From Martin: "I found it a bit surprising that you would give much credence to the article
about the Russian ships in Syria – it’s a bit questionable in my opinion.
According to the author’s stellar and cutting edge analysis, the dilapidated
vessels are solely in the region to fulfill Russia’s desperate need to
re-emphasize its global military superiority. He seems to disenfranchise them
from any motive to provide tangible aid to their strategic ally. Old rickety
naval relics? Fine…but he himself stated their eligibility as freighters and
cargo ships. Isn’t the use of non civilian transport mediums that cannot be
stopped, scrutinized, seized, or intercepted in international waters/airspace
just what the doctor ordered for the hardware/ordnance hungry Syrian government?
Look how Lavrov and his foreign ministry colleagues scramble to make profuse
excuses about how their “routine weapons” shipments are merely the fulfillment
of old existing contracts – the Russian’s seem really averse to this sort of PR
so they might see such disguises and theatrics as necessary for
“special/unscheduled” parcels.
Anyway I’m no expert on maritime law nor on the nature of the current restrictions or pressures on Russian air and sea traffic to and from Syria so i could be spitting in the wind here, but the plane intercepted in Turkish airspace and the ship carrying Syrian helicopters that was forced to return to Russia come to mind…..just thought id throw it out there if you ever get to reading this".
Anyway I’m no expert on maritime law nor on the nature of the current restrictions or pressures on Russian air and sea traffic to and from Syria so i could be spitting in the wind here, but the plane intercepted in Turkish airspace and the ship carrying Syrian helicopters that was forced to return to Russia come to mind…..just thought id throw it out there if you ever get to reading this".
