Janine Davidson

Defense in Depth

Janine Davidson examines the art, politics, and business of American military power.

Print Print Cite Cite
Style: MLA APA Chicago Close


Vladimir Putin’s Naval Ambitions Have Only Begun

by Sean R. Liedman
September 30, 2015

Russian President Vladimir Putin delivers a speech during celebrations for Navy Day as it rains in Baltiysk, Kaliningrad region, Russia, July 26, 2015. (RIA Novosti/Mikhail Klimentyev/Kremlin, Courtesy Reuters) Russian President Vladimir Putin delivers a speech during celebrations for Navy Day as it rains in Baltiysk, Kaliningrad region, Russia, July 26, 2015. (RIA Novosti/Mikhail Klimentyev/Kremlin, Courtesy Reuters)


By Sean Liedman

Defense in Depth is proud to welcome Captain Sean R. Liedman, U.S. Navy, who will be serving as a military fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations for the 2015-2016 term. Today, he assesses recent shifts in Russian naval planning and deployment, and considers what might come next.

Considering that he earned his spurs in the culture of the KGB, Russian President Vladimir Putin has demonstrated surprisingly strong navalist tendencies over the past eighteen months. Adding irony to this new focus on the sea, his presidency began with allegations that he mishandled the disaster of the sinking of the “Kursk” submarine in 2000, just three months after he was inaugurated as Russian president. However, last week’s deployment of Russian military forces to Syria confirmed that maintaining naval access has become a centerpiece of President Putin’s foreign policy and may shed light on future Russian foreign policy goals. Two other recent developments confirm this trend of restoring Russian naval power: the annexation of Crimea in March of 2014 and the release of the Maritime Doctrine of Russian Federation 2020 in July of 2015.

The Russian annexation of Crimea restored firm Russian control over the port city of Sevastopol, which is the home of the Russian Navy’s Black Sea Fleet and Sevastopol Shipyard. Sevastopol Shipyard played a key role in modernizing the Russian Navy over the past decade—even though it was located on sovereign Ukrainian territory but leased back to Russia under the Black Sea Fleet Agreement of 1997.

The Maritime Doctrine of Russian Federation 2020 leads off with the provocative phrase: “Historically, Russia—the leading maritime power…” and goes on to divide Russian naval policy between six regions: the Atlantic, Arctic, Antarctic, Caspian, Indian Ocean, and Pacific. Upon release of the Maritime Doctrine in July, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin told IHS Jane’s Defense Weekly that “…the Atlantic has been emphasized because of NATO expansion, the need to integrate Crimea and the Sevastopol naval base into the Russian economy, and to re-establish a permanent Russian Navy presence in the Mediterranean.”

That last phrase (“…to re-establish a permanent Russian Navy presence in the Mediterranean”) serves as a clear signal of one of the principal policy objectives of Russian military forces to Syria last week—the preservation of Russian naval access to the Syrian ports of Tartus and Latakia. During remarks at the German Marshall Fund in Washington, DC on September 28, General Philip M. Breedlove, Supreme Allied Commander, Europe (SACEUR), said he believes Putin’s top priority is to protect Russian access to airfields and warm water seaports in the Eastern Mediterranean. The second priority, in service to the first, is to prop up Russia’s host, the embattled regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Then third, he said, “After all of that, I think that they will do some counter-ISIL work to legitimize their approach to Syria.”

After Russian defense spending hit rock bottom in 1998, a decade of increased investment in modernization and maintenance has renewed Russian aspirations of exerting global influence with a similarly global navy. Although that navy is ready to sail, it still needs access to bases for logistics support for sustained deployments abroad. While the Russian Navy does not yet have the capacity to generate the scope and scale of Soviet Navy deployment patterns during the Cold War, it has restored its capacity to maintain presence where core Russian interests are at stake—such as in Syria.

During the Cold War, the Soviet Navy enjoyed access to bases in Algeria, Libya, Egypt, and Yugoslavia to sustain continuous naval influence in the Mediterranean Sea. The recent trend toward Russian maritime expansion could serve as a harbinger for future Russian foreign policy initiatives. In late August 2015, the Russians persuaded Spain—a member of NATO—to allow a Russian Kilo-class diesel submarine to refuel and re-supply on the Spanish island of Ceuta as it transited from the North Sea Fleet to the Black Sea Fleet.

Moving forward, keep an eye on Libya as another potential focus area for restoring Russian naval access. While the current political situation in Libya is tenuous, the conditions are set for Russia to attempt to restore its access to naval bases and further sustain naval presence in the western Mediterranean and eastern Atlantic oceans—all under the cover of “fighting international terrorism.”

Captain Sean R. Liedman, U.S. Navy, was the commander of Patrol and Reconnaissance Wing Eleven operating the P-8A and P-3C maritime patrol and reconnaissance aircraft. He has twice served in the Air Warfare Division on the Chief of Naval Operation’s staff and also as the executive assistant to the deputy commander of U.S. Central Command.  The conclusions and opinions expressed are his own and do not reflect the official position of the U.S. government.

Post a Comment 3 Comments

  • Posted by Tyler P. Harwell

    Also keep an eye on Cyprus, where the Kuznetsov paid a visit the last time it was in the Mediterranean Sea.

    The Med is NATO’s backyard. How odd it is that the US Navy would show no interest in maintaining a substantial presence there, though as you state, Russia clearly has that intention. Is there some reason why NATO should want this ? Unless it be by invitation, the Russian Navy can not achieve a commanding presence. It has no leg to stand on there.

    That said, there is now the equivalent of a Russian battle fleet off the shores of Syria, and a small air base getting bigger on land. All of this depends on a right of passage through the Bosporus. But Russia’s activities in Syria are inimical to the interests of Turkey. One question on everyone’s mind has to be this: Just how large a build up in Syria and the eastern Med will Turkey tolerate ? If it is troubled by this development, what responses does it have ?

    No answer to this question should be expected prior to the upcoming national elections in Turkey. But there is no political faction there that welcomes Russian intervention in Syria. It is a strategically odd and unstable situation. Turkey has the 6th largest air force in the world, the second largest army in Europe, after Russia, and the most powerful navy in the Med. The two countries are historic adversaries. With the Assad regime getting a boost from Russia, the prospects are not good. There is highly probable that Turkey will either leave NATO is disgust, or become involved with Saudi Arabia, in a deadly proxy war with Russia.

    All in all, the risks for Russia are grave. It is a high stakes gamble.

  • Posted by Lenin Deno

    Putin’s intentions are obviously clear; rebuild Russian military might and strategic positions without any concern or respect for the sovereignty of its neighboring countries.

  • Posted by D'Allessandro

    The encroachment of NATO into the Russian zone of influence set off a chain of events that are spiraling out of control such as their annexation of Crimea, covert operations in Ukraine and now the arrival of Russian military personnel and weapons in Syria. What the West is seeing is a forewarning of even more future moves to come. It is obvious that Putin and his inner circle are intent in restoring the projection of strength that the former USSR used to exhibit prior to it’s demise. It is not only their naval ambitions that are being undertaken but also a blatant display of unilateral geopolitical strength. Their political-military policy to “re-establish a permanent Russian Navy presence in the Mediterranean” is becoming a reality. For the majority of our Western leaders, who seem to be sleepwalking as all these maneuvers take place, their options are many, however the current perception is that they will allow for Putin to dictate the pace just like in Crimea, Ukraine and now Syria. It is not inconceivable in the ensuing years to see part of the Russian fleet stationed in naval bases not only in the Mediterranean but also in ports in Nicaragua and Venezuela. Yes it is a high stakes gamble but Russia seems at the present to be winning hand after hand.

Post a Comment

CFR seeks to foster civil and informed discussion of foreign policy issues. Opinions expressed on CFR blogs are solely those of the author or commenter, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions. All comments must abide by CFR's guidelines and will be moderated prior to posting.

* Required