Russia Seeks New Bases in Eight Countries
Country Wants More Military Access Abroad
Since the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia’s access to overseas military bases has shrunk precipitously. Indeed, at present the only base they have left that isn’t in the former Soviet Union is the naval base in Syria’s Tartus.
As Russia hopes to modernize its military and return to the role of a global military power, officials say they are in talks with eight countries across the world trying to work out deals for new access.
In 2002 President Putin shut down bases in Cuba and Vietnam citing financial constraints, those nations are at the top of the list now, along with Venezuela, Nicaragua, Algeria, Cyprus, Seychelles and Singapore.
Financial troubles in the post-Soviet era forces Russia to dramatically scale back its military spending, and while the US still outspends them 10 to 1, Russia has recently been reported to have passed Britain as the third place military spender.
Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz
- Israel Preps 'Significant Expansion' of Gaza War: 878 Gazans Dead - July 25th, 2014
- ISIS Overruns Key Syrian Military Base Near Raqqa - July 25th, 2014
- Russia: Ukraine Fired 40 Shells Into Russia, Trying to Kill Border Officials - July 25th, 2014
- UN: Israel Never Informed Us of Plans to Attack Gaza School - July 25th, 2014
- Report: Israeli Drone Strike Kills Three in Sinai - July 25th, 2014
Imperium
March 1st, 2014 at 5:38 am
Bravo: I had been a Cold warrior,and much opposed to the Soviet Union. But ,now those powers which finance dthe bloody Bolshivicks,cal themselves Neoconsetrvatives,and rule Washington/London. Their greedy,exclusive control of the West,has proved destructive,and they thrive on war.Only a Nationalist Russia can be the counter. I fear ,they mighgt grt WW3,before the weight of Russian Resurgence can develope. We must say NO,to WW3. Do not fall for their lines. SE THE BAD WAR.COM
Michael Kenny
March 1st, 2014 at 7:18 am
The great weakness of the Russian military is that it uses conscripts and every year, a certain number of conscripts are killed through the brutality of their superiors. Equally, the whole military machine is a ramshackle which has rfeceived very little renewal since the end of the cold war. Thus, other than parading up and down, I doubt if it could do very much harm. If it got into any sort of serious fight, there would probably be large-scale desertions or even mutinies. It could be 1917 all over again!
Popsiq
March 1st, 2014 at 8:01 am
Oh gaaawd ! They've outstripped the Brits in military spending .. that only leaves the USA and China(?) to hold them back.
Wait a minute! The US spends more than the top 7 combined – so call us when the 'commies' get within a couple of trillion of that target.
Orwell
March 1st, 2014 at 9:12 am
"…and while the US still outspends them 10 to 1"
Meanwhile, we are cutting food stamps, unemployment insurance and our bridges and infrastructure are crumbling. But when the Pentagon wants a new aircraft carrier…..no problem, where do we sign the check, say the Democrats and Republicans.
dan
March 1st, 2014 at 6:45 pm
Depends Michael. 1917, or WW1, (known as The Great War, until 1939) was a war of choice for Tsarist Russia. The average Russian peasant had no stake in the war or its outcome. Nor did he stand to gain anything from it. And the Kaiser, whatever his faults, was no Hitler. He had no plan for the genocide of Slavic peoples. Now if Russia was directly threatened, it could be a whole different story. I think it is a mistake to automatically discount a conscript army. What matters is the reason they are fighting.