What happened to the sinking of the Moskva, the largest Russian warship

The Russian warship Moskva rests in the depths of the Black Sea this morning. Whether he is there as a victim of Ukrainian missiles, Russian incompetence, bad luck or a combination of the three is unclear.

What is certain, however, is that the biggest loss of a warship in 40 years will raise troubling questions not just for Moscow but for military strategists around the world.

What caused the sinking?

The ship sank off the coast of Ukraine in the Black Sea on Thursday (15). The Russian Defense Ministry says a fire of unknown origin detonated the ship’s stored munitions, and the resulting explosions left the Moskva with structural damage. The folder then stated that the warship sank amid rough seas while being towed to a nearby port.

Ukraine says it hit the Moskva with anti-ship cruise missiles, which caused the fire that detonated the munitions.

American and Western defense officials appear to favor the Ukrainian account. The United States believes with “medium confidence” that Ukraine’s version of events is accurate, he told CNN a familiar source.

The Moskva was armed with an array of anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles, as well as torpedoes, naval weapons and anti-missile defense systems, meaning it would have a massive amount of explosives on board.

When was the last time a ship of this size was lost in war?

The Argentine ship General Belgrano was hit and sank during the Falkland Islands war, after an attack by the British nuclear-powered submarine HMS Conqueror, on May 2, 1982.

General Belgrano and Moskva were of similar size—each about 182 meters long and weighing 12,000 tons—although the crew of about 1,100 aboard General Belgrano was more than twice the size of the Moskva’s crew, which had about 500 people.

Russia did not disclose the number of casualties that occurred during the sinking of the Moskva. A total of 323 crew died when General Belgrano sank.

What does the loss of Moskva mean for the Russian war effort?

The greatest effect may be on Russian morale. As the admiral of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, the Moskva was one of its most evident riches in the Ukraine war.

While Moscow carefully manages news of the conflict, the sudden absence of such a large ship will be difficult to hide, and its loss will raise doubts about Russia’s wartime capability — whether due to enemy action or an accident.

“Both explanations for the sinking of the Moskva indicate possible Russian deficiencies — either flaws in air defenses, or lax safety procedures and damage control on the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet,” wrote analysts Mason Clark, Kateryna Stepanenko and George Barros of the Institute for the Study of War in his daily briefing.

Carl Schuster, a former US Navy captain, said doubts reached the Kremlin.

“This raises doubts about naval competence 10 years after (Russian President Vladimir) Putin announced that he would restore the Navy’s capabilities, morale and professionalism,” Schuster said.

“It appears he hasn’t been able to deliver on any of his promises to any of Russia’s military services,” Schuster said, noting that Russia had also suffered setbacks on land.

But analysts are divided on the impact the sinking will have on the Russian invasion.

Analysts at the Institute for War Studies assess the situation as a relatively minor blow, saying the ship was primarily used for cruise missile strikes on Ukrainian logistics centers and airfields. Russia has ground systems and attack planes that can do the same thing, they said.

However, experts added that if it were indeed a Ukrainian missile that led to the sinking, the Russian navy would have to rethink its operations, possibly moving ships further away from Ukrainian territory and adjusting its air defenses.

In Washington, Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said Moskva’s main mission was air defense for Russian forces in the Black Sea. “It will have an impact on that capability, certainly in the short term,” Kirby told reporters.

A lesson for China?

Analysts say the sinking will be carefully studied in East Asia, especially if it is confirmed that Ukrainian missiles hit the warship.

In particular, analysts will be looking for any insights it can offer into any potential military conflict involving Taiwan — the democratically governed island that the Communist Party of Beijing claims as part of its territory.

Beijing has not ruled out using force to gain control of Taiwan, which has raised tensions with the US, which is keen to supply the island with defensive weapons.

Timothy Heath, senior international defense researcher at the think tank RAND Corp., said the attack on Moskva would underscore both China and the US “the vulnerability of surface ships” in any potential military conflict.

Heath said that in such a scenario, the US Navy would like to keep its surface ships well out of range of the anti-ship missiles that Beijing has amassed on the Chinese mainland.

China, on the other hand, would be aware that Taiwan was acquiring cheap anti-ship missiles similar to the ones Ukraine claims to have hit the Moskva, Heath and others have assessed.

Because of this, “any potential (Chinese) invasion of Taiwan remains an extremely high-risk mission,” Heath said.

But some analysts said the Moskva sinking had limited relevance to the situation in East Asia.

Thomas Shugart, a former US Navy submarine commander who is now an analyst at the Center for a New American Security, said there were too many differences between the situations.

Moskva’s air defense systems are not in the same league as the more modern Aegis systems of the US Navy’s destroyers, and Ukrainian anti-ship missiles are not as good as the Chinese, Shugart said.

And Soviet-era warships like Moskva have typically been “known for their offensive power, not their defensive or damage control systems,” Shugart said.

Source: CNN Brasil

You may also like