Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
WorldWar2.ro Forum > The post-WW2 and recent military > "Internationalising" the Black Sea


Posted by: Imperialist June 24, 2005 05:17 am
Apparently by "internationalising" the Black Sea, the president understands offering (permanent) bases to the US and introducing a new naval power to the Black Sea:

QUOTE

  Etapele consolidarii parteneriatului strategic romano-american se aseaza pe doua paliere: in primul rand o prezenta militara legala, activa a fortelor americane la Marea Neagra prin instalarea de baze militare in zona Marii Negre si enunt acest obiectiv si ramanem aici. si al doilea obiectiv in interiorul parteneriatului strategic cu SUA, dar si cu Marea Britanie: internationalizarea Marii Negre. Unul din mecanismele de garantare a pacii in zona Marii Negre este internationalizarea Marii Negre. Mediterana a fost o zona de conflict pana cand s-a reusit internationalizarea ei si asezarea definitiva a Flotei a VI-a americane in Marea Mediterana si alte forme.
  In momentul de fata, Marea Neagra este o mare controlata de Federatia Rusa, un prieten al nostru, dar nu ni se pare suficient. Va fi batalia internationalizarii Marii Negre, in care statele aliate noua sa aiba prezenta militara si politica in Marea Neagra, sa trecem la controlul traficului in Marea Neagra si acesta va constitui obiectivul final, daca vreti, al politicii noastre externe in Marea Neagra. Romania sustine internationalizarea Marii Negre.



http://www.ziua.ro/b.html

Posted by: Alexandru H. June 24, 2005 06:00 am
Yes, this is yet another of those great romanian initiatives, that go down with the first Russian wink... dry.gif

Posted by: Iamandi June 24, 2005 06:02 am


Is just a reason for government/presidency to have that bases in Romanian soil. They want that for politichal reasons, just to have for next election a subject more in theyr propaganda: "We were those who convince America to bring his Navy to guard Romanian interests in Black Sea!".

Funny thing - countryes who had american bases on theyr soil, wants to reduce US military presence there.... and wish to be whitout them. Hey, were is the iron cortina now? Why to artificially create another one? Were is the bright future? Why to live in a past, a past of Western countrys? This is what we want? No...

Iama

Posted by: sid guttridge June 24, 2005 09:27 am
Hi Iamandi,

Which are the countries with US bases on their soil that want to get rid of them?

Doubtless there are a few, but don't be fooled by loud public demonstrations by vocal anti-American minorities, which can be found anywhere. They are seldom representative of general opinion, which is usually indifferent to, or supportive of, a US presence.

Cheers,

Sid.

Posted by: dragos03 June 24, 2005 11:06 am
The bases bring important economic advantages to the countries they are in. That's why we want them. That's why the Germans want to keep them, even if the Cold war is long gone.

Basescu had a very good idea. The Black Sea region has many oil and rare material deposits, previously dominated by Russia. Now, the Americans want these resources. By allowing the bases, Romania becomes the most important American ally in this region, thus having a chance to get some of these resources in the future.

Posted by: Imperialist June 24, 2005 11:41 am
QUOTE (dragos03 @ Jun 24 2005, 11:06 AM)
The bases bring important economic advantages to the countries they are in. That's why we want them. That's why the Germans want to keep them, even if the Cold war is long gone.

Basescu had a very good idea. The Black Sea region has many oil and rare material deposits, previously dominated by Russia. Now, the Americans want these resources. By allowing the bases, Romania becomes the most important American ally in this region, thus having a chance to get some of these resources in the future.

Well, Basescu's policy is lame IMO.
If he would have said "fellow romanians, I know its gonna be hard, but I initiate a 4 year naval plan to rebuild the romanian navy and strengthen Romania's presence in the Black Sea. I know that the US will understand the importance of this presence and give us any needed assistance", I would have supported it 100%.
Just to give some bases is an easy way out.

Besided, their economic impact will be small.

take care

Posted by: dragos June 24, 2005 12:42 pm
QUOTE (Imperialist)
If he would have said "fellow romanians, I know its gonna be hard, but I initiate a 4 year naval plan to rebuild the romanian navy and strengthen Romania's presence in the Black Sea. I know that the US will understand the importance of this presence and give us any needed assistance", I would have supported it 100%.


I doubt something like that is realistic with our economic situation.

Posted by: Imperialist June 24, 2005 02:20 pm
QUOTE (dragos @ Jun 24 2005, 12:42 PM)


I doubt something like that is realistic with our economic situation.

Its a question of will, not of budget. Dont imagine aircraft carriers or nuclear subs though, thats true... But a navy. Like before.

Posted by: Imperialist June 26, 2005 06:38 am
Well, until Basescu internationalises the Black Sea by increasing US presence, the Ukrainians have internationalised the transport on the Danube by establishing THEIR (very Ukrainian, non-US/Russia/another power) presence:

QUOTE


  Argumentand o asemenea abordare a problemei, ziarul mentionat mai sus cita cuvintele reprezentantului Comisiei Europene pentru energie si transport, Francois Lamoureux, potrivit caruia "calea ucraineana de navigatie Dunare - Marea Neagra trebuie sa distruga monopolul detinut de Romania la transportul de marfuri, micsorand considerabil costurile acestuia".

  In ultima instanta, Ucraina si-a vazut visul cu ochii: "Romania nu mai detine monopolul la transportul fluvial de marfuri, Kievul controland acum pana la 60% din aceasta activitate". Asa sustin expertii ucraineni.
  In orice caz, nota mass-media,"UE pare sa fie multumita de permanenta monitorizare ecologica efectuata practic zilnic de Ministerul Transporturilor de-a lungul canalului pe Bistroe. In plus, Europa a inteles ca, folosind varianta ucraineana, poate castiga bani frumosi: pretul de traversare este net inferior tarifelor practicate de Romania pe Sulina".


http://www.curentul.ro/curentul.php?numar=20050625&art=19737

Look mr. President, we've just been internationalised! I am sure we can swing right back at them by allowing the US X Fleet a permanent base here. That would make us feel important. And powerful.

Posted by: Iamandi June 28, 2005 11:49 am
Presence of military warships of USA (NATO wink.gif ) in Black Sea will not became a pressure fact against Ukraine, Russia... ? Here are enough flags of NATO on board of the Turkey, Bulgaria and Romania.

What can do more military presence in Black Sea? They will be as a crow scarrie presence against turkish ships who take fish from romanian waters? Or what? I have friends ex-soldiers at border patrol ships, who told me about "antibraconaj" actions or anti-cigar trafficants... Some shootings with 14,5 m.m. MG's. In future, i espect to see at tv (bleah! i hate tv!!!) a Los Angeles class sub who catch some calcan illegal turkey fishers who enered in romanian waters.... biggrin.gif

Cernomorskaya Fleet had enough fuel and crew (and crew training) to do something imoprtant against us, bulgarians and turks? laugh.gif

Americans (yeah, NATO... laugh.gif ) are such naives? Ok, another romanian "impale"... They will come here to internationalise Blac Sea... and our leaders wants to ... "to milk the cow" ... to milk that rich cow named USA (i know, NATO organisation...).

What is the price ? In absolutelly all aspects of the life, allways it is a price tu be payed for anithyng. So, what will be the price for this???

When you win at something, you will loose at another thing. What we don't see, blind us, blind in face of the continuation of "hey, look, americans came, after all that time!"?

What win USA at this?
Why?
I want peace for my country and for this part of the world, who had a lot of conflicts in her history.

Were i read this jocke: "You see how pervert sounds for romanians PEACE DAY"? laugh.gif

Anyway... I'm a conservatorist? No, but i don't want more foreign presence in my country. Pause! Don't jump to my throats! Is my prefference, as a citisen of Romania. Is my right to think in this way, and no chance to reconvert my mind...

Much armed force so close to Russia can be opposite to peace dreams.

Iama

Posted by: Victor July 12, 2005 10:22 am
The Irak discussion has been moved to the Guerilla actions in Irak thread:
http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=2027

Posted by: Imperialist October 20, 2005 02:08 pm
Generalul Ralston tempereaza ambitiile Romaniei la Marea Neagra

http://www.adevarulonline.ro/index.jsp?page=articol&article_id=158176

Posted by: Imperialist December 08, 2005 08:38 pm
The view from Moscow:

http://www.gandul.info/2005-12-09/international/bazele_americane

Posted by: Zayets December 08, 2005 08:46 pm
Russia in NATO? rolleyes.gif

Posted by: Dénes December 08, 2005 08:54 pm
QUOTE (Zayets @ Dec 9 2005, 02:46 AM)
Russia in NATO? rolleyes.gif

Better than NATO in Russia laugh.gif

Gen. Dénes

Posted by: Zayets December 09, 2005 06:58 am
QUOTE (Dénes @ Dec 8 2005, 08:54 PM)
QUOTE (Zayets @ Dec 9 2005, 02:46 AM)
Russia in NATO?  rolleyes.gif

Better than NATO in Russia laugh.gif

Gen. Dénes

Now, that depends who's saying smile.gif It could be that this is the best thing ever happened to Russia. I know, I know , Russia is not used to receive orders from anyone, but hey! better with your pride "touched" but alive and kicking. We, Romanians, learned this the hard way biggrin.gif

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)