Global Independent Analytics
Danielle Ryan
Danielle Ryan

Location: Ireland

Specialization: US foreign policy, US-Russia relations and media bias

US warship dangerously close to Russian coast?

A little context always puts things into better perspective, so here we go. Grab an atlas.

There was an uproar on Wednesday as video emerged of Russian jets buzzing a US Navy warship which was operating in the international waters of the Baltic Sea.

The two Russian jets flew close to the US guided missile destroyer — so close, in fact, that they created ‘wakes in the water’ about 30 feet away. The US Navy described the incident as a “simulated attack”. A Polish helicopter was aboard the destroyer at the time.

Okay. First things first. Was the Russian move aggressive, as claimed?

Let’s be honest. Watch the video. It was an aggressive display of strength and presence. It was clearly intended to be. It certainly falls outside of what would be considered usual behavior, although the Russian defense ministry denied that it broke safety protocol. If nothing else, the maneuvers were clearly not what you’d call friendly behavior. US officials are correct in that much at least.

But calling the recent Russian moves in the Baltic aggressive and dangerous implicitly assumes that the US has not, of late, been acting aggressively towards Russia and that the US Navy is simply the innocent victim of needless Russian ‘provocations’ time and again.

A little context always puts things into better perspective, so here we go. Grab an atlas.

The US warship had set off from the Polish city of Gdynia — which, incidentally, is about 50 miles from Russia’s Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad, as the crow flies. Russia’s second largest city, St. Petersburg, is also on the Baltic coast, further north. At the time of the incident, the US warship was about 70 nautical miles from Russian land.

Let’s imagine for a minute that a Russian warship had been hanging around off the coast of, say, Florida, preparing to engage in military exercises with a Mexican helicopter. The US air force sends two jets to approach the Russian warship, repeatedly conducting low flybys, signaling their obvious displeasure. What would the headline be?

To put it really simply, this is the logic that we are supposed to follow: An American warship roughly 70 nautical miles from Russian land is the innocent party. While the Russian jets, roughly 4,300 miles from American land are the “provoking” party. Case closed.

The media ran riot with the story this week without drawing attention to any of this. The US Navy, naturally, is entitled to be anywhere at any time. The Russian military isn’t afforded the same luxuries — even at its own borders. And no one at CNN or the BBC is rushing to draw attention to the fact that sorties of NATO tactical warplanes near Russian and Belarusian borders hit the 3,000 mark in 2014.

If one was to select the analysis that did its very best to obscure the context here, they might just have to give the award to this Vox piece. The author went through the usual laundry list of ‘reasons why Putin does stuff’ — you know, it’s good propaganda for TV, it’s to please stupid Russians who don’t know any better, it’s a distraction from the economy which is “hurtling towards disaster” etc. In short, he used his 2,000-word piece to (very maturely) whittle the motivations behind Russian foreign policy down to “trolling”.

Look, there wouldn’t be a problem in calling what these two particular Russian jets did aggressive (and yes, possibly even dangerous) if the facts were presented in any coherent and fair context, but that rarely happens. And it’s not just Russian jets that are always the provoking party either. Russian submarines are always lurking around somewhere, too.

Take for example an incident which took place in the Irish Sea last April. A fishing trawler was hit by a submarine and pulled backward violently. Virtually all Irish and British media were unanimous in the immediate assumption that this was a Russian submarine. At the time, I wrote a piece which suggested that it was perfectly likely — given the history of dangerous British submarine activity in the Irish Sea — that the submarine which hit the trawler was, in fact, British. But that wasn’t as interesting. Five months after the incident, the UK conceded that it was, in fact, one of theirs — but by that time, who cared? That’s not big news, no need to make a fuss.

So give the faux outrage and righteous indignation a rest. No one is buying it.

Related ARTICLES

NATO’s Wish List: de-Finlandization in Europe

NATO’s Wish List: de-Finlandization in Europe

NATO is currently working hard to make Finland and Sweden join the military bloc. De-Finlandization is clearly high on the agenda.

25 May 2016

by Normunds Grostins

What are European Values and What Do They Mean?

What are European Values and What Do They Mean?

Our values – usually called "European values" – were a staple of discussions in the 1990s.

04 April 2016

by Patrick Armstrong

Toward a Deeper Understanding of Imperialism's War with Russia

Toward a Deeper Understanding of Imperialism's War with Russia

The system is now in an intractable crisis that threatens to spark a World War III scenario.

05 March 2016

by Danny Haiphong

POPULAR ARTICLES

Not Found

OPINION

Vladimir Golstein

Vladimir Golstein

The Danderous Acceptance of Donald Trump

James N. Green

James N. Green

Politics in Brazil: Fasten Your Seat Belts!

Barbara H. Peterson

Barbara H. Peterson

Health officials confirm spread of Zika virus through sexual contact in Texas, first in US

Danny Haiphong

Danny Haiphong

WHY IS OTTO(SUPER)MAN ERDOGAN LOSING HIS CHARISMA?

Miray Aslan

Miray Aslan

How relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran reached a breaking point

Navid Nasr

Navid Nasr

How relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran reached a breaking point

Writers

chief editor

Joshua Tartakovsky

Analysis should serve as a method to better understand our world, not to obscure it.

Materials: 42

Specialization: Israel and the Middle East, US politics

Materials: 7

Specialization: Balkans, NATO and EU policies, Strategic communications

Materials: 3

Specialization: Foreign politics, Immigration, Human rights.

Materials: 2

Specialization: Political Science, Social Anthropology

Materials: 3

Specialization: Eastern Europe

Materials: 14

Specialization: Industrial Safety, Corporations

Materials: 12

Specialization: Eastern Europe, Labor movement

Materials: 3

Specialization: American history, way of life, and principles

Danielle Ryan

Ireland

Materials: 10

Specialization: US foreign policy, US-Russia relations and media bias

Materials: 20

Specialization: War, Racism, Capitalist exploitation, Civil rights

Materials: 8

Specialization: Modern Japanese History, Modern Chinese History, Military History, History of Counterinsurgency, History of Disobedience, Dynamics of Atrocities in Wartime

Dovid Katz

Lithuania

Materials: 3

Specialization: Holocaust Revisionism and Geopolitics; East European Far Right & Human Rights; Yiddish Studies & Litvak Culture

Materials: 20

Specialization: History, Catalunya, Spain, Geopolitics, Nationalism in Europe, Islamization, Immigration

Materials: 5

Materials: 3

Specialization: migration, international relations

Materials: 1

Specialization: Syria, US Foreign policy and strategies, BRICS/SCO

Materials: 19

Specialization: Balkans, Yugoslavia

Materials: 10

Specialization: Jihadist Groups, Islamic Terrorism, Global Security

Materials: 4

Specialization: Geopolitics

Materials: 4

Specialization: Media and government relations

Materials: 2

Specialization: Latin America, Brazil

Jay Watts

Canada

Materials: 2

Specialization: History, Marxism-Leninism, Imperialism, Anti-imperialism.

Materials: 2

Specialization: International Relations, Sociology, Geostrategy

Materials: 1

Specialization: civil rights

Lionel Baland

Belgium

Materials: 22

Specialization: Euroscepticism, Patriotic parties of Europe

Maram Susli

Australia

Materials: 3

Specialization: Geopolitics

Materials: 2

Specialization: Civil rights, Racism, US politics

Materials: 1

Specialization: geopolitics, economics

Max J. Schindler

Palestine-Israel

Materials: 9

Specialization: Politics

Miray Aslan

Turkey

Materials: 12

Specialization: Media, Politics

Materials: 5

Specialization: Politics, International relations

Navid Nasr

Croatia

Materials: 13

Specialization: Global security, Politics

Materials: 9

Specialization: Development of European Union, Non-governmental organizations, Politics and economics in Baltic States

Materials: 9

Specialization: Greece, Crisis of the US hegemony; Israel / Occupied Palestine, Oppression of Black people in the US

Materials: 4

Specialization: geopolitics, Russia, USSR

Pedro Marin

Brazil

Materials: 17

Specialization: Latin America, Ukraine, North Korea

Materials: 13

Specialization: Sustainable development, International relations, Comparative European politics, European integration, Eastern European politics and EU-Russia relations

Materials: 8

Specialization: Politics

Materials: 16

Specialization: Counterterrorist Finance

Seyit Aldogan

Greece

Materials: 3

Specialization: ISIS, Middle East, Globalization, Migrant crisis

Materials: 1

Specialization: Head of "Srebrenica Historical Project"

Materials: 3

Specialization: Economy, Social politics

Stevan Gajic

Serbia

Materials: 1

Specialization: Full time researcher at the Institute for European Studies

Materials: 5

Specialization: Geopolitics, Geoeconomics

Materials: 2

Specialization: Civil rights

Tobias Nase

Germany

Materials: 8

Specialization: Syria, US Foreign policy, Ukraine

Valerijus Simulik

Lithuania

Materials: 2

Specialization: Politics and economics in Baltic States, education and science, non - governmental organizations, globalization and EU

Van Gelis

Greece

Materials: 17

Specialization: Middle East

Materials: 1

Specialization: Kosovo, Serbia, Belgrad bombing

Materials: 5

Specialization: international relations, Russia

toTop