Commander of the Naval Forces of Ukraine, Vice Admiral Oleksiy Neizhpapa, was born in Sevastopol, grew up in Sevastopol, studied in Sevastopol, served in Sevastopol, and no one from his hometown called him on February 24, 2022.
About how a country without a large fleet managed to sink and damage two flagships of the Russian fleet, why the "Hetman Sahaidachny" was sunk, whether Ukraine will be able to push the Black Sea Fleet out of Crimea and how Neizhpapa first returned to Sevastopol on a naval drone - the commander of the Navy told the publication "Ukrainian Truth".
"After 2014, I didn't have any friends there. Especially among fellow servicemen who were in the Armed Forces of Ukraine at the time of 2014. After that, we never maintained any relations with them. They are traitors. That's why nobody called me, there were no calls, warnings or anything like that. But I wouldn't pick up the phone." - explains the vice admiral.
After the Russian annexation of Crimea, Neizhpapa was among those Ukrainian sailors who kept their oath and left Sevastopol for the mainland. So our conversation takes place in his current office in Odessa.
This room itself is not distinguished by anything special, but in its corners and on the walls there are dozens of artifacts, which in general can be used to describe Ukraine's war for its right to be called and be a maritime state.
For example, here you can see the cover from the launcher of the Neptune complex. It was this cover that flew off at the moment of the missile launch, which became fatal for the Russian cruiser "Moskva".
A little further on the wall hangs next to a photo of a Ukrainian fighter jet and a signal tape from the Storm Shadow missile, which turned the Headquarters of the Black Sea Fleet in Crimea into a blaze.
But with special interest, the vice admiral shows his scratch card, which shows the entire composition of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation. After each successful operation at sea, Neizhpapa notes on this map the losses of the Russians: if the ship is damaged, the silver paint is partially erased from it in the place of damage, if the ship is destroyed, it turns into a completely red spot. Like, for example, the same "Moscow" or the submarine "Rostov-on-Don".
"Someday everything here will be red," Neizhpapa says conspiratorially and breaks into a genuine smile.
The beginning of the invasion and "Hetman Sahaidachny"
- Now there is some understanding that the state leadership in February 2022 considered escalation possible only in Donbas. Did you believe that there would really be a full-scale war?
- I am a military man. I have to prepare for worst case scenarios, that's my job. Before the start of a full-scale aggression, the enemy created a full-fledged grouping of amphibious forces, gathering amphibious ships from all fleets, acquired the ability to land a full-fledged brigade of marines simultaneously in several directions.
Therefore, of course, I understood that the war will not be only in Donbas. We understood this very well and were preparing for it.
- And how exactly? For example, the Air Force took helicopters to the fields, prepared spare airfields. And what was the training of the Naval Forces like?
- A certain group was created in the Navy by order of the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. This group was scattered, some ships were at sea, some were in other bases, irregular, as they say: on civilian piers or other facilities. But most of the ships were at sea.
Therefore, in the first days of the war, not a single warship was damaged after massive enemy strikes, all of them were dispersed. Naval aviation was also lifted from the airfields. We have no significant damage to naval aviation at the start of a full-scale aggression.
- Our only sensitive loss is the Hetman Sahaidachny frigate. Can you tell us about how the decision to flood it was made?
- At the time of the full-scale invasion, repair and modernization work began on "Hetman Sahaidachny". There was no energy on it at all, all diesel generators were subject to complete replacement, turbines were being repaired, all weapons were also out of order.
As a warship that could participate in repelling aggression, it was not capable at that time at all.
Therefore, the commander of the ship made a wise decision, in my opinion. This is written in the provision "On ship service": the ship must not reach the enemy. And at that moment, the enemy was advancing very quickly through the Kherson region, had already bypassed Kherson, and was on the approaches to Mykolaiv.
- Do you remember the morning of February 24? How did you find out about the start of the invasion?
- I heard everything myself. I was at my workplace in the office and heard the flight of a cruise missile. And then, as they say now, "arrival" at the "Skhilny" airfield (in Odesa - UP). We felt it directly. Therefore, everything was understood immediately. Then the operative on duty reported, but even then I understood that this was the beginning of a full-scale aggression. Then, of course, the report to the commander-in-chief, and all military bodies began to work.
- You said that at the beginning of a full-scale invasion, the Russians gathered full-fledged units capable of carrying out large-scale amphibious operations. But there were no amphibious operations. How was this avoided?
- So that you understand, the amphibious operation is one of the most difficult naval operations in general. All branches of the fleet are involved in its implementation. The first, of course, are amphibious ships, directly marines. But these are also fire support ships, this is aviation.
Landing requires mastery both in the air and at sea. At that moment, the enemy had such dominance. But still, a naval amphibious operation, as a rule, is carried out in the direction of the enemy's main attack. It begins when appropriate conditions are created on land.
After a full-scale invasion, the enemy advanced to Mykolaiv, then went northwest, bypassing Mykolaiv in the direction of Voznesensk, to enter the rear of the Odesa region. If our 80th Airborne Assault Brigade had not stopped the enemy near Voznesensk, conditions would have been created for the Russian army to launch an amphibious operation in the Black Sea operational zone.
But the Naval Forces did not stand still. We carried out a defensive mine barrier in the areas accessible for landing. From the first days, the artillery unit of the marines and other brigades, which were stationed in Odesa at that time, were brought into the area of firing positions. Radio engineering and radar reconnaissance were strengthened with the involvement of radio engineering posts and Bayraktar unmanned systems in order to detect enemy landings.
That is, we were also preparing for such actions of the enemy. Yes, the landings did not take place because the conditions on land were not created at that time, in the first place. Second, you know the story when we first hit the Admiral Essen frigate with Neptune missiles. And then there was the same cruiser "Moscow". And the enemy realized that it would be very difficult to simply go to our shores without drowning. Therefore, of course, he refused the amphibious operation.
The first success of the Neptunes and Snake Island
- You mentioned "Neptunes". Do you remember the first launch of "Neptune"?
- Of course, I remember.
- Can I talk about it already?
- The first use of "Neptune" was when the frigate "Admiral Essen" came very close to our shore. And he was followed by more amphibious ships along the Tendrivskaya Spit.
- What district did they go to?
– In the direction of the port "Pivdenny", between "Pivdenny" and Ochakiv, somewhere in the middle, in the Rybakivka district (a resort village in the Mykolaiv region - UP).
They carried out so-called demonstration actions. What was it done for? So that the units of the marines and others, who were standing on the shore at that time, were constantly preparing for the landing, so as not to give the opportunity to transfer these brigades to the Mykolaiv direction or to the side of Voznesensk for help. The enemy wanted to keep us in constant tension, that the landing of the landing force was about to be prepared.
At the same time, their ships were sailing near Odesa, firing shots from deck guns, shelling civilian objects. It was clear that right now there would be no amphibious landing, because the conditions were not created. But they constantly repeated it, landing forces lined up in formation, moved towards Odessa with fire support ships - everything according to the classics, as the book says. But we understood that these were purely demonstration actions.
And when "Essen" approached, we decided to try what our "Neptune" can do. The first launches were not as successful as on the cruiser "Moscow", but then this frigate "Essen" was damaged for the first time. There were several "two hundred" on board, as far as I know. The ship urgently returned to Sevastopol for repairs, the missile did not hit the ship directly, I understand. There was an explosion right next to the ship that damaged the weapon system on this frigate.
And the most interesting thing is that they even shot down their own plane right off the coast, which covered the ships from the air.
This was the first application.
- And those amphibious ships that went with "Admiral Essen" also turned around?
- So. But, I understand that they did not understand that we have powerful missile weapons, and continued to do almost the same thing.
There were approaches to our shores. There were many strange episodes. For example, the frigate "Admiral Makarov" chased after a small diving ship that was going along the shore, delivered a fire strike, next to this ship there were such big splashes of water as in the movies.
But the crew did not get lost, came under the protection of coastal artillery, which inflicted damage on "Makarov". He realized that there was nothing more for him to do there, and quickly returned to Sevastopol.
There were many such examples. Therefore, such a small war at sea continued at that time.
- On the first day of the invasion, Snake Island was captured. Were there any theoretical possibilities for the garrison guarding the island to resist the enemy forces that were advancing on it?
- How to tell you... The garrison was armed with certain small arms and anti-tank means, but there was no full cover from the air or from the sea - because we do not have cruise missile carrier ships. This garrison could not resist such an armada of the Russian Federation in full-scale aggression.
It was put in place in order, first of all, to prevent so-called asymmetric actions that could occur in the event of the deployment of some "Crimean scenario". If there was a seizure by special operations forces of the Russian Federation, our garrison was stationed on the island to repel such actions.
At that time, he could not resist full-scale aggression. We had not yet built coastal missile forces that could, as now, destroy enemy ships, and there were no medium-range anti-aircraft weapons to destroy enemy aircraft on approach.
The garrison found itself in a very difficult situation. I requested permission from the Commander-in-Chief of the ZSU Zaluzhnyi to evacuate this garrison. Received permission. But due to weather conditions, we didn't have time to do it, unfortunately.
- How did the balance of forces at sea change after the capture of Zmiiny?
- Zmeiny became the bridgehead of the Russian Federation for the control of navigation on the Danube and on the approaches to the ports of the so-called Great Odessa: Chornomorsk, Pivdenny and Odesa directly. From this island, raiding operations were carried out by enemy boats to the Danube. They tried to mine the approaches to the mouth. There were even fire clashes between these boats and boats of the Ukrainian Navy directly in the Danube itself.
And from this island, the isolation of the district was also ensured. You know that the enemy, with the beginning of full-scale aggression, created a group consisting of amphibious ships, fire support ships, anti-mine ships, ships that used "Caliber" throughout the territory of Ukraine, and a detachment of district isolation ships.
The latter were controlled by the cruiser "Moscow". On this cruiser, a command post was made to isolate the area and control the airspace in the combat zone. These ships carried out a complete isolation from the Crimea to the Danube in order to prevent, as they believed, the ships of partners or civilian vessels from entering the area of hostilities.
The first sunken flagship "Moscow"
- By the way, about the cruiser "Moscow". How did we manage to track him down? Because both we and our Western colleagues have completely different versions of this story.
- It's wonderful that everyone has different stories. You know, I would say this: everyone has his own truth, and there is only one truth. Therefore, I will not tell how it happened.
I can only confirm that the cruiser "Moskva" was destroyed with the help of the forces and means of the Naval Forces of Ukraine from the beginning to the very end: from detection to its destruction.
- Okay. And can you explain, at least for people who have not devoted their lives to the sea and warships, what the cruiser "Moskva" meant for Russians both in terms of military and propaganda? So that people can feel what "Moscow" is for Black Forest.
- Just so you understand, this is a Guards cruiser with a Guards ribbon. This ribbon is yellow and black as a symbol of victory, as they say, in the Great Patriotic War. All sailors wearing visors have worn this ribbon regularly since Soviet times.
Cruiser "Moscow" was built in Ukraine, in Mykolaiv. The first cruiser of this series. There were four in total. The fourth still stands in Mykolaiv unfinished. It is built on the basis of the project of a large anti-submarine ship, but of an even larger size. Its first name was "Glory".
This is the flagship. If there is no cruiser, by and large a fleet cannot be called a fleet. Without a cruiser, a ship of the first rank, it is called a flotilla. This understanding of gradation has been accepted since the time of the Soviet Union as mandatory.
Now their flagship is the Admiral Makarov frigate, not a cruiser. By old Soviet standards, it was a second-rate ship. Now, probably, his rank has been increased, because he is, after all, the carrier of Calibers. Thus, the cruiser "Moscow" is precisely the flagship of the fleet.
By the way, it was named "Moscow" after the request of the mayor of Moscow to name one of the ships in the Black Sea Fleet after the capital of Russia. Until that time, a large anti-submarine aircraft carrier cruiser was called "Moscow". I also found him when I was a cadet at our Institute of the Naval Forces of Ukraine. That is, he was still part of the Black Army after the declaration of Ukraine's independence.
And then it was written off and, of course, this name "Moscow" had to be transferred to someone else. At that time, the cruiser "Slava" was standing at the factory in Mykolaiv for long-term repairs. And here, as they say, everything coincided: they decided to give it the name of the capital of Russia.
And from that time, the attention of Putler personally, who was on this cruiser several times, and the then mayor of Moscow Luzhkov, and his successor Sobyanin were drawn to him.
It was the pride of the Black Sea Fleet. The cruiser took part in all the conflicts of the post-Soviet period: in the war with Georgia, all the forces of the fleet near its coast were controlled from it, it was in Syria and in the area of other conflicts.
The cruiser underwent a complete overhaul before the full-scale aggression, a lot of money was invested in its modernization. But as I understand it, it did not help, this modernization.
From a political and image point of view, this is a great loss for Russia. Especially from the image one. From a military point of view, this cruiser is intended for the ocean, it is not intended for the Black Sea, it is too small for it. Because the forces and means installed on it are primarily cruise missiles with a range of 500 kilometers.
During the Cold War, it was laid to destroy the aircraft carriers of the United States. That's what they were called - "killer of aircraft carriers". Of course, there are no aircraft carriers in the Black Sea. According to the Montreux Convention, they are prohibited from entering here. And it is difficult for such large ships to pass under the bridges in the Bosphorus Strait. Therefore, from a military point of view, this cruiser was not really needed here.
The only thing is that it was possible to place a command post on "Moscow". There are large flagship cabins. So that you understand, in my opinion, 7 floors. An elevator for going up from the main command post, which is below the main deck, to the gangway. 7 decks that the elevator passes through! Well, so that the commander or senior officer does not walk on the bridge of the commander. There was a pool. That is, the ship provided very comfortable living conditions for personnel for long-term trips.
And, of course, "Moscow" covered the main issues of air defense: it was equipped with detection systems, radio-electronic warfare, and the naval version of the S-300 anti-aircraft missile system, which was called "Fort". It was an air defense umbrella over order ships (order of location of ships during a campaign or battle - UP).
That is, "Moscow" performed several functions: a command post, an anti-aircraft defense ship and a symbol that is "Moscow came with war". Everything begins with Moscow, and everything, I understand, will end there.
- What do you feel when you sink such a ship?
- Of course, emotions were overflowing. You know, within a day, and he was drowning for almost a day, just everyone called me. "Drowned or not drowned? Did he drown or didn't he drown?". I say, "I can't follow, I'm not near him."
We knew he was still afloat. We tried to follow up, but did not have complete information. There was something in the press, in open sources of Russia itself, we received some information from radio intercepts.
But first of all, we realized that there was an impression after all, when I was told that all the ships that were next to the cruiser began to move towards it very quickly. And he himself, let's say, drifted, that is, he stopped moving. Then we realized that we had hit it.
Then intelligence, radio interception, reports. It sank almost a day later. Of course, there were emotions. But we did not yet fully understand the weight of the moment. Because the war is going on, tomorrow someone may come again, we have to work again with cruise missiles or whatever we have. There was no time to particularly sit and feel some great victory, the situation at that time was very tense.
Yes, there was joy, of course, that Ukrainian weapons are so successful. Of course, this is such a historical moment. But it somehow passed very quickly for me personally.
- But, in fact, the sinking of the "Moscow" upset the entire balance of forces at sea.
- Of course, after the sinking of the cruiser "Moscow", the enemy realized that he could no longer approach our coast just like that. He should have made some other tactical decision. And the ships of the Russian Federation, especially large ones, were already much further away from our shores than they had been since the beginning of the full-scale aggression. They did not come closer than 100 nautical miles (a little more than 180 kilometers - UP).
It was a certain victory. Already in April 2022, we turned the northwestern part of the Black Sea, which is almost 25 thousand square kilometers, into a gray zone. When, by and large, ships of the Russian Federation cannot enter there, because there is a risk of their being flooded by our coastal missile forces.
But, of course, we cannot feel at ease in this zone either, because the enemy still has air superiority, and they also have coastal missile forces. As we operate our missile systems in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, the Russian Federation is doing the same in the Odesa region.
This is such a large gray area that no one has complete control over. But the ships of the Black Sea Fleet are not there and never will be. And this is the first serious stage in the liberation of the sea from the Russian invaders.
Drones and the second damaged flagship of the Black Sea Fleet
- It is interesting that you will go down in history as the commander of the Navy, during which not one, but two flagships of the Russian Black Sea Fleet were hit. "Moscow" was sunk, and "Admiral Makarov" was damaged. Only not with missiles, but with sea drones.
- You know, this is such a story! I think we will then write a historical account of how it happened with our colleagues from the Security Service.
There were many comical incidents during these attacks. And there were several of them, more than once we tried to hit this very frigate "Admiral Makarov". Another frigate "Essen" was also hit by us directly in the bay of Sevastopol. That is, it was damaged twice: the first time by a Neptune cruise missile, the second time by one of the drones that exploded nearby right in the Sevastopol Bay.
- UP wrote a text about these attacks, and there General Hunter very vividly described the story of how you controlled the drones in this Sevastopol bay, how you controlled them from memory...
- ...Not as I remember - I can see everything, the camera is working. And I completely orient myself there, where everything is. And he gave commands directly: he stood behind the cameraman, rudely telling him to do his job correctly.
- By the way, SBU head Malyuk says in the same text that with the start of our use of these drones, a new era has begun in the conduct of maritime operations. Do you agree with this? And, if so, what is this epochal change?
- You know, any war is the development of military technologies. We use technology, the enemy develops countermeasures. This is the only way to understand whether it works or not.
Some of our tricks, application tactics, which were practiced in 2022 and 2023, will no longer pass in 2024. Therefore, you need to change tactics, change the technical characteristics of everything you do.
In general, if we say, from the beginning of the full-scale aggression, missile troops and naval drones played a very significant role in the liberation of the Ukrainian sea. Therefore, I agree that unmanned technologies are the technologies of the future for military conflicts. We will get to the point, I am not saying this for the first time, that the war of the future is a war of drones against drones. It will be so.
But the sea has a certain non-linearity. Therefore, to say that only these drugs are suitable for this disease, and the rest can already be thrown away - I will never say that. Yes, drones are another way to get wet. I agree with this, it works. But there is a certain limitation in the use of these means. First of all, it is the size, armament, and the ability to withstand weather conditions - many things that distinguish them from a ship.
Of course, there is a very big difference: sitting in a bunker opposite the screen and seeing the enemy through the TV, the enemy who is on the ship looking at this drone. It's like on the battlefield, when a soldier sees a drone coming at him from above, but he can't do anything.
But the enemy also understands this and will use drones at sea in the same way as they use them on land. The enemy is also learning, he also has a very powerful industrial complex, and no one has ever spared the Russians money for weapons. Therefore, we have very difficult drone wars ahead of us.
We must move in that direction, we must develop. I strongly support Vasyl Vasyliovych (Malyuk - UP) that drones are the weapon that can bring us closer to victory at sea.
But this is not the only solution. Simply transfer the fleet to drones and win - it won't work that way. It is the same as giving up tanks, BMPs, guns and everything else to the Ground Forces.
- You can't land a landing party on drones...
- So. You can claim a territory as yours only when your soldier or marine's boot is standing on it. Then this is your territory. The same is true at sea. When you have a ship standing in these territorial waters, and no one can do anything with it, only then is it your sea.
How to finally destroy the Black Sea Fleet
- In his latest interviews, President Zelensky openly hints that this year Ukraine is concentrating on knocking out the Black Sea Fleet from Crimea. After the successful operations of the summer-autumn of 2023, to what extent is Crimea still a comfortable base for the Black Sea Fleet?
- What is a base? This is the center of logistical support of the fleet. Sevastopol is a base that was built over centuries. Ammunition and fuel reserves are scattered there, which are hidden in the mountains, they are not so easy to hit. Caliber missiles are also located there, because there are closed storage systems for them.
Secondly, Sevastopol has a medical care center, a large hospital, and so on. All educational institutions were built there. That is, Sevastopol is such a strategic hub.
It is physically dangerous for the fleet to be in Novorossiysk, especially in such numbers. The military port that Russia built already during Ukraine's independence was enlarged, but it is not developed enough to provide a base for the Black Sea Fleet.
Especially since immediately after the occupation of Crimea, almost all the resources that were allocated for the development of the entire fleet of Russia went to the Black Sea Fleet. Russia was preparing for this war, it strengthened the Black Sea Fleet as much as possible: the latest frigates, submarines, missile boats with Calibers.
And Sevastopol is the main base, which fully satisfies the maintenance of the fleet, the repair base, these are several repair plants, and also airfields, and the same "Belbek" and "Kacha". In the same Novorossiysk, there are no airfields, no large repair factories, no such places for storing weapons, etc.
This is largely one of the reasons why they ended up in Crimea in 2014. Because without Sevastopol, they would not have been able to keep the Black Sea Fleet in the Black Sea.
- To what extent can the Russians now safely use this Crimean hub? After Ukrainian attacks, including drone strikes.
- Again. We need to understand that we have more than just drones. A very big role is played by the Air Force of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with its famous Storm Shadow. It was they who provided very accurate strikes on the headquarters of the Black Sea Fleet. Or the first time in history a submarine was destroyed.
This is a historical event, by the way, somewhere on the level of the cruiser "Moscow". The Caliber carrier was destroyed right in the dock. A powerful new submarine with a good name "Rostov-on-Don". Or the latest Askold missile boat, which was never introduced into the fleet.
These are the successes of all the Defense Forces: SBU drones, of course, and the Air Force, and our coastal missile forces, and the means of the Main Intelligence Directorate that they have. And this complex of our measures forced the Russian Federation to reduce the use of Sevastopol as the main base. And Feodosia recently too.
- How realistic is it to make it so that Russia, even if it controls the peninsula, cannot use its naval bases?
- This is work that must be done. There is a task for the president, the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces, and we will work.
- Russia is currently building a new naval base in Abkhazia. What is she for?
- There is such information. This is not quite a base, but a base point, most likely, for dispersing the ship's crew. Because you can't keep the entire fleet at one base. Moreover, Novorossiysk is not a very pleasant port for basing due to weather conditions, especially in winter. Sevastopol is a very closed bay. It is very geographically suitable for parking ships. It is protected from all winds except the west. Very symbolic, by the way.
And in Novorossiysk there are very unpleasant winds, called bora. It is a strong wind that comes down from the Caucasian mountains, and because of this, parking in the port is dangerous. In addition, entering the port in Novorossiysk is dangerous in itself, and therefore, in certain weather conditions, the ship's commander must have considerable abilities, simply to ensure navigational safety. I am not talking about sailing or combat use, it is inconvenient for ships to simply stand in this port. Therefore, of course, this is a problem for Russia, which they now want to somehow solve.
- And if Russia builds this base in Abkhazia, will it be a legitimate target for Ukraine or not?
- For us, any ship flying the St. Andrew's flag of the Russian Navy is a legal target. Wherever he is in any part of the world ocean.
Grain corridor, NATO convoys and demining of the sea
- After the successful actions of the Defense Forces in the sea, Ukraine was able to launch its own maritime corridor. Recently, Zelenskyi said that the partners will provide ships to escort vessels in this corridor. Was it about ships from Britain, which Turkey has now refused to let into the Black Sea, or about other vessels?
- These are slightly different things. Turkey has said that they will not miss the Cherkasy and Chernihiv mine countermeasures ships. These are two ships that were handed over to us in early 2023. They are already part of the Navy, although they are now in Great Britain. There, our crews undergo training according to NATO standards, and I think that after its completion, these ships of ours will be fully compatible with NATO countries in terms of mine action.
But we did not submit an order for these ships to pass through the Turkish Straits, because we understand that this is prohibited under the Montreux Convention. Otherwise, the Russian Federation can do the same and increase the number, for example, of missile carriers or amphibious ships. We understand that, and that's why we didn't try to do it.
I think there must have been some misunderstanding in the information field. I can only guess, but there are minesweepers sailing from Britain for Romania. They are exactly the same absolutely, of the same class as ours. Perhaps, because of them, this topic in the press arose. But these are ships bought by the Romanian side for themselves in Great Britain.
As for the support that the president said, the following negotiations are underway, including the involvement of NATO ships to ensure the safety of civilian shipping to the ports of Ukraine. And when they will be implemented or not, there is currently no information. I myself personally asked about it from partners.
- Are these supposed to be some Romanian or Turkish ships that are already in the Black Sea?
- We will not say what ships these will be, but I have addressed several commanders with requests. This is a political issue. Therefore, all my friends who are fleet commanders confirmed to me that if there is a political decision of the leadership, they will implement it. Now this issue is raised precisely at the level of the president. If he said so, then he and the Office are working on it.
- Now the Turks, Bulgarians and Romanians have launched a joint mission to clear the mines of the Black Sea. Can it be extended to our waters? Is this also a political decision?
- I was in Romania at the beginning of September. There was just a meeting with the participation of all the commanders of the Black Sea fleets, except Russia, of course, plus the involved specialists and commanders of the 6th US fleet, the commander of the NATO Navy was also present.
Issues regarding further actions to ensure mine safety in the Black Sea were discussed. Ukraine, of course, is primarily interested in this, so we made a proposal to divide this work into several stages.
The first is direct mine action, which is carried out right now while there is a full-scale war and there are certain restrictions under the same Montreux Convention.
The second stage is now that Romania, Bulgaria, and Turkey are united in such a tactical group to combat drifting mines. For now, they will deal with those mines that are in their area of responsibility, not off the coast of Ukraine or in our exclusive economic zone.
Our vision is that we should also be in this group to have our representatives for coordination. And so it will be.
And the third stage - immediately after our victory, a full-scale anti-mine operation will begin. For this purpose, the Navy created the appropriate headquarters, people are undergoing training, we already have anti-mine ships, which will arrive in the Black Sea immediately after the victory. We train our specialists and divers as well.
- And how long will it take for this big operation to demine our entire sea?
- It depends on the available forces that we will involve. First of all, it will be necessary to demine the recommended routes and anchorages - what is used in civil shipping. All ships follow the recommended routes. There are also roads on the sea, it's just that no one marks them with curbs.
It will take 5-7 months to secure these routes, anchorages, etc. But it depends, again, on the number of ships and means that will be involved in this operation.
We will have the two anti-mine ships I mentioned. This year, we will receive another anti-mine ship from the Netherlands. Then in 2025 – another one. That is, we will have a full-fledged anti-mine division. But if our area of responsibility, for example, the NATO group, is involved in this, it will be faster.
But for the demining of the entire area of hostilities, that is, the Black Sea, plus the Sea of Azov, it will take years.
Roman Romaniuk, UE
To always be aware of the most important things, read us at Telegram
