WASHINGTON – “Moscow” was the pride of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, a symbol of the country’s dominance in the region and a powerful military machine used to launch precision cruise missiles deep into Ukraine.
Despite claims by Russia that an accidental fire broke out on the ship, US officials confirmed on Friday that two Ukrainian Neptune rockets had hit the ship, killing an unknown number of sailors and sending it and its arsenal to the bottom of the Black Sea.
The sinking of the Moscow on Thursday was a serious blow to the Russian navy and a dramatic demonstration of the current era of war, in which missiles fired from the shore can destroy even the largest and most powerful ships. It was also the most significant combat loss for any fleet since 1982, when the Argentine Air Force sank a British destroyer with guided missiles and other ships during the Falklands War.
The Russian warship Moscow was hit by missiles
about 65 nautical miles south of Odessa,
according to a defense official.
April 12
A ship of similar size
and features were seen around
75 nautical miles from Odessa.
April 10
Seen in the sea
near the port
April 7
It can be seen in the port
in Sevastopol
The Russian warship “Moscow” was hit.
with missiles about 65 nautical miles
south of Odessa, according to a defense official.
April 10
Seen in the sea
near the port
April 12
Ship with similar
dimensions and
characteristics were visible
about 75 marine
miles from Odessa.
April 7
It can be seen in the port
in Sevastopol
Russian cruise missiles have been used to brutally attack residential buildings in Ukrainian cities, and Moscow’s cannons have fired on Ukraine’s Snake Island. The Kremlin’s most powerful missile platform is impossible to replace, and its sinking is a bold counterattack, retired military officers said.
Moscow aroused awe in those who saw it – bristling with rockets and hovering over the landscape – and was the epitome of Russian power in the region for decades.
“It was a very impressive ship,” said retired Rear Admiral Samuel J. Cox, director of the Naval Command for History and Heritage in Washington. “With these surface-to-surface missiles, it really looks dangerous. But obviously she can’t take the blow. “
The sinking of the ship has symbolic, diplomatic and military significance.
Russian ships have already been pushed farther off the Ukrainian coast, US officials have said on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence assessments of the war. The rest of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet is still within range of cruise missiles in Ukraine, but is unable to support any landing attack on the country’s coastal cities, according to former officials.
Naval analysts have been worried for years that a new generation of missile destroyers will threaten large and important ships such as Moscow or the United States’ aircraft carrier fleet. The sinking of Moscow is a clear sign that the future has come.
Moscow itself is designed as a killer. Construction of the ship, originally known as the Glory, began in 1976, and the ship became operational in 1983. Built by the Soviet Union to sink American carriers, it is armed with missiles capable of striking aircraft, ships and submarines. .
Improved many times over the years, “Moscow” had to have protection to shoot down Ukrainian missiles. The ship was armed with a medium-range surface-to-air system believed to be effective within seven miles, and there were other missiles designed to eliminate threats within 50 miles. In theory, his cannons could shoot down a Neptune rocket. But none of these protections worked.
“War is a brutal thing,” said the retired administrator. Gary Rughead, former chief of naval operations. “You have to make investments to defeat the types of weapons that people will throw at you.
Anti-ship weapons are not difficult to build or use. Hezbollah struck an Israeli warship during the 2006 Lebanese war. Hutus rebels in Yemen fired multiple anti-ship missiles at a U.S. Navy destroyer in two separate attacks in 2016, sparking retaliatory attacks with Tomahawk cruise missiles in response. While the U.S. Navy has been investing in missile technology for decades, U.S. military planners have said Chinese missiles would pose a real threat to the conflict.
Although symbolically painful for Russia, the loss of Moscow also has practical effects on the ongoing war. The missiles that would be fired at Ukraine are now at the bottom of the Black Sea, a blow to Russia’s military plans.
Moscow would play a key role in any potential airborne attack on the Ukrainian coastal city of Odessa. While other landing craft would be used to bring Russian naval infantry to shore, Moscow would defend those ships and launch missile strikes on the city.
Now, said Admiral Cox, any landing attack on Ukraine will be much more dangerous for Russia, as its landing and landing ships are much more vulnerable to attacks.
The farther Russian ships are from shore, the more limited their support for ground attacks on Ukrainian cities will be. Although greater distance may make some attacks more difficult, this will not take Russia’s more powerful missiles out of range. Some of Russia’s cruise missiles can reach 1,550 miles, while Ukraine’s Neptune missiles have a range of about 190 miles.
Prior to the attack on Moscow, a senior Defense Ministry official said the Russian Black Sea Fleet had acted with relative impunity.
“They thought they could run around the Black Sea and go wherever they wanted,” said retired Admiral James G. Fogo III, dean of the United States Naval League’s Center for Naval Strategy. “They understood otherwise.”
Preventing an attack on Odessa has been a priority for the Ukrainian military, which has been demanding additional anti-ship missiles and other so-called coastal defense weapons from the United States and its allies for weeks.
Senior Ukrainian officials told the Pentagon they needed anti-ship missiles and other weapons to open a new front and return the Russian invasion, US officials said.
The strike on Moscow showed that Ukraine’s demands were “very far-sighted”, said a senior Defense Ministry official.
By building the coastal defense, Admiral Fogo said, Ukrainians will be able to face the Russian navy even without a powerful navy. Missiles, smart mines and other modern devices will help keep Russian ships away.
“You don’t have to have a warship to go out and protect the shores of Ukraine,” he said. “It’s easier to shoot from the shore. It is easier to defend than to attack. So now the Russians have a problem. “
The United States has responded to Ukraine’s request by adding coastal defense weapons to a $ 800 million package announced this week. Senior Pentagon officials also called on U.S. military officials at a meeting Wednesday to develop proposals for additional anti-ship missiles that the United States could provide to Ukraine or its allies.
Some US officials have said they are puzzled as to why Russia continues to claim that “Moscow” was destroyed in an accident and not by a Ukrainian coup. Russia remains eager to downplay Ukraine’s military success in front of the Russian public. U.S. intelligence agencies say senior Russian officials have not given President Vladimir Putin accurate reports of the war in Ukraine, and former officials say Russian military officials may have lied to the Kremlin about what happened to Moscow.
“The loss of the flagship of the Russian Black Sea Fleet is like the loss of a jewel in the crown: a serious damage to prestige that I think probably hit Putin personally, given how much importance he attaches to Russia’s recovery as a great naval power.” said Katarzyna Zisk, a professor at the Norwegian Institute for Defense Research in Oslo.
The sinking of Moscow, officials said, also demonstrates the strategic importance for Ukraine of expanding the battle from the country’s cities to the Black Sea, where the Russian navy has long dominated. And this revealed, said Admiral Fogo, deep problems in the Russian army. Well-trained sailors should have been able to cope with the floods caused by the missile strikes, put out the fire and save the ship, he said.
Although few American analysts would have predicted that the Ukrainians could destroy Moscow, officials said no one should be surprised by Ukraine’s capabilities at this point in the war.
And the sinking of the ship is one of the strongest blows inflicted so far by the Ukrainian military.
“It is astonishing to think how harmful this will be for the morale of the Russian navy, given its symbolic name, its role as a flagship and the fact that it is a combat victim,” said the retired administrator. James G. Stavridis, former Supreme Allied Commander Europe. “Given that the Russians are losing such a significant unit, yes, you have to go back to World War II.
Julian E. Barnes reports from Washington and James Glanz from New York. Helaine Cooper, Eric Schmidt and John Ismay contributed to a report from Washington.
Add Comment