There is a heavy British military presence off the coast of Ireland in response to a Russian ‘live-fire’ naval exercise being held south of the country.

You can see Typhoon jets, a Voyager tanker and P-8 Maritime Patrol Aircraft close to the Russian fleet. In addition, a British frigate is nearby.

Here’s a video I created using ‘ADS-B Exchange’ a popular flight tracking system.

According to the Irish Times here, an Irish Air Corps Maritime Patrol Aircraft observed two Russian warships within the EEZ overnight, “approximately 140 nautical miles (260 km) southwest” of Ireland.

An Irish Defense Forces spokesman was quoted as saying that vessels were outside Irish sovereign waters and therefore acted in accordance with international law.

“There are no restrictions on warships operating on the high seas inside or outside the exclusive economic zone.”

The report added:

“During the day, the Air Corps also observed two French Navy ships with RAF Typhoon fighters outside the EEZ, which cast a shadow over Russian ships. Navy service LE Samuel Beckett was also in an area monitoring the movement of the ship. The US Navy’s USS Roosevelt, a destroyer equipped with two helicopters, was also monitored by the Defense Forces. The Royal Air Force made numerous flights in response to the ship and the arrival of Russian military aircraft around its EEZ without notice.”

In addition to Typhoon jets, P-8 Maritime Patrol aircraft and a Voyager tanker, HMS Argyll is involved in monitoring Russian vessels on their way to exercises outside of Irish waters.

The Irish Air Corps has released imagery of ships and aircraft involved, taken from one of their aircraft. A few of those images are shown below, click the images below to enlarge them.

IAC-RUSIAC-RUS
IAC-argyllIAC-argyll
IAC-TyphoonIAC-Typhoon

You can view more of these by clicking here.

What’s happening?

Russia is holding ‘live-fire’ naval exercises between February 3rd-8th off the Irish coast. Originally, the exercises were to be held 240km (150 miles) off southwestern Ireland – in international waters but within Ireland’s exclusive economic zone. The tweet below shows the original location.

Irish Foreign Minister Simon Coveney last week objected to the exercise:

“This isn’t a time to increase military activity and tension in the context of what’s happening with and in Ukraine. The fact that they are choosing to do it on the western borders, if you like, of the EU, off the Irish coast, is something that in our view is simply not welcome.”

British Maritime Patrol Aircraft operating off Irish coast

Russia’s embassy in Ireland on Saturday posted on Facebook saying the exercises would be relocated outside of the Irish economic zone “with the aim not to hinder fishing activities”.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

150 COMMENTS

  1. I thought that the RAF had primacy for the airspace protection of Irish territory. I did not think Ireland had a credible air force but the article mentions a patrol aircraft, am i wrong?

    • The Irish Air Corps (move over, Biggles) has a pair of CASA/IPTN CN-235 Marine Patrol aircraft.

      (To be fair – have a decent patrol range)

      I love how the newspapers are also reporting the presence of American and French forces.

      • There’s US, French and UK ships out there along with the Russians and the Irish Navy, no different than when the US, UK and French navies have been conducting exercises in the Irish EEZ over the years.

      • Quite right too, excellent to see NATO allies US and France there. The Russians should feel they are surrounded and watched from all sides.

        • The other way of looking at this, is that this is purely a distraction tactic by Russia to see what happens or to divert resources away from other areas.

          • Yes, could well be. NATO has no choice but to act, despite our limitations.
            I don’t agree with the suggestion from some we should just ignore these deployments.

          • Hmme

            Well countries that can be counted on like the Dutch, US, UK. Nordics and ex soviet satellites are in this.

            France (Micron) are more interested in self aggrandisement.

            Germany are on the fence haunted by WWII nightmares.

            Honestly the calculus has to exclude Germany unless they are directly attacked.

            And should never include France unless they are in charge……

          • Quite right, it does make you wonder what Russia are up to elsewhere while attention is focussed on Ukraine and the western approaches…

          • The trans Atlantic Internet cables are around that area. They probably trying to steal secrets or fuck stuff up

        • Yes I would be up for 20 or so Typhoons doing low flying over the Russian ships. To return the greeting they gave our ships in the Black Sea. I think that would make the point they are in our back yard and not welcome.

          • Better to be more professional about it than the Russians. We expect freedom of navigation. That said we should watch them like hawks and take the appropraite action if they start interfering with any of our kit.

          • Nicely, put Mark,

            Professionalism is what keeps the peace whilst demonstrating what can and will happen if someone goes too far. It’s called deterence and its all about balance.

            Cheers CR

    • You are wrong, there’s an agreement between Ireland an the UK for fighter reaction response, though the agreement has never been published, but outside of the 12 mile the UK can operate in the EEZ like everyone else.

          • a bilateral agreement between Ireland’s Department of Defence, Department of Foreign Affairs and the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA) with British counterparts: the RAF, the Civil Aviation Authority, the Ministry of Defence, and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

          • Which is for the RAF fighters to respond to a situation formalising the ad hoc arrangement post 9/11. There is no such thing as the “Republic of Ireland Neutrality Act”, either in the U.K. or the Republic.

          • Madam, – Recent developments have again raised the intractable issue of Irish neutrality. The problem is that there are two definitions of neutrality, the internationally accepted definition and Ireland’s unique and traditional interpretation.

            The internationally accepted definition of neutrality is non-participation in a war between other states, maintenance of an impartial attitude towards the belligerents, and in peacetime not doing anything that would make neutrality impossible during wartime.

            Ireland’s unique and traditional interpretation is non-participation in a military alliance. In none of the government publications on the matter have I seen a commitment to non-participation in a war, or to maintaining an impartial attitude towards the belligerents, or to respecting and obeying any of the international conventions and treaties on neutrality. All that is promised is a commitment to non-participation in a military alliance.

            Ireland’s neutrality is not enshrined in the Constitution, in law, or in any international treaty. It is a one-line policy statement with no detail and no legal authority.

            So is Ireland neutral? The answer, thankfully, is no. Even the Government does not refer to Ireland as being neutral; instead it says that we are militarily neutral. The reason for this is because “neutrality” has international legal ramifications whereas “military neutrality” is a made-up phrase that can mean anything.

            In reality Ireland is non-aligned. However, the phrase “military neutrality” is used to soothe the fears of those who have a sentimental attachment to the word “neutrality”.

            Since there are two definitions of neutrality in use it makes it difficult to have any sort of rational, intelligent, informed debate on the subject, especially as there are people who purport to be in favour of neutrality but who do not know or understand what neutrality is. These proponents confuse neutrality with being anti-military, anti-nuclear, anti-conscription, anti-armaments industry, anti-European, anti-American and so on.

            I stand corrected but your assertion that it was a post 9/11 agreement is wrong,

          • First, from a quick google, that’s a study paper with no connection to Government, either UK or Irish.
            Second you are referencing a 1980s paper, it has no relevance to anything now (for example, in the 80s Ireland spent over 1.5% on gdp, but gdp was so small that was only a few hundred million pounds), yet even then points out there was no agreement with foreign nations (and given Anglo-Irish relations then it wouldn’t have been with the UK).
            And thirdly show me any formal agreement in the 80s between London and Dublin on defence?The UK might have acted anyway but there was no formal undertaking.
            The Agreement that is in place, references explicitly “Aerial Terrorist Threats” and was only agreed post 9/11 (from memory the RAF was asked by Bertie to perform CAP over Dublin on that day)

          • Thank heavens for that. We’ve seen what formal neutrality legislation has done for the Ukraine and Moldova.

        • Would be nice if Ireland at least attempted to provide for their own defense like Switzerland does and not depend on others to foot the bill.

  2. Would it not be fun to send a combined Alpha Strike in using British, American and French aircraft, form up over the Bristol Channel, flys in low and fast pops up and comes home. Just to let the Russian know that they are in NATOs back yard. Or an Atute that just pops up. Before someone shouts we can’t do that, why not the Russian did it with one of our T45s in the Black Sea when they buzzed it with 17 aircraft. Or if Russian news is to be believed dropped bombs to ‘chase’ away a T45 transiting Ukrainian waters.

    • I witnessed a couple of Bucs do it in the late 80s against a Kirov well north of Shetland. The Soviets didnt even turn on their radars or react.
      The Soviets had a laugh at our expense as a Victor class sub that we didnt know was their started transmitting against Brum…

      All part of the great Game….

      • Presumably the Bucs were land based by then? With AAR for reach?

        T42 never had the best rep for sub hunting: too noisy.

        • Bucs came out from scotland.
          T42 with 2016 was OK for hunting in active.
          Noise is an issue for Passive not so much for Active.

          • But if there is noise, even in active, it reduces detection sensitivity?

            And therefore range.

          • Not really. The amount of power in a transmission and it being at a discrete frequency negates most self generated noise. Most ship generated noise is at specific lower frequencies and harmonics. (Things like 50/60 hz from generators and motors) The active transmission “Chirp” is well above any self generated frequencies. You know what frequency you transmitted out at so you know what to listen for coming back (allowing for some minor doppler shifting).
            2016 would hold targets out to 30+ Kyds easily.
            The modern day sonars such as 2050/51are capable to tracking at ranges massively in excess of that and also provide doppler for target speed and also aspect ratio so you know if the sub is side on, end on or turning.

          • Sort of.

            It affects the receiver gain that can be applied and therefore how well the digitiser is used.

            You always have harmonics and these reflect off the analogue filters and become artefacts. OK DQD gets rid of them but but that is post digitisation.

            Most of this is unseen processing that is simply done behind the scenes.

            Although DQD was not really a thing until the 90’s when faster digitisers because a thing. So the LSB isn’t being used properly.

            Quite interesting seeing the board out of the T23 sonar on Warship Life at Sea – looked suspiciously like a euro card board out of a well known make of MRI scanner. Must say I was surprised they allowed a shot of anything out of the guts of it. There are various things I can deduce from the board itself that I won’t post here. But I won’t be the only one able to work it out……

            Hmmme

    • Best to just ignore Russian sabre rattling as the desperate gesture it is rather than getting into a dangerous willy waving competition. So long as our ships have decent AShMs & sufficient SAMs, we’re capable of both seeing off enemy ships & not rising to childish provocations.

      • Agreed

        Laser Focus on what is critical.

        Willy waving isn’t critical.

        UK did CSG21 – Russia can’t do CSG anything as it does have a working carrier.

      • Mind you Boris may actually have a bigger Willy than Vlad, Joe or Micron?

        Or maybe just have used it more given the number progeny…..

        Or it could just be delusions of grandeur?

  3. Interesting to see the Typhoons operating in the area. Are there any signs of Russian aircraft operating off the Irish coast?

  4. So looking at George’s video the Typhoons came from Coningsby.

    Is this not EXACTLY the type of situation where facilities for forward deployment should exist, at St Mawgan for example, to increase time on station in addition to the Voyager?

    Post 9/11 QRA facilities were allegedly set up in the SW, places named at the time included Culdrose and Yeovilton, with Boscombe mentioned with more certainty.

    In my opinion our assets should already be waiting for them at locations across the SW.

    • Very good point. St Mawgan is a prime location for Atlantic commitments. And also (eventually🤞) With the growing F35 fleet, some of these very important strategic bases that were so vital for many years, need to be at least ‘fitted for but not with’ (to coin a very unpopular phrase) to enable operations. Too many eggs in one basket has never been a sound idea and having options is always preferable.

      • Totally agree. For St Mawgan, that at least should involve, I guess, maintaining the fuel installations ( including any GPSS link ) hard standings, and taxiways. The runway is in use anyway. The HAS site is still there but seems to be in use as an aircraft store looking at GE.
        The admin side of the station is still in use by MoD. The ESA and SSA still exist but no idea what state they are in.

        • St Mawgan should have at least a Posiedon detachment to look over the Western Approachs. Lossies a big trek from the Southern Irish Sea/Western Atlantic. The infrastructure`s all still there and one of the longest runways in the UK.

      • Morning Rob.

        Of course, and Yeovilton, and Boscombe. My point was why are they not sat there already, as this has been known about for some time? Maybe it would it have cost more to deploy a det there in advance compared to the increased flying time from home station?

        They put Typhoons at Northolt for the Olympics. And the RAF grandstanded recently about dispersal ,so what an opportunity this would have been.

          • Yes. A term I use when HMG/MOD like to highlight/spin something, which is either “world class” or which, once done briefly, and in a minor fashion, they then don’t continue with any real sense of purpose.

            In other words, it was PR.

            There was an article about it here months ago, and here we are, an example of when that could have been put into practise.

            The Russian navy conducting a live fire exercise where they are at this of all times is not standard procedure, so why should we act likewise?

            Did I offend you?

          • No you didn’t offend me. I just can’t recall during my 25 years that the Service ‘grandstanded’, using the Oxford Dictionary definition. MOD PR yes, but the Service no’. Was dispersed all over UK for exercise purposes many times, even to Wick’. (excellent Chippy!) Just don’t believe it would be worth the hassle/expense on this specific occasion.

          • Thanks Fen, in that case I’m more than happy to withdraw that remark, from the RAF side at least!

            I assume your experiences dispersal wise were primarily Cold War? Do you not think they should be ramping up that sort of thing again?

        • I guess they can use any of the mentioned stations if they really needed too. But the transit time from Coningsby is minimal in a Typhoon. And once you land, more chance somthing goes wrong when you start it up again. And we could forward deploy if the intelligence told us we really need to, just like at Benbecula back in the F3 days. And the RAF have practiced recently with rapid forward deployed ops from bare basic airfields. Think UKDJ had an article about it not long ago.

    • Good morning Daniele,

      Not my area of expertise, but would this not be a useful addition to the RAF for monitoring situations like these?

      Ireland might be able to afford one or two as well?

      First-production Triton at IFC-4 standard delivered to USN03 FEBRUARY 2022

      An integral element of the USN’s plan to recapitalise its maritime patrol and reconnaissance force, the MQ-4C Triton high-altitude, long-endurance UAS has been designed to provide a persistent maritime and littoral intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) data collection and dissemination capability to the fleet, and to shorten the sensor-to-shooter kill-chain.

      https://www.janes.com/defence-news/air-platforms/latest/first-production-triton-at-ifc-4-standard-delivered-to-usn

      • Morning Nigel.

        Not half! I believe they are over 150 million each, though! Australia has bought them to complement their P8s. But with Australia, people forget the size of the area they must cover and why such a fleet is necessary.

        I suspect Protector will do similar, but not as well.

  5. Hi folks hope all is well.
    I thought the Irish government and it’s supporters did not like the British military considering the history. Although we are great friends and family now. However, the Irish government appears to want protection when it fits.
    It’s all very well sitting on the fence of neutrality, while others do the protecting, a possible reflection of an independent Scotland.
    Maybe now it’s time for Ireland to step up and join NATO.
    Cheers
    George

    • The RAF patrols are in the EEZ, just as with Russian flights or the Russian or NATO nations exercises in that area they are free to do so, there’s no suggestion that there’s been any contact between Dublin and London for these patrols. The agreement for fighter reaction is different and dates back to the post 9/11 environment as I’ve posted.

      Moreover there’s little to suggest the defence stance of a iScotland would be the same, even if somebody set out to do so the chances of recreating the circumstances and forces that shaped the state of play in the DF is unlikely.

      The timing of the current situation is interesting however as the year long defence review is about to publish their findings next week, leaks suggest up to a 300% increase in the budget over 10 years in their preferred option (ie circa 3 billion) with both warships and fighters on the suggested list of purchases.

      Joining NATO however is not on the table.

      • Why bother? Last time I was in the country they had barely a decent motorway. Charm to be sure but Modernity just happens to other people; Irish parochialism is on the epic scale. What on earth would a tiny country that has no intention of using it want advanced military equipment that soon enough needs ever more expensive replacement? The bounding fantasy that comprises the Irish Republic’s outlook on the world is inexpensive afterall.

        • Given the Irish publics fierce determination to cling to their ‘neutrality’ NATO is a non starter, however given that the two main political parties FF and FG which happen to be governing in coalition at present are both equally determined to be the number one nation in terms of support for the EU and all its policies, they would presumably want to be in the vanguard if the EU went ahead and formed an EU army, and in that case they would seriously need to invest in defence, although not to the same 2% of GDP level as NATO members are expected to.

          • No we have an opt out in the treaties regarding defence matters, so if the mythical EU Army ever does happen (past 60 years suggests not) then it would optional for the Republic. We have some minor engagements with some PESCO projects and some of the EU tastings currently but that’s about it.

          • Yes theirs the opt out clause but given FF FG and even SFs propensity for kissing EU ass would you trust them to take the opt out clause option.

          • I would trust them to take the option that is most likely to get them re-elected. As things stand that rules out any fantasy EU Army anyway.Moreover the Irish relations with the rest of the member states and the EU institutions aren’t really the concern of the U.K.

          • Given SFs high showing in the last elections you may have a point, the instinct to cling on to power may well outweigh the propensity to kiss EU ass. Although I wouldn’t put it past them to omit it from their manifests only to put it through anyway after the elections, if instructed to do so by their EU masters.
            As a public forum I think you will find everyone is entitled to an opinion, PS I’m in Dublin.

        • Must be quite some time since you were in Ireland. They now have a wonderful motorway system with free flowing traffic. However, the cost of living there is ridiculously high with a bottle of wine the most expensive in Europe. Lovely place for a motoring holiday, but I shall stick to the Continent !

          • Well the cost of alcohol is mainly taxes, and now minimum pricing per unit, so it’s a real killer there.

        • We have a pretty good motorway system now, it must have been a while since you were here.
          The idea behind purchasing fighters is about 2 years old but I wasn’t expecting the quantity the new report recommended.

      • Throwing iScotland into the debate is tantamount to throwing in TSR2 or Eire.

        Given iScotland doesn’t exist and is unlikely to exist in the foreseeable future, even just mentioning it is obfuscation of the highest order. Please desist.

      • I think the vastly more important point would be there would have to be public support for joining first. There isn’t and unlikely to be a majority anytime soon.

        • Should we accept that the people of the Irish Republic do not want their country to be part of a large defence alliance, but merely want to remain a country on the edge of Europe, with a small insignificant defence force? If so, they should not expect the UK and NATO allies to provide constant air and sea cover, in and around their territorial airspace and waters.

          • The people of the Republic of Ireland by and large couldn’t care much if tomorrow morning said cover was withdrawn. But as it also suits the UK and the wider NATO it won’t be (and even if we had the equipment I’d imagine something like this Russian exercise would draw NATO attention anyway). The UK was under no obligation to agree the Fighter coverage agreement for example, it suits them to have done so.

      • All three Baltic States are the same but they are NATO members and should be thinking about acquiring combat aircraft and warships (perhaps frigates). Otherwise, the UK and others will providing their defence well into the future.

        • Latvia has a declining population of 1.5m do given Slovakia has a pop of 5m and struggles and the Czech 10m struggle, all three Baltic States do pay the 2%+

          All three States maintain OPVs and minesweepers but they need to come under the collective wing of a MS (Poland) establish a common pool of T31, PL Blackhawks and perhaps Swedish Gripens along with a common integrated AD missile system.

          Too much money has been wasted on individual IFVs, CVR(T), tracked SPGs, individual weapons and kit, comms systems.

          Should Poland step up – the Czechs would get hoighty, but, SVK, PL, CZ, LT, LV and EST, would have a buying power equating to almost 65m people… worth thinking about… but, a grown up would have to knock their heads together… Canada?

          • Slovakia and Czech Republic are not Baltic States and are land-locked countries. Therefore, of course, they do not have OPVs and minesweepers.

          • The point was economy of scale on purchasing… including Black Hawks and Air as well as land based systems.

    • The Irish Republic is schizoid. It believes it climbed to international regard solely on its own merits – being a contributor to the rise of the British Empire and having thereby a platform from which to promote ‘Ireland’ as sort of world class culture counts for nothing post 1921. Always makes me smile. A third of Irish people lived worked and stayed in England since the founding of the Republic. Notably, all the leading Irish creative types left – heading for London. During the Second World War many greeted the Blitz on England with delight. The joke in Dublin was ‘We are neutral. But who are we neutral against?’ Five ‘boxes’ of wartime communications between The Republic and Nazi Germany held in the historic archives at Kew were sealed for a hundred years at the time of the Good Friday Agreement.

      • How many creative British types leave for the US? And given throughout the history of the state British made up the largest block in the Republic as well (only since 2000 has that changed), I’m not sure your point, of course the larger economy has drawn people over the century, nobody has denied that.

        As to WW2, given what the British forces did in the War of Independence are you really that shocked at some attitudes in the Irish public, yet you don’t mention for example sending support to Belfast after the bombings there? But no despite your allegation there was no connection or support for the Axis, a basic study of all the indirect (and direct) support Ireland gave the Allies would demonstrate that.

        • Thank you for reiterating the the well known received view. I am well aware of the unexamined arguments. Incidentally, do concentrate your mind on the Troubles leading to the creation of the Free State; the Irish Civil War that followed was far worse but memory holed. The main factor here is not history but contemporary issues. The Republic wants its cake and eat it. An accommodation with N.A.T.O. would benefit both parties and save the Republic from an expense better spent on its people. But a ridiculous and frankly time expired notion that makes perfect sense to Nationalists seems positively Made in Kerry today.

          • memory holed… You mean apart from shaping the public and political discourse of the nation for a hundred years? The Republic is currently having it’s cake and eating it, ie having NATO handle any threats for free, generally most British posters here tend to be rather negative about that arguing that the Republic should be handling it’s own defences.

            It’s quite strange to see the opposite.

          • Ahh my favourite pastime reading about British – Irish history. Always constructive, positive and leading to mutual respect and understanding of each others positions. Ireland won’t join NATO because the vast majority of it’s people don’t want it to. Ireland needs the ability to police it’s own airspace and waters hopefully one day soon it will. But that is a matter for the people of Ireland and no-one else.

          • Well next week for the Commissions report, after that most likely debate till the next budget in October.

          • Well fingers crossed sometime around October 2032 give or take a decade you’ll have something tangible to celebrate. Good luck. 😀

        • Had things gone seriously wrong for the Allies in WW2, the Republic would have been invaded and occupied.

          You only have to look at Belgium to see that, Switzerland was spared, as it was effectively a Nazi Bank (still is some say), but Ireland would have been occupied to deny its use to the Americans, who might have moved quickly to get a European toe hold.

          Thousands of Irish citizens joined the British Armed forces during WW2 and served for the greater good, salute them for their service, they didn’t have too….

          • The most likely invasion was from the Allies, Churchill had to be talked out of it, and unsurprisingly the NI Unionists wanted it through out the war.

          • Yes and no, elements within the Irish Government were in low level negotiations with the British and the Germans at various points via their Swiss and Swedish embassies.

            Early in the war tasit Irish government approval had already been agreed for British intervention, in the event of a German invasion of the Republic, this was kept a closely guarded secret from the Irish people, with some having sympathies for ‘the other side’ for their own reasons.

            The Germans getting the message across that under the third Reich, Ireland would be united.

            It would of course, but under the same United jackboot as everyone else!

            Your assertion that Churchill and the UK wanted to occupy the Republic (without an invitation to assist in a German invasion) is a rather fanciful and typically Republican position, it keeps a certain narrative rolling about an expansionist Great Britain, that by WW2 was already over and out of steam.

            Invasion was considered a distinct possibility after the Battle of Britain, in an effort to win the battle of the Atlantic and force the UK out of the war, while in turn, denying the US a possible European base.

            Had a determined invasion of the Republic been undertaken, only prompt UK action, would have prevented a German victory.

            Ireland was in part and indeed effect, saved from invasion during WW2 by the huge sacrifice and protection of the UK.

            It’s Geographic position making its occupation an absolute certainty, to protect the greater Reich.

            You are welcome Mark, oh and while we are on the subject, who left the lights on then?😉

          • Not the U.K. who had cut the oil supplies to Ireland. And no it isn’t Republican fantasy, the War cabinet by Churchills request considered retaking the Treaty Ports, Montgomery noted that he was ordered to draw up the plans to take the two Southern Ports. Or is he a Republican as well?

          • I thought Switzerland was spared as the Wermacht realized the effort taking it in its mountain fortresses was not worth the casualties. Their defensive preparations are extensive.

          • There is that mate … But, they had a vital roll for the Nazis, banking and holding ‘ borrowed’ treasures … Certain Swiss banks not asking too many questions shall we say….

    • Good points George. I don’t understand why Ireland retains neutrality, unless it is because they don’t want to increase their defence budget to NATO target levels.

        • They must all be very happy that several Russian naval vessels are exercising and firing live munitions so close to their shores.

          • Well first off the exercise is over 200km off the coast, that’s not close, second given US, UK and French exercises have also taken place even closer to the Irish coast over the last few years, NATO membership or not wouldn’t change matters..

            Secondly the majority of people couldn’t particularly care, certainly not enough to join NATO. Even if the Commission does generate an increase in defence spending it won’t change Irish FP which rules out membership of NATO.

          • Well, those Russian ships could be right on the Irish coast in 4 hrs sailing, so it is close.
            US, UK and French ships on exercise should not pose any concerns, but surely Russian ships might.

  6. I do hope the Russians continue conducting operations off the Republic of Ireland as it *might* just prompt the politicians over there to increase defence spending from the pathetic 0.3% of GDP. Regardless of whether it is a NATO member or not as a democracy it has a duty to do its bit and at the very least have the capability to defend itself (which it can’t at the moment).

    • That was already on the cards before this, the Commissions suggestions are either a 50% increase or a 300% increase over 10 years according to leaks. It’s due to be published next week.

      • Good to know. Even a 300% increase would leave overall defence spending quite low as % of GDP given the extremely low starting point. Right direction though.

        • It would put it at about 1%, around €3 billion so closer to the EU average spend, but in reality the gdp figures aren’t the most accurate for Ireland, it arguably would be close to 1.5% adjusted.

          • Yep, still a long way off what I think democracies should be spending but if they do go down the 300% increase route then it will be a step in the right direction.

          • For Ireland’s FP it’s pretty much enough, the high end option would allow for both a capability of air policing (circa 12 planes) along wtih increased MPA and a few Warships for occasions like this along with improvements to the Army. Since we aren’t in a military alliance I can’t see there being much more than that spent and it would if enacted be the largest real budgets for defence in 100 years.

          • I would welcome a large budget increase as a step in the right direction but Ireland really ought to be contributing more than just self-defence. Its current policies and attitudes to defence seem to be incredibly selfish to me, along with most of Europe.

          • Ireland could do far more UN missions, take a more active role fighting terrorism, respond more effectively to natural disasters and help fellow democracies if needed. Just because she isn’t in NATO doesn’t mean Ireland can’t respond to an incident or help another nation.

          • Ireland has had continuous UN operations since the 60’s and for the scale of the DF contribute outside of many Western nations, Ireland is heavily active in fighting terrorism from working with every intelligence service, to working with other SF, to deployments in Afghanistan with NATO or in Mali currently, in terms of natural disasters typically the Irish NGO sector handles that and again perform larger than the population/economy would suggest, though the DF contribute when asked. The MRV when it arrives will increase that capability as well.

  7. Those Russian landing craft seem to be in Tartus now. The only one filmed was loading fresh food and other supplies. No sign of this one unloading anything.

  8. Meanwhile.

    Russia continues military build-up on Ukrainian border03 FEBRUARY 2022

    “Russia’s military build-up in Belarus and along the Ukrainian border has continued unabated over the past 14 days. Social media indicates the frequency of deployments has increased, with daily sightings of equipment on the move at their highest since the build-up began in October 2021.”

    https://www.janes.com/defence-news/defence/latest/russia-continues-military-build-up-on-ukrainian-border

  9. No real surprises then, what comes next and when is the question?

    China has joined Russia in opposing further Nato expansion as the two countries move closer together in the face of Western pressure.

    “Moscow and Beijing issued a statement showcasing agreement on a raft of issues during a visit by Russia’s Vladimir Putin for the Winter Olympics.
    In it Moscow said it supported China’s stance on Taiwan and opposed independence for the island.”

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-60257080

    America Cannot Take On China And Russia Simultaneously

    “U.S. concerns about the risks of fighting a coming war with Russia and China are well-grounded, given it is unprepared to fight even a purely conventional war with them.”

    https://nationalinterest.org/feature/america-cannot-take-china-and-russia-simultaneously-194899

    • Given we aren’t members of NATO I would have thought it makes sense not to mention it since we have no involvement in its policies.

  11. Well I suspect that Kent will be using 2087 to good effect for the accompanying Russian Sub. Directing in Merlin and P8 to annoy the carp out of them.
    The USN ASW contribution from an AB will be minimal except for being a noise maker!

  12. To coin a phrase “Gaslighting”the big bad Russians are here hide under bed covers BS there just showing military stratification look over here whilst we sneek up the back garden gate ,if we took it seriously, which I think we should, they’ll be an astute class just watching, waiting &that’s that,no more live fire exercises off the Irish coast.the ruskies really don’t want to piss the Irish fishing fleet off,cos there a tough bunch of blokes that to coin another phrase will drag there nets “Vladimir put in his place”

  13. I wonder which EU port will be refueling the Russian navy this time. That being said it’s international water and they have a right to be there best to monitor and ignore them because all media attention is doing is making it out like Putin had some first rate military capability rather than the stack of power points, CGI graphics and wooden mock ups that make up the bulk of his expeditionary capabilities.

  14. That slava is one very old ship, it will be interesting to see if they live fire any of those sandbox missiles, I don’t think they made anymore since the fall of the USSR, not sure if you would want to fire off a 30-40 year old missile.

    • If you keep updating and replacing the explosive components and lifex bits it should be OK.
      Explosives deteriorate over time. The chemicals added to the mix that make it safe to handle /store deteriorate in a fairly predictable way. With regular testing you can graph it an predict when an explosive will get over sensitised and will no longer be safe to store or handle.

      if you dont test fire such systems successfully and in full view then your potential opponents will not see a working system that has a deterrent value to it. There isnt much point having 16 ASMs on a Slava if they are not seen to work.

    • Yet we too operate 1980s Harpoon missiles on the few escorts that have any at all. Soon we’ll have no AShMs for a very long while. Not much credible deterrent then.
      Talking of old ships, according to Warship World the ancient recently decomissioned RFAs Forts Rosalie & Austin(1970s vintage) have incredibally been bought by the Egyptian navy & will be modernised(at Cammel Laird) for more service. Bit like recruiting 80 years olds into the army!

  17. My life was shadowed by the cold war and now 70 years later Ukraine and Russia History will repeat itself if do not learn

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here