Wider Black Sea – Strategic Dynamics
War, power and interdependencies within a Maritime Strategic Ecosystem in transformation
Maritime Security Forum – Geopolitica Magazine
The Black Sea is undergoing a transformation that extends beyond changes in the balance between the naval forces of its coastal states. Russia’s war against Ukraine has brought merchant vessels, ports, energy infrastructure and conditions of maritime access into the centre of the confrontation. Official maritime advisories document strikes on vessels, explosions, the use of drones and the presence of naval mines, including drifting mines. These threats simultaneously affect military operations, transport, supply chains and economic decisions. The Black Sea is a theatre of war whose consequences extend beyond the boundaries of the basin.
Against this background, the essential geostrategic question is: who can constrain or maintain access, essential flows and freedom of action in the wider Black Sea, through what combination of power, infrastructure, alliances and rules? Answering this question requires examining the relationships between the components of the maritime space, the ways in which disruptions spread and the capacity of actors to adapt.
This is the objective of “Wider Black Sea – Strategic Dynamics,” a project developed within Maritime Security Forum – Geopolitica Magazine. The platform translates the research direction established by the three FSM studies authored by Aurel Popa and Sorin Learschi into a tool for documentation and analysis: from the conceptual foundations of the Maritime Strategic Ecosystem to an integrated methodology and an examination of the relationship between analysis, decision-making and action.
The Black Sea remains the geographical and strategic centre of the research. Broadening the perspective means tracing the mechanisms through which developments in connected regions influence the Black Sea’s strategic environment. The Turkish Straits provide its maritime connection to the Mediterranean, while the Montreux Convention establishes distinct regimes for the passage of merchant vessels and warships. The geography of access and the legal framework thus intersect at a point of relevance to every Black Sea coastal state.
Connections with the Caucasus and the Caspian bring overland transport, energy infrastructure and the interests of transit states into the analysis. The Mediterranean, the Red Sea and the Gulf introduce additional pressures on navigation and supply. In October 2026, the EU Foreign Affairs Council addressed disruptions to maritime security and freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb. For Black Sea analysis, such developments raise questions about transport costs, access to energy and the priorities of external partners. Their specific effects on the Black Sea must, however, be demonstrated through evidence; the mere simultaneity of conflicts does not establish a causal relationship.
The distribution of power in this space requires a comparison of all six coastal states: Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey, Ukraine, Russia and Georgia. A meaningful comparison must examine inventories, availability, logistical support, bases, industry, air and coastal components, uncrewed systems, losses and force regeneration. National inventories must be distinguished from documented presence in the Black Sea, and contracts and modernisation programmes from capabilities effectively available. This comparative discipline is necessary to understand what each actor can accomplish and under what conditions.
The defence of Europe is a central dimension of this transformation. NATO describes the reinforcement of its eastern flank from northern Europe to the Black Sea and documents the development of Allied presence in Romania and Bulgaria. Assessing the southern segment nevertheless requires examining specific functions: surveillance, air and coastal defence, the protection of access, reinforcement and sustainment. Comparison with the northern segment becomes meaningful when it applies the same criteria while accounting for the geographical and legal characteristics of each basin.
NATO’s and the European Union’s interests take practical form through different instruments, which must be assessed against their mandates and results. The European implementation report on the strategic approach to the Black Sea presents the regional hub concept jointly developed by Romania and Bulgaria as a civilian-led structure for interinstitutional cooperation, supported by the EU. The existence of the concept must be tracked separately from operational implementation, resources and services actually delivered. A concrete example of evolving cooperation among coastal states is the amendment extending MCM Black Sea’s missions to the protection of critical undersea infrastructure, announced by Romania’s Ministry of National Defence in July 2026. Assessing its contribution requires tracking documented activities and results.
Critical infrastructure occupies a central place because it converts resources and geographical position into services, revenue and sustainment capacity. A port’s strategic value must be examined alongside its rail and road access, terminals, technical services and hinterland connections. In the same way, Constanța’s significance must be analysed in relation to the Danube, overland transport, energy and support for maritime activities. Commercial throughput is an important indicator, but it does not fully capture the strategic function of such a hub.
Neptun Deep illustrates the need to examine an entire functional chain. In its report of 29 October 2026, OMV Petrom recorded the installation of the platform, the completion of eight wells and the laying of the pipeline to shore, while maintaining its expectation of first gas in the first half of 2027. Analytically, the project’s importance is assessed through the relationship between extraction, subsea infrastructure, shore connections, transport, market access and continuity. Physical progress and estimated future production must remain distinct from deliveries already achieved.
Protecting infrastructure and lines of communication likewise requires examining the entire function they support. A transport corridor becomes credible through usable access, information, coordination, available assets and response capacity. Declaring a corridor does not, by itself, ensure continuity of traffic. Saving lives, responding to pollution and restoring services complement this analysis because they can limit the consequences of an incident. They form part of the broader geostrategic issue: the capacity of actors to maintain essential functions under pressure.
The framework proposed in the FSM studies organises these relationships through the concept of the Maritime Strategic Ecosystem (MSE). Actors, infrastructure, technologies, flows and rules are examined as interdependent elements. From this perspective, a local event may acquire strategic significance through the effects transmitted to other components. War disrupts the configuration of relationships, while adaptation may alter routes, dependencies and the distribution of costs. Stabilisation must be investigated through observable outcomes, without assuming an automatic return to the previous situation.
The conceptual tools allow the diagnosis to be developed further. The Maritime Strategic Centre of Gravity (MSCoG) directs research towards decisive concentrations of functions and dependencies. Maritime Strategic Convergence (MSC) examines the mechanisms through which interactions produce cumulative effects. Maritime Strategic Resilience (MSR) concerns the maintenance and restoration of functions, while Maritime Strategic Elasticity (MSEL) addresses adaptive reconfiguration. Maritime Cognitive Superiority (MCS) introduces the issue of the quality of knowledge and anticipation. The Maritime Strategic Convergence Framework (MSCF) and the Integrated Maritime Security Architecture (IMSA) connect the diagnosis with functional and institutional assessment. These are concepts and tools proposed by the FSM authors, open to critical examination and independent testing.
The platform aims to give readers access both to the documentation and to the relationships underpinning its interpretation. Dossiers will cover states, capabilities, infrastructure, corridors, cooperation, treaties and agreements, together with sources, reference dates and recorded uncertainties. Bilingual Romanian–English search will help users identify subjects and move from a question to the relevant records. Researchers will have a structured documentary resource for verification, comparison and further investigation, while interested readers will be able to develop an integrated understanding of the region.
The project’s purpose is to understand the conditions under which geographical position, resources and cooperation can support freedom of action, security and continuity. For Romania, this question connects defence and Allied support with the functioning of ports, energy, transport and supporting infrastructure. The accompanying video introduces this analytical approach and presents the platform’s working version, which is undergoing further documentation and editorial review.
“Wider Black Sea – Strategic Dynamics” will be made available to readers in early December.