Yeah, this is prudent:
The Romanian government has approved a decision to spend at least €137 million (U.S. $159 million), excluding the value-added tax, on the purchase of anti-ship missiles that are to be deployed to the country’s Black Sea coast.
It could be an American or European system. As I noted recently, Romania really needs coastal defenses these days:
Romania is justifiably worried about Russia. But unless Russia's de facto territory ofTransnistria is built up into a major Russian base and logistics area, as long as Ukraine holds out against Russian aggression, Romania's front line is secure, notwithstanding Romanian worries about Russian threats from the Black Sea. Turkey's control of southern access to the Black Sea and treaty limitations on non-Black Sea states' naval presence complicates NATO's at-sea defenses. I'd like to see land-based anti-ship, anti-aircraft, and naval mine-laying capabilities built up in Romania and Bulgaria. But if a naval presence in required, could NATO build modularized auxiliary cruisers for the Black Sea that might bypass treaty limits?
Naval mine-laying capabilities would be very effective too, in denying Russia free use of the Black Sea. That capability always seems to be ignored.
Defending natural gas resources in the Black Sea--with the unfortunate side effect of making the suppression of corruption more difficult--adds to the Romanian incentive to deny Russia access to their littoral region in war.
No doubt, the Russians will continue to be amazed that "cause and effect" applies to them.
