I would normally not give exposure to this kind of news but there are a few points I want to make. Foremost, I am quite amused at how fast and how extensive bad news from Russia is covered in the US while politically pertinent developments or news that casts Russia in a good light is virtually banned from mainstream media coverage, with rare exceptions. The recent tragic accident that took the lives of twenty Russian sailors and shipbuilders is being presented in the US as a sign that Russia's military is hopelessly outdated. From my perspective, however, the recent deadly accidents within the Russian military, while normal by international standards, are clear signs that the Russian military is emerging from its decade long deprivation and degradation. The slumbering Russian military is awakening and becoming highly active again. Unfortunately, on its course towards recuperation and modernization there will more such incidents. Furthermore, Moscow's reaction to the unfortunate incident was a pleasant surprise. The news of the accident was broadcasted soon after it had occurred and constant media coverage is continuing. In a news article today the New York Times suggested that Putin, unlike Medvedev with the current event, was grossly negligent during the Kursk incident in 2000. Well, was Putin negligent or was he forced into inaction due to serious geopolitical considerations? Please watch the following video presentation -

The Kursk tragedy - a submarin in troubled waters: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...18731467852276



Russian Sub Returns to Base After Accident That Killed 20

November, 2008

A brand-new Russian nuclear submarine returned to base on Sunday after an accident with its fire-extinguishing system flooded two compartments with Freon gas, killing 20 people and injuring 21, Russian officials said. Naval officials would not identify the submarine, but a state-owned news agency said it was the Nerpa, an Akula-class attack submarine. It was undergoing tests in the Sea of Japan at the time of the accident. A Russian Navy spokesman, Igor Dygalo, reported that its reactor had not been damaged and that radiation levels were normal. The vessel was scheduled to be commissioned in the navy later this year, and most of the dead were shipbuilding workers on board to carry out tests. An additional 167 people on board were not injured, Mr. Dygalo said. The specific naval base to which the sub returned was not disclosed, though the accident occurred near Vladivostok, the main base in Russia’s far east. It was the most deadly accident on a Russian submarine since 2000, when an explosion aboard the nuclear submarine Kursk caused it to sink in the Barents Sea. Many of the 118 men aboard survived the sinking, but they were all dead by the time the vessel was brought to the surface, prompting criticism that Vladimir V. Putin, who was then the president, had reacted slowly to the crisis. The government’s response to this accident has been notably different. Within hours of the malfunction, President Dmitri A. Medvedev asked his defense minister for continual briefings on the situation and pledged support to victims’ families. News coverage has been intense, with telephone hot line numbers for victims’ families displayed on newscasts. Russian submarines have had other accidents since the sinking of the Kursk. In 2003, a decommissioned nuclear submarine sank while it was being towed to a scrap yard, killing nine crew members. In 2004, one person was killed when a holding tank on a submarine exploded during repair work. In 2005, a hurried international rescue effort brought seven Russian sailors to the surface with only three to six hours’ worth of air left. And in 2006, two soldiers suffocated when a fire broke out on a nuclear submarine in the Barents Sea.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/wo...russia.html?hp

No comments:

Post a Comment

Dear reader,

Arevordi will be taking a sabbatical to tend to personal matters. New blog commentaries will therefore be posted on an irregular basis. The comments board however will continue to be moderated on a regular basis. To limit clutter in the comments section, I kindly ask all participants of this blog to please keep comments coherent and strictly relevant to the featured topic of discussion. Moreover, please realize that when there are several anonymous visitors posting comments simultaneously, it becomes very confusing (not to mention extremely annoying) trying to figure out who is who and who said what. If you are here to engage in conversation, make an observation, express an idea or just attack me, I ask you to at least use a moniker to identify yourself... or else, I will not post your comments, especially if they are, in my opinion, nonsense. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.