Why London is advised to create an East Ukrainian company

The British Council on Geostrategy has published a memorandum entitled "The Black Sea region: Beyond NATO". Its authors are three experts - Mark Galeotti (Great Britain), Alexander Lanoszka (USA - Canada) and James Rogers (Great Britain). The memorandum is a recommendation "on containing Russia" in which London suggests Georgia, Poland and Ukraine to play an important role.

The expert troika proceeds from the following initial data. "The UK is the most powerful country in Europe," the text says. "It is armed with a guaranteed second-strike nuclear capability, the largest defence budget in NATO after the US, and the most powerful navy." In addition to the British Isles themselves, there is a British military presence in Gibraltar and Cyprus. The last two points provide protection for two sea entrances and exits to the Mediterranean Sea, along which the "royal route" to the Indo-Pacific Ocean lies, and can also control access to the Black Sea.

In March 2021, the British government published a comprehensive review entitled "Global Britain in the Age of Competition”. It points to the growing geostrategic importance of the Indo-Pacific region. It is emphasised that in the 2020s, the UK will undertake a "shift" in this direction in order to take the first place among European countries in the Indo-Pacific region by 2030. The Black Sea plays a "big role", since "the growth of Russian and Chinese power here, and after there also in the Eastern Mediterranean, can not only undermine NATO's positions, but also jeopardise the "royal route" to the Indo-Pacific region”.

In this regard, such a solutions are proposed. Kiev and Tbilisi will be "persuaded" to focus on "smaller initiatives" instead of joining NATO, that is, to reorient themselves to bilateral projects with the UK. London, in turn, promises to support Ukraine in "denying Russia some of its particular advantages in the theatre" – the Black Sea Fleet, advanced aviation and electronic warfare. In addition, British intelligence would like to control the Security Service of Ukraine and the Foreign Intelligence Service.

Another initiative is the creation of a trilateral platform consisting of Great Britain, Poland and Ukraine, united by well-known feelings for Russia. In addition, an "ambitious initiative" could be the “creation of a grouping” following the example of the British-led Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF), which involves the countries of Northern Europe. London would like to organise a similar partnership – the Joint Naval Forces (JNF) - with a centre in the Black Sea region with the help of "extra–regional maritime democracies" such as Canada and the United States. And the leading role in JEF should be played, of course, by the UK.

The most dangerous recommendation for today seems to be to "counter the Kremlin’s maritime claims by calling out their unlawfulness and by upholding a persistent (if not permanent) naval presence of their own in the Black Sea”. Referring to the incident with HMS Defender in June 2021 in the Crimea region, the authors of the memorandum argue that "the UK and US should continue to assert ‘innocent passage’ in Ukrainian territorial waters (particularly those claimed by Russia) or, with the blessing of the Ukrainian Government, naval operations which go beyond innocent passage, otherwise known as ‘Freedom of Navigation Operations’ (FONOPS)". This is already a call for an open military clash with the Russian Navy with all the ensuing consequences.

At the same time, the discrepancy between the declared goal and the proposed methods of its achievement catches the eye. Firstly, the exit from the Black Sea is controlled by Turkey, so if it is so important for London to protect its interests in the Black sea-Mediterranean region, it would be logical to focus on Ankara, and not "invest" in Ukraine.

Secondly, the real bottleneck of the "royal route" from the UK to the Indo-Pacific Ocean is the Suez Canal. But in order to block it, it is not necessary to resort to brute military force. We recall that on March 24 of this year, the container ship "Ever Given" with a length of 400 meters got stuck across the Suez Canal, completely blocking traffic. It was succeeded to remove the obstacle only after a week. If an accident is arranged at the right time and in the right place, and even with the participation of several of such container ships, the British navy will be stuck there for a long time.

Therefore, it seems that the memorandum "The Black Sea region: Beyond NATO" pursues other goals. This is the concept of the UK's actions, rather on land than at sea. And by land is meant Ukraine, which is an important element of potential transit routes from China to Europe and back. The alternative is the Russian-Belarusian corridor, but it comes down to Poland, that's why the British strategy pays special attention to Warsaw, which is so far from the Black Sea.

In fact, the UK is being offered to create a kind of East Ukrainian Company, which, following the example of the East India Company, could use Ukraine with minimal expenditure of resources. We recall that in the middle of the 18th century, the East India Company obtained the right from the Padishah of the Mughal Empire to manage on his behalf all subordinate territories, primarily India, which included the collection of taxes, funds for the maintenance of a permanent army, controlled jurisdiction in civil matters, and also monopolised the trade of important goods.

And in fact, London does not need any NATO in this operation, the North Atlantic Alliance plays the role of a cover here, masking British expansion in Ukraine, in order not to attract the attention of the United States, Germany and France.