Some of Ukraine’s key international allies rallied behind the country on Nov. 26 after attacks on and the seizure of Ukrainian Navy vessels trying to enter the Azov Sea through the Kerch Strait by the Russian coast guard on Nov. 25.
Other international observers highlighted that the events could have been an effective “fire-starting” operation by the Russian Federal Security Service, known as the FSB, or GRU military spy agency. Ukrainian lawmakers, meanwhile, appear set to approve a controversial proposal by President Petro Poroshenko for martial law, giving Ukraine’s leader a broad range of options to suspend constitutional rights and greatly increase state security measures.
Illegal maritime actions
Russia was widely criticized for its “aggressive” and “illegal” actions on the evening of Nov. 25 by international lawmakers and experts after the Ukrainian Navy reported that Russian coast guard vessels opened fire on three Ukrainian boats in the Kerch Strait – a body of water and vital shipping lane that connects the Black Sea and Azov Sea.
Three Ukrainian vessels were seized by Russian special forces soldiers and at least six Ukrainian naval officers were reportedly wounded after they were fired upon.
In response, the Ukrainian government called for an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council and sought to impose martial law, which will require the approval of Ukraine’s parliament during a session of the Rada on the afternoon of Nov. 26.
Nikki Haley, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, confirmed that an emergency meeting of the Security Council has been called for and would take place on Nov. 26, around the same time that Ukrainian lawmakers meet to discuss President Petro Poroshenko’s proposal to implement martial law.
Late on Nov. 26, Russia announced it had reopened the Kerch Strait to international shipping, with the Russian FSB security services saying that the seizure of Ukrainian vessels had essentially eliminated what they regarded as a security threat.
Urging Russian restraint
Despite notable silence from the leaders of G7 and European Union countries, including U.S. President Donald Trump and British Prime Minister Theresa May, some lawmakers from countries allied with Ukraine have blasted what they called Russian naval aggression in neutral waters.
As Ukrainian Navy Commander Ihor Voronchenko confirmed that his remaining vessels near the Kerch Strait were on combat alert and ready for another Russian assault, the Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Chrystia Freeland, called on Russian naval forces to immediately stand down.
“Canada condemns Russian aggression towards Ukraine in the Kerch Strait,” she said in a statement. “We call on Russia to immediately de-escalate, release captured vessels and allow for freedom of passage. Canada is unwavering in its support for Ukraine’s sovereignty.”
British lawmaker Alan Duncan, a Foreign Office minister and the Secretary of state for Europe and the Americas, tweeted his support for de-escalation.
“We are concerned by the reports of a confrontation between Russian and Ukrainian ships in the Sea of Azov and the blockage of the Kerch Strait,” he said. “[We] urge caution but the UK position is clear: ships must be allowed free passage to Ukrainian ports.”
Samantha Power, former US Ambassador to the United Nations under President Obama called the events on the Azov Sea a “very significant new aggression by Russia,” and echoed the calls for an emergency meeting of the UNSC.
Foreign ministries across Europe also issued statements condemning Russia’s actions.
Romania’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs echoed similar statements from nearby countries when it labeled developments in the Azov Sea as Russian aggression and a violation of international law that “undermines the security of the whole region”.
Michael Carpenter, senior director of the Penn Biden Center for diplomacy and former U.S. deputy defense secretary, said that the time had come for NATO to seriously consider placing naval forces in the Black Sea port of Constanta, Romania.
“It won’t help Ukraine right now, but NATO needs maritime assets stationed in the Black Sea for defense and deterrence,” he said.
A message to NATO countries?
According to some observers, the Kremlin is concerned about a potential “build-up” of Ukrainian and NATO marine forces in the Black Sea and has acted aggressively in the Kerch Strait to assert their control and dominance, while sending a strong message to NATO HQ in Strasbourg.
At a bilateral meeting with Ukrainian defense officials in London on Nov. 21, UK Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson reaffirmed London’s support for improving Ukraine’s naval forces and their operational capacity – he also warned of heightening of tensions on the Azov Sea.
Williamson clarified plans outlined in October for an increased British military deployment to Ukraine, where roughly 100 British soldiers already train Ukrainian troops in the western region of Lviv and just outside Dnipro, 200 kilometers northwest of Ukraine’s Black Sea coast.
At the beginning of 2019, more UK soldiers will be deployed for training and joint exercises, with training Ukrainian marine forces as a priority. The British force sent to Ukraine will include a contingent of Royal Marine commandos and the Royal Navy ship, HMS Echo, according to the UK Ministry of Defense.
“As long as Ukraine faces Russian hostilities, it will find a steadfast partner in the United Kingdom,” Williamson said on on Nov. 21. “By continuing to work together, whether through training or joint exercises, we help Ukraine to stand up for our shared values.”
On Nov. 21, the Russian Embassy in London issued a statement stating they were “deeply concerned” with Britain’s planned deployments to Ukraine, adding that it “aggravates” the situation and represents an unacceptable NATO build-up in the Black Sea.
GRU or FSB operation
As Russian attack helicopters and fighter jets circled over the Kerch Strait on the evening of Nov. 25, some observers began to speculate that the Russian coast guard was using special ops forces for support. When Russian Spetznaz soldiers took control of the first Ukrainian vessel, they argued the theory was all but confirmed.
According to some analysts, Russian special forces will have been in tight contact with both the Kremlin and either the GRU or FSB security agencies when they attacked and seized Ukrainian vessels, wounding sailors in the process.
As Russian forces now take a moderate but notable step back and reopen the Kerch Strait to commercial shipping, while Ukraine prepares to implement martial law, the GRU could have succeeded in manufacturing just the kind of crisis in which in specializes.
Christo Grozev, a Vienna-based GRU and FSB expert with the London-based Bellingcat investigative agency says this “fire-starting” operation was likely coordinated by either the FSB or the GRU.
“It could have been the FSB using the moment to show Vladimir Putin that they’re better than the GRU,” he told Kyiv Post, in reference to the recent operational failures of the GRU, Russia’s main military intelligence directorate.
On Nov. 26, after provoking the crisis and starting the fire, Kremlin agents will now step back to see what happens next and examine how Ukraine and the West respond, Grozev predicts.
“This could be smart tactics, if their plans for a friendly presidential candidate weren’t working out,” said Grozev, adding that Russian experts had already predicted Poroshenko would seek to introduce martial law before the end of 2018.
“They [Russian intelligence] wanted exactly this kind of response,” Grozev added.
