Russia’s guided missile cruiser Moskva appeared suddenly on the horizon, dark and imposing like a fortress in the twilight, and steamed on Saturday into the Black Sea port of Sevastopol, where its sailors were given a hero’s welcome.
“Russia! Russia!” chanted hundreds of supporters from the embankment, as fireworks burst.
The ship, more than 183m long and bristling with guns and missile launchers, was one of several from the Black Sea Fleet that patrolled the coast of Georgia during the conflict between it and Russia. The fleet — which the Russians say sank a Georgian gunboat that fired on them — is based in Sevastopol, Ukraine, a city populated mainly by ethnic Russians.
The next day, in Kiev, Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko presided over the first military parade in years — with a massive display of tanks, armored personnel carriers and missile launchers — to celebrate his country’s 17th year of independence from the Soviet Union. Russia’s willingness to send troops into Georgia, another former Soviet republic, to settle their territorial dispute this month has made Ukraine jittery, and the pro-Western Yushchenko used the celebration to again push for inclusion in NATO.
“We must speed up our work to achieve membership in the European system of security and raise the defense capabilities of the country,” Yushchenko said in a televised speech to thousands gathered in the city’s main Independence Square. “Only these steps will guarantee our security and the integrity of our borders.”
The dueling celebrations, one rejoicing in Russia’s military might and the other overshadowed by it, underscore the tensions between Russia and Ukraine, where leaders had hoped the days of Russian dominance were long over. They also highlight Sevastopol’s status as something of a fault line between the two countries.
Though it is in Ukraine’s southern Crimean peninsula, Sevastopol — home to thousands of Russian naval personnel and their families — is ethnically and culturally very much a Russian town.
Crimea, connected to Ukraine by a slender causeway, was in fact considered a part of Russia, until Nikita Khrushchev, the Ukrainian-born Soviet leader, bequeathed it to Kiev as an act of good will in 1954.
What was considered a purely symbolic gesture at the time, however, assumed monumental importance with the breakup of the Soviet Union. Crimea — wrested from the Turkic Tatars in the late 18th century under Catherine the Great — was now a part of Ukraine.
And with it went Sevastopol, the strategic base for the Black Sea Fleet for more then 200 years and a city of deep emotional resonance for Russians. Twice it has been besieged — by British-led forces in the 19th-century Crimean War, and then for 250 days before falling to the Germans in World War II.
After the Soviet breakup, Moscow and Kiev wrangled first over the ownership of the fleet — of which the Kremlin finally took the lion’s share. Then they argued over the terms by which Russia could continue to use the base. The two countries agreed on a 20-year renewable lease in 1997.
With the ascension of Yushchenko’s pro-Western government after the 2004 Orange Revolution, and with Russia’s new assertiveness as oil dollars flow into its coffers, Sevastopol has once again been thrust under the klieg lights.
Crimea was a stronghold of Yushchenko’s political opponent, the pro-Russian Viktor Yanukovich.
Russian nationalists have begun agitating to reclaim Sevastopol and Crimea, although taking such an action is far from a mainstream sentiment. Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov raised Ukrainian hackles in May when he called for Russia’s western neighbor to return “what doesn’t belong to it,” the Associated Press reported.
The Ukrainians, for their part, have struck back. Yushchenko, who traveled to Tbilisi in a display of solidarity with Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili, threatened to ban Russian warships from returning to Sevastopol, saying their movements were subject to Ukrainian approval. Yuriy Yekhanurov, the country’s defense minister, later said that the fleet could move unhindered.
As with his Independence Day remarks, the Ukrainian leader has also amplified his rhetoric for joining NATO, despite Russia’s clear indications that it opposes expanding the alliance to its border.
Many analysts say that Europe is not seeking a battle with Russia and that the Georgian conflict has reduced, rather than enhanced, Ukraine’s chances of joining the alliance.
At the same time, the idea of eventually rejoining Russia has strong support among many in Sevastopol, though no one here is yet speaking of pushing the matter politically, let alone militarily.
“Everyone wants for Crimea to become part of Russia,” said Nina Vakula, a local resident, as she watched the Moskva.
Vakula is living proof of the ties that bind Russia and Ukraine. She is a Ukrainian citizen, but her son-in-law serves in the Black Sea Fleet and both he and her daughter hold Russian passports. The couple’s two-year-old son, Yura, a Slavic portrait with hair bleached white from the sun, was born in Ukraine.
Vakula says Ukrainians and Russians are part of one Slavic family, and that divisions between them are artificial.
Those sentiments are not shared by those who not only fear Russia’s return, but also worry that Sevastopol’s importance could provide a pretext for Moscow to extend its reach here.
“These people are separatists,” said Oleg Yatsenko, a student leader who traveled from Kiev to stage pro-Ukrainian rallies during the warships’ return, referring to the those who had gathered to welcome home the sailors. “They want to do the same thing here that was done in Georgia.”
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers