin to use Tartus as a major naval base is a key interest. Finally, as Moscow’s position in the area has strengthened, Turkey’s ties to NATO have weakened. Removing the Ankara government from the alliance would be an extraordinary military and diplomatic victory for Putin.

Writing in the Weekly Standard, Thomas Joscelyn  notes that “Assad’s principal international backer, Vladimir Putin, hasn’t stopped him from using of them.  [chemical weapons.] Nor has Iran, which is deeply embedded in Syria alongside Assad’s forces.,,It gets even worse, as another rogue state has reportedly facilitated Assad’s acquisition of chemical weapons: North Korea. This facilitation is especially worrisome in light of the two nations’ previous cooperation on a nuclear reactor that was destroyed by the Israelis in 2007…In March, the U.N. issued a report on North Korea’s active “prohibited military cooperation projects…stretching from Africa to the Asia-Pacific region, including ongoing ballistic missile cooperation with the Syrian Arab Republic and Myanmar, widespread conventional arms deals and cyberoperations to steal military secrets.”

The level of tension can be seen in the statements of world leaders. President Trump called Assad “an animal” for his treatment of his own civilians.  In a tweet, he stated “Many dead, including women and children, in mindless CHEMICAL attack in Syria. Area of atrocity is in lockdown and encircled by Syrian Army, making it completely inaccessible to outside world. President Putin, Russia and Iran are responsible for backing Animal Assad. Big price..”.
Missionary online viagra soft The most important thing you need to know about it. 3. But before taking any type of drug, keep in mind prescription levitra that some experts highlight that it’s not addicting plus it should not result in a . m . tired consequence, like several sleeping treatment meds make. Usually this generic viagra for sale is temporary and blood pressure returns back to normal condition by the application of any other anti-biotic form, at that movement this high potential drug has been prescribed by many physicians to treat erectile dysfunction. The vardenafil tablets india common errors done during the therapy session is the use of Kamagra tablets or oral jelly.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has expressed “deep concern”  over reports of chemical weapons being used. A statement from his spokesperson  Stéphane Dujarric  notes that the “Secretary-General called on all parties to cease fighting and restore the calm that had been in place and adhere fully to Security Council resolution 2401, adopted in February and which called for a ceasefire across Syria.  ‘While the UN is not in a position to verify these reports…the Secretary-General notes that any use of chemical weapons, if confirmed, is abhorrent, and requires a thorough investigation… Mr. Guterres explained that … he has received reports indicating sustained airstrikes and shelling on Douma that have killed civilians, destroyed infrastructure and damaged health facilities. There has also been shelling on Damascus city, reportedly killing civilians…Since 11 March, some 25,000 people have reportedly left East Ghouta, seeking shelter in the rural Damascus villages of Dweir, Adra and Herjelleh.

A separate release  from the UN reports mass evacuations from Syrian cities. “In Idlib Province alone, some 1.5 million people were now displaced in various locations, making it “the biggest refugee camp on earth in many ways,” said Mr. Egeland, who is the Senior Adviser to UN Special Envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura. Mr. Egeland also provided details about the destruction of Raqqa city, once the stronghold of Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) extremists, saying that it was even worse than in Aleppo and Homs, two other once-vibrant Syrian cities that have seen massive destruction over the course of the seven-year conflict.”

There is a clear and troubling trend that is becoming increasing apparent, and exceedingly dangerous.  In Europe, Russia has deployed short range Iskander nuclear missiles, in violation of agreements that were signed between President Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev. It has also invaded neighboring Ukraine, and now occupies Crimea. In the Middle East, it supports the use of outlawed weapons by its Syrian client state. Similarly, it has transferred weapons to Iran, which, through proxies, is directly threatening U.S. allies Israel and Saudi Arabia.

All this occurs as Putin’s massive arms buildup nears completion, and when American forces, following the Obama disinvestment period, leaves U.S. armed forces at their lowest level of strength in decades.

Moscow’s influence in the Middle East, its intimate alliance with unscrupulous governments in Tehran and Damascus, and its confidence in the capabilities of its strengthened armed forces renders the region a flashpoint for a war that spread far beyond the region.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Why Obama Finally Decided ISIS is Genocidal

Long after it had become painfully obvious to even to the most casual observers, the Obama Administration has decided that ISIS is guilty of genocide.  It has, however, failed to admit that its own incompetence led to the conditions allowing ISIS to become a powerful force.

The timing of Secretary of State Kerry’s announcement, and the deployment of Marines from the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit to Iraq, reveals much about the mindset of the Administration’s attitude towards foreign affairs, not just in the deeply troubled Middle East but also in its perception of the American role in the world.

Since the end of World War 2, the United States and its NATO partners have been the most powerful alliance on Earth, both politically and diplomatically. That partnership was hugely successful. Another world war was averted, and the Soviet Union was stared down and collapsed without yet another global conflict. A period of extraordinary prosperity was ushered in.  Numerous nations gained independence.

This was not accomplished without major cost, both to the U.S. taxpayer and to those who served and sometimes gave life or limb in the armed forces.  But the results were extraordinary.

Mr. Obama and those who ideologically agree with him nevertheless have been uncomfortable with Washington’s leading role. They disagree with the commitment of many billions of dollars to defense purposes instead of social welfare programs. They are troubled by the American philosophies of capitalism and individual rights. They seek to reduce the influence of the United States.

Reducing America’s international role from one of leadership to just one of many, or in some cases a junior partner, just feels right to them.

The conflict in Iraq had already long lost popular support before Mr. Obama took the oath of office in 2009. However, the continuing post-war presence of American troops served an important purpose.  Iraq’s internal conflicts, never far from the surface, were kept somewhat at bay as the nation moved slowly but significantly towards democracy.  Who can forget the images of Iraqi voters proudly holding up purple thumbs, signifying that they had voted for the first time in a true election? Equally as important, the presence of U.S. troops kept a lid on the influence of the darkest forces in the region.

That salutary effect was eliminated when those troops were wholly withdrawn, the last leaving on December 18, 2011, against the advice of military leaders. In 2015, the Washington Times reported that many current and former  military believed that  the untimely and complete exit “left the door open for the Islamic State’s land grab…The assessment comes from the Army chief of staff, a former Marine commandant, a former U.S. Central Command chief, a former defense secretary and, privately, from the officer running the war in Iraq against…ISIS.”

However, when their patent expired a number of online viagra no prescription medications became available on the market. Here we enlighten fast generic cialis you with some useful and constructive medicines named anti-impotent drugs. canada cialis online robertrobb.com It is a significant part of a couple’s relationship to keep their bonding alive and happier for a longer period. levitra overnight shipping Also these funguses are known to regulate the blood pressure and body temperature, boosts immune system activity, and causes the body’s natural painkillers, such as endorphins, to be released. Not long after, in 2014, ISIS began to seize territory in Syria and Iraq. Since then, as Secretary Kerry noted on March 17,    ISIS (also known as Daesh) “is responsible for genocide against groups in areas under its control, including Yezidis, Christians, and Shia Muslims. Daesh is genocidal by self-proclamation, by ideology, and by actions … Daesh is also responsible for crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing directed at these same groups and in some cases also against Sunni Muslims, Kurds, and other minorities.…Daesh killed hundreds of Yezidi men and older women in the town of Kocho … Daesh captured and enslaved thousands of Yezidi women and girls – selling them at auction, raping them at will, and destroying the communities in which they had lived for countless generations. We know that in Mosul, Qaraqosh, and elsewhere, Daesh has executed Christians solely because of their faith; that it executed 49 Coptic and Ethiopian Christians in Libya; and that it has also forced Christian women and girls into sexual slavery. We know that Daesh massacred hundreds of Shia Turkmen and Shabaks at Tal Afar and Mosul; besieged and starved the Turkmen town of Amerli; and kidnapped hundreds of Shia Turkmen women, raping many in front of their own families. We know that in areas under its control, Daesh has made a systematic effort to destroy the cultural heritage of ancient communities – destroying Armenian, Syrian Orthodox, and Roman Catholic churches; blowing up monasteries and the tombs of prophets; desecrating cemeteries; and in Palmyra, even beheading the 83-year-old scholar who had spent a lifetime preserving antiquities there.”

The American military response—limited use of bombing runs– was little more than the armed equivalent of a pinprick.

The premature American withdrawal emboldened more than just ISIS. Moscow has long coveted a much larger role in the Middle East for several reasons.

Russia’s navy is handicapped by a geography that makes many of its ports ice-bound for a portion of the year, so warm water alternatives are a much desired commodity.  Hence, the importance of its naval base at the Syrian city of Tartus. This goal can also be seen in the recent agreement with Cuba to allow the Kremlin’s naval vessels to dock there.

Syria’s Bashir al-Assad has been a valuable ally for allowing the continuation of Russia’s armed presence in his nation, but the value of a powerful presence in the Middle East doesn’t end there.  Moscow’s economy is dependent on the export of energy.  The ability to influence the Middle Eastern energy economy is a major factor in Putin’s aggressive planning for the future.

Russia’s active use of military force in the Middle East was not aimed at stopping the depredations of ISIS, but on the twin goals of propping up a regime friendly to Moscow’s military goals and demonstrating the growing power of the Russian/Iranian alliance, which has now clearly replaced Western influence in the region. Israel, in particular, has been placed greatly at risk by the rise of Iranian influence in the region and Tehran’s increasingly powerful missile arsenal.

President Putin, however, has used the atrocities committed by ISIS as a justification for his commitment of Russian forces in the region. Secretary Kerry’s long overdue acknowledgement of ISIS’ depredations and the deployment of Marines follow in its wake.  What was unacceptable as an American initiative—particularly the commitment of ground troops—is now acceptable to the White House, so long as it is an act that dovetails with, and serves as a junior partner to, the actions of the Russian/Iranian axis.

 

Categories
NY Analysis

Understanding Putin, Understanding Obama

Putin follows a classic pattern

The deployment of Russian military power to the Middle East, in alliance with both Iran and the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad, (who has committed massive human rights offenses and has violated international accords through his use of banned weaponry) provides conclusory evidence of Vladimir Putin’s worldview.

Simply put, it is unquestionably evident that the Russian President, who invaded Ukraine, dramatically ramped up his nation’s military spending, violated nuclear arms agreements, resumed nuclear bomber patrols along American coastlines, and is establishing bases in Cuba and Nicaragua, seeks to make his nation the world’s preeminent military power.

In his determined quest to attain his goal, Putin has ignored international opinion, arms treaties, and even the objections of several public figures within his own homeland.

He has succeeded. Despite the increasingly hollow sounding claims from the White House and politicians of both parties that America is the world’s strongest nation, the fact is that the Russian-Chinese-Iranian axis has supplanted the U.S.-NATO alliance as the globe’s most significant military.

That status is based both on the power of Putin’s armed forces and on his own steely determination. Unconstrained by public opinion, he has displayed no qualms about partnering with pariah states such as Iran and Syria.  He pays no political price for telling outrights lies, such as he told when he claimed he was going into Syria to fight ISIS, or that some of his new missiles do not defy treaty prohibitions, or that his claims to expanded Arctic territories are legal.  Indeed, he has unabashedly stifled dissent within Russia through physical, financial, and extralegal intimidation.

One of the key links in America’s victory in the first Cold War was the shared interest of Washington and Beijing in taming the Kremlin.  Putin has reversed all that, and the Chinese, with their booming economy and greatly expanded military, now are allied with Russia against the U.S.

In essence, Putin is the classic expansionist leader, not dissimilar from those that preceded him in Germany and Japan in World War II.  Indeed, it must be remembered that Russia began the Second World War in an alliance with the Nazis. Moscow only changed sides after Hitler invaded the USSR.

President Obama’s fundamental transformation

Putin, then, is not hard to understand. He is almost a stereotype.  But what about President Obama?

In the short span of his seven years in office, the United States has descended from the “world’s only superpower, the indispensable nation” to an increasingly irrelevant entity. This did not occur by accident, bad luck, inadvertence, or incompetence.

Almost immediately upon taking office, Mr. Obama began alienating America’s allies.  He gave up British nuclear secrets to Russia during arms negotiations. He backed away from agreements with Poland to base defensive missiles within its borders. He prematurely withdrew American forces from Iraq, which created the vacuum that gave rise to ISIS. He gave a departure date for the drawdown of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, and opened negotiations with the Taliban in violation of a long-standing policy against speaking with terrorists.  He failed to lodge even a diplomatic protest when China stole offshore territory from the Philippines, and when Beijing intimidated Japan.  He utterly abandoned and even assisted in the elimination of the pro-western regime of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and the anti-al-Qaeda regime of Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi. He engaged in a unilateral withdrawal of American tanks from Europe.

In complete violation of U.S. treaty obligations to the Ukraine, the White House failed to take any serious steps, other than minor sanctions, against the Kremlin in response to its Ukrainian invasion.

President Obama’s alienation of Israel has become so complete that, following Iran’s call for the elimination of the Jewish state, he ordered Secretary of State John Kerry and Ambassador Samantha Power to be absent when Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke at the U.N. to condemn that despicable statement.

It wasn’t just nation-states that were abandoned. He failed to take into consideration the plight of Cuban dissidents when he opened relations with Cuba (a month after Havana agreed to let the Russian navy back in!) He failed to dwell on the oppression of dissidents in Iran and China in his discussions with the governments of those nations.
Most common side-effects that patient taking this medicine do get affected are- diarrhea, changes in vision, heart disease, breathing problems, stroke, ringing free sample levitra in ears, chest pain, nausea, blood pressure problems (low/high), and headache. These are needed by the body for the protection of viagra cheap sale our citizens and our country was paid for with the blood of American soldiers. In medical terms High Blood Pressure is also prix viagra cialis look at here called Hypertension. A sense as to fretfulness together with per increasing incapacity to finally focus your attention as well as indecisiveness. slovak-republic.org buy levitra 6.
Mr. Obama complemented his diplomatic withdrawal from the world and alienation of allies with his demoralization and defunding of the U.S. military. He signed an agreement with Moscow allowing it to gain, for the first time in history, superiority in strategic nuclear weapons. He has even floated a trial balloon about unilateral cuts in the already diminished American atomic deterrent.

The dire results of Mr. Obama’s actions are indisputably evident in the replacement of U.S. influence and power throughout the world with those who are antagonistic towards western interests. While there has always been a segment of the American political leadership and the general public that has sought to reduce defense spending and decrease overseas entanglements, the extreme degree of the current White House’s actions are far beyond any prior leanings in that direction.

The question that remains is why the President chose this course, particularly at a time when the expansionist actions of Russia, China, Iran, and Islamic terrorists render it a dangerous and clearly mistaken plan.

The answer lies in not in foreign policy, but in domestic spending programs. Mr. Obama’s desire to “fundamentally transform America” (which he stated explicitly in his October 2008 campaign stop in Columbia, Missouri, and implicitly in many other forums) requires vast funding. During his tenure in office, extraordinary increases in new and expanded entitlement programs have occurred as part of his transformation, and he seeks to do even more.

The U.S. already imposes the highest corporate taxes in the developed world, and individual income taxes are equally excessive. Increasing either is politically untenable.  Deficit spending has reached its limit with the U.S. already in an $18 trillion hole, and already threatens to institute a Greek-style meltdown even without further increases.

Defense spending, which accounts for about 18% of the U.S. budget, is seen by the current White House as a piggy bank to finance its goal of turning America into a European-style social welfare state.

There are two problems with that course of action. The first is purely economic.

In every instance where a social welfare-concentrated government has been attempted, the results have ranged from disappointing to absolutely disastrous.  Whether tried in the extreme, as in communist nations, or in moderation, such as the social democrat states of Europe, the concept has not produced a robust economy.  As Margaret Thatcher once said, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

Two factors have allowed Europe’s social –spending oriented states to survive as long as they have: the defense of the continent was provided by the United States, virtually eliminating the lion’s share of that burden (the United Kingdom, for example, spends only 2% of its budget on defense) and the comparatively unfettered American economy continued to be the economic engine of the planet.

European populations and governments have not shown the political will to replace the American defense umbrella, and their social welfare economies do not possess the ability to do so, particularly with the weakened U.S. economy incapable of being a driving force for financial growth.

President Obama apparently recognizes this. He made a reckless calculation that the only means to finance his domestic spending programs was to retreat from the U.S. post-World War II role as the bulwark of the defense of what used to be called the “free world.”  His apparent hope was that if America retreated from international activities and slashed defense spending, Russia, China, and other forces would do the same.

Obviously, that hasn’t happened. The exact opposite occurred. A militarily and diplomatically weakened America encouraged aggression on the part of expansionist forces. However, despite the abundant and overwhelming evidence that his gamble has completely failed, Mr. Obama refuses to change course.

That leaves the world at a precipice last seen in the 1930’s.

Categories
Quick Analysis

America’s Middle Eastern Policy Collapse

The collapse of the Obama Administration’s policy towards the Islamic world is in abundant evidence. The extent of the Administration’s mistakes is staggering, and the ramifications are global.

Whatever opinion one may have had of the war that deposed Saddam Hussein, President Obama’s decision to prematurely withdraw American troops from Iraq, a nation that was struggling but nevertheless slowly moving towards stability and democracy has proven disastrous. The vacuum that was created allowed ISIS to rise to great power.

In turn, the White House’s subsequent failure to bring sufficient strength to bear against ISIS, either through American airpower or through providing the heavy weaponry needed by the Kurds to do the job, allowed Iran and Russia to extend their influence throughout the Middle East. For the first time, Russian forces, in alliance with the terrible regimes in Iran, the key supporter of global terrorism, and Syria, a nation whose government commits massive atrocities against its own people and has caused the worst refugee crisis since World War II, hold the balance of power in the region.

The belief that Russian, Iranian, and Syrian forces will at least counter ISIS may be mistaken as well. Iran’s key goal, which it has followed for decades, is to extend its influence. It is far more interested in establishing a dominating military influence in nearby nations than in combatting ISIS. Similarly, the major priority Syrian forces follow are is eliminating rebel forces opposing their regime.

And then, of course, there is Russia, which already has a naval base in the Syrian city of Tartus, and seeks to greatly expand its influence in one of the planet’s most strategic areas.  Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, (commander of U.S. European Command and supreme allied commander, Europe)  noted that Russia’s presence is being watched “with concern.”

This turn of events has been made even more complete by Obama’s alienation of Israel, his inexplicable support for the rise of Egyptian elements that are tied to the Moslem Brotherhood, (a turn of events later undone from within that nation) and his bizarre military adventure in Libya which replaced an anti-terrorist regime with a weak government that has allowed that country to become a growing stronghold for al Qaeda.

Practice the pill with water & online prescriptions for cialis shun taking it with booze or grapefruit juice. The cialis online erect state of penile organ remains strong for 4 to 6 hours, without producing any complexities. There was no viagra online for sale solution to tackle this problem in the end. You can place an online order by specifying the buy generic viagra quantity and quality of the sperms or if they are suffering from the Problem of Erectile dysfunction. The refusal to take any action in response to Syria’s crossing “the red line” in its possession of unlawful weaponry, the lack of any military action in response to the murder of Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi, and the terms of the Iran nuclear deal which allows that nation to eventually possess atomic arms has signaled the region that the United States is no longer a force to be feared.

In another part of the Islamic world, a similar scenario is taking place. The President, similar to his Iraq mistake, announced a departure date for U.S. forces in Afghanistan. As a consequence, the Taliban, which provided support for the 9/11/01 attack that devastated New York and the Pentagon, is returning to power. The most recent example: on September 28, Taliban forces overran the provincial capital of Kunduz in the northern part of the nation. This is the first loss of a provincial capital since American forces entered Afghanistan in 2001. Kunduz is a strategic transportation center for the entire region. (Airstrikes have been made in an attempt to retake the city.)

Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX), Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, made the following statement Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX), Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, made the following statement

“News reports that the Taliban has retaken Kunduz are discouraging, but not unexpected.  President Obama’s failure to fully resource his strategy for Afghanistan forces our troops and their leaders to focus on meeting next year’s withdrawal deadline, rather than America’s security needs.  The fall of Kunduz to the Taliban is not unlike the fall of Iraqi provinces to ISIL—it is a reaffirmation that precipitous withdrawal leaves key allies and territory vulnerable to the very terrorists we’ve fought so long to defeat.”

In an interview  with The Hill, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, noted that President Obama’s Middle East foreign policy is “failing on every single measurement…Russian aggression in the region may eventually force the Obama administration to take military action.”

Despite the extensively negative results of his policies, there is little indication that the President is ready for a change in course.

Categories
Quick Analysis

The curious case of Ceuta

As Russian forces expand their presence in Syria, where they currently possess a major naval base in Tartus, another site has become an asset to Moscow’s growing sea power.

Ceuta, a city of only seven square miles, occupies a strategic peninsula off the Moroccan coast at the east end of the Strait of Gibraltar. Control was transferred from Arab hands to Portugal in 1415, and then to Spain in 1580.

As part of Spain, the city is in NATO territory.  However, it is regularly hosting Russian naval vessels. According to the authoritative Jamestown Foundation “On August 5, 2015, four Russian warships—the missile cruiser Moskva, the escort ship Pytlivy, the large sea tanker Ivan Bubnovand Shakhtyor, a rescue tug—docked at the Mediterranean port of Ceuta, a Spanish exclave in North Africa, claimed by Morocco, and located just south of Gibraltar, across the Strait… This port visit was followed, on August 26, by the arrival of the diesel-electric submarine Novorossiysk and, one day later, an SB-36-class tugboat … This marks the 12th such port visit this year; 13 took place over all of 2014. Russian warships bunker and take water and other supplies at Ceuta, while their crews enjoy shore leave.”

This is not a brand-new development.  Common Sense  notes that Russian naval vessels “have been regularly visiting Ceuta since 2010 at a relatively constant rate of 10 to 15 port calls per year.”

Some have speculated  that Spain’s motives may include the financial boost provided by the visits, and a slap at the United Kingdom, which counts nearby Gibraltar as an overseas territory.

The Heritage Foundation has sharply criticized Spain’s dalliance with Russia’s navy. “Spain possesses two sovereign enclaves called Ceuta and Melilla that border Morocco. They are both sizable cities, with populations of 73,000 and 79,000, respectively. They are legally part of Spain, and they are the only two European Union (EU) cities located in mainland Africa. They are also part of the Schengen Agreement and the eurozone. The Russian navy has been using their port facilities for years.
It contains all the desired information which one must know about the product generic sildenafil india find out for more info dosage including the product detail. This component helps by making the levitra free consultation find out content blood flow in the genital areas. This creativity from Ajanta was quite praiseworthy and got appreciated by many users. women viagra order women viagra online Branded pills are expensive and hence, people look for generic medicines.
“On April 28, during the same week that the EU announced a new round of sanctions against Russia, Spain played host to the Russian destroyer Vice Admiral Kulakov at Ceuta. During its stay, the destroyer took on nearly 740 tons of fuel and 100 tons of water…Spain’s policy of allowing the Russian navy to use Ceuta in North Africa is also hypocritical in relation to its reluctance to allow visits by NATO ships to or from the British Overseas Territory of Gibraltar directly to or from Spanish ports. Therefore, under certain circumstances Spain would rather have a Russian ship visit a Spanish port than a NATO ship. In addition, Spanish authorities routinely deny any request by military aircraft from NATO members that arrives or departs the Gibraltar airfield and overflies or lands in Spain.”

The U.S. Naval Institute reports that “…the Russian Navy is pivoting back into the same European waters it became very familiar with during the Cold War. Russia apparently is deploying, and intends to continue to deploy, its navy into the vacuum created by the United States’ absence in the Mediterranean Sea.”

Russia is also involving its ally China in its assertion of naval power in the Mediterranean.  During May, it conducted joint maneuvers with Chinese naval vessels. It has also engaged in similar joint maneuvers with Beijing’s naval forces in the Pacific and Indian Oceans.

The Kremlin is flexing its new, muscular armed forces across the world, including Latin America, where it has returned to Cold War era facilities.  As noted in the Daily Signal  “Russian military spending has seen dramatic increases. As of 2013, its military budget had “more than doubled over the last decade. Through the first quarter of 2015, defense spending ‘was more than double what the government had originally budgeted, at over 9 percent of the quarterly GDP.’ Conversely, U.S. national defense spending as percent of GDP dropped to an estimated 3.3 percent in 2015 after reaching a high of 4.7 percent in 2010, according to the Office of Management and Budget… one thing remains certain: Russia is repositioning its naval assets with NATO in mind.”