Military Review

Number one geopolitical weapon

52
The global tendency to close the sky for Western air strikes may be one of the key factors for changing the geopolitical world view.




Since Russia first began to export its own, unparalleled in the world, anti-aircraft missile systems of the C-300 / C-400 family, there has been an endless dispute in the local patriotic press about the justification of such transactions. This wave of perplexity reached its climax after the announcement of the supply of Turkey's C-400 complex - this “obvious enemy who shot down a Russian plane”. About Saudi Arabia and Qatar, which also announced their intention to acquire Russian air defense systems, in this sense, you can not even speak. Here, the opinion of the network commentators is almost unequivocal - they say, the commercial gain will overshadow the eyes, overshadow the mind and everything else.

However, in my opinion, this is exactly the case when one should not rush to conclusions and it is worthwhile to take the trouble to assess the situation, as the classics said, “deeper and wider”.

And if we do this, we will surely see that this topic is at least ambiguous. And, maybe, even we will come to the conclusion that the strategic benefits for Russia in this case are much more significant than the primitive opportunity to earn money on the occasion of billions of dollars or two dollars, risking the loss of exclusive technologies.

And the point here is not even that such deals, symbolizing Russia's breakthrough on arms markets previously inaccessible to it, including NATO countries, mean qualitatively new and more favorable development prospects for the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation. Although it is certainly very important.

The main reason for this process lies, in my opinion, in considerations that are much deeper than purely commercial. And it is directly connected with the general geopolitical philosophy of the current Russian leadership and its fundamental vision of the main development trends of modern humanity.

In Moscow, obviously, they proceed from the fact of the continuing erosion of the Anglo-Saxon model of the monopolar world, as well as from a parallel increase in the desire of many nations and states to get rid of Western influence that is clearly becoming excessive, often directly contradicting local national interests.

Meanwhile, the basis of Western hegemony is precisely its still recently indisputable military power. The absence in most states of effective forceful arguments against which is the main deterrent to the further rise of the world anti-hegemonic wave.

The Achilles' heel of the western machine of the global military dictate is also quite obvious. Which becomes fatally ineffective in a situation where a potential adversary of the West manages to solve the issue of effectively neutralizing its air force. Because it is they, and not the Western infantry, which is too expensive for the integrity of its skin, has always been and remains the main striking tool of the West in all its neo-colonial military adventures - from Yugoslavia to Iraq and Syria. It is the full guarantee of an “open sky” for NATO, mainly American, military aircraft, is the main incentive and condition for the start of the next aggression.

It is not by chance that the West has always shown extreme restraint in providing all countries of the world that are not part of its own geopolitical pool with modern weapons air defense. Even despite the undoubted commercial attractiveness of such transactions. And in cases where the provision of such problematic countries with air defense systems was in the interests of the West itself, it was limited, as a rule, to the temporary deployment of their own units on their territories, for example, the Patriot air defense missile system. Which were immediately withdrawn from there, as soon as the US command wanted. It is on such “bird rights” that completely ignore the sovereignty of the countries receiving these weapons, that American anti-aircraft “aid” is based even on America’s close allies like Turkey, Arabian monarchies, South Korea, or Poland’s European member of NATO. It was worth it, for example, of the same Turkey to behave excessively independently from the point of view of Washington, as NATO’s subordinate NATO batteries of the Patriot were subordinate to the United States and were immediately removed from this country.

Such a policy of limited sovereignty in the field of national defense, which in turn has a very negative impact on the ability to protect the state interests of such countries, is naturally perceived by them as extremely uncomfortable and requiring the adoption of alternative solutions.

And these "alternative solutions" are, nothing more than the acquisition of their own "keys to the sky." The presence of which in the hands of sovereign powers knocks the most important trump card from the aggressive arsenal of Western hegemony - the invulnerability of American air power.

Do I need to clarify that such trends in the mindsets of the leaders of many countries in the world are fully understood in Russia, which itself plays a leading role today on this anti-hegemonic “track”.

Mainly for this reason, and not because of primitive and, in general, cheap commercial benefits, today Moscow makes strategic decisions on the transfer of high-performance air defense systems to those countries whose national interests more and more clearly contradict Western ambitions and therefore insistently require reliable power supply.

A classic example is the same Turkey, with the vital interests of which the world hegemon does not want to be considered in principle. The United States is steadily following the path of the all-round consolidation in the Middle East of its new geopolitical Frankenstein - “the great Kurdistan”. The emergence of which for states such as Turkey is mortally dangerous.

Ankara today is taking more and more anti-American positions precisely because no benefits from the “strategic partnership” with Washington are able to outweigh the threat of a national catastrophe. Which is the same US actually prepare for this country. Turkey, in particular, will never put up with American plans to equip the Kurdish proto-state in eastern Syria. And it will fight against this enclave by all means, even if for this it will need to become a military-political opponent of the United States. Ankara has already announced plans to mobilize reservists, clearly referring not so much to a local battle with the Kurds in the Afrin region, as the need to quickly destroy the Kurdish-American outpost to the east of the Euphrates.

All this suggests that the contradictions between Turkey and the West, led by the United States, are becoming antagonistic, intractable by consensus. And these contradictions outweigh everything that binds Turkey to the Western world.

And this means that Russia has no reason to exercise excessive restraint in developing its relations with Turkey and to restrict this country in acquiring the military-strategic stability that is so necessary for it in the form of a reliable anti-aircraft and anti-missile shield.

Practically similar motivations are present in politics of a number of other states that need the same Russian weapons in order to make their territories "no-fly zones" for enemy aircraft and missiles. Another classic example of such logic is Iran.

However, today it can already be argued that these are by no means individual swallows that the weather does not do. Quantity begins to translate explicitly into quality. As evidenced by the military and political ambitions shown by the oil monarchies of the Middle East. Which also come in the taste of a more independent foreign policy. And they understand that those times when it was the most correct to put all the eggs in one - the American basket, pass irrevocably. And for a new and more profitable multi-vector policy, they need an adequate force and, above all, anti-aircraft reinforcement. Independent from the West! That is why the US State Department is so nervous, and the special services of this country are making titanic efforts to disrupt such deals.

It seems that Iraq is ready to become another country that has reached the line of awareness of new strategic realities. What is not surprising, if we remember that this country is almost more than all the others suffered from its American "benefactors". And which is only now making the first attempts to break free from American oppression.

“Iraq is striving to have S-400 missile systems at its disposal to protect its territory and sky from airborne threats. This was stated on Saturday by Al Ghad Press to the head of the Iraqi Parliament’s Defense and Security Committee, Hakim al-Zamili ... “Iraq has the right to possess advanced weapons to protect its land and sky from outside air threats,” he said. At the same time, the parliamentarian pointed out that the United States "does not seek to arm Iraq and provide him with systems that provide full protection of its territory and airspace", but want it to remain "an open arena for the implementation of their plans." “Therefore, Iraq is forced to possess such complexes,” he said. “And it is our right to receive them.” On Wednesday news Shafaaq News portal said that the Iraqi delegation will visit Moscow in the near future to negotiate the acquisition of S-400 anti-aircraft missile systems "


Thus, we can confidently say that "the process has begun." And in the foreseeable future, more and more countries of the world that are on the path of asserting full-fledged national sovereignty and liberation from overly obtrusive Anglo-Saxon guardianship will follow this example. And acquire weapons that significantly reduce the ability of the West to dictate their will to them by military means.

In this sense, Russian advanced air defense / missile defense systems are indeed becoming number one geopolitical weapon. Thus, the ultima ratio, or, if you like, by the Archimedean lever of world politics, which is really capable of shifting the geopolitical earthly axis. And this, you will agree, is a completely different issue price than a couple of billions earned on the occasion of the world arms market.
Author:
52 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. siberalt
    siberalt 27 February 2018 05: 30
    +3
    Yeah. It’s not a sin to earn a couple of billion bucks at the expense of your safety. Oh well! winked
    1. Stas157
      Stas157 27 February 2018 07: 31
      +8
      finding your own "keys to heaven." The presence of which in the hands of sovereign powers knocks out the most important trump card from the aggressive arsenal of Western hegemony - the invulnerability of American air power.

      And also the invulnerability of Russian military air power! Why touch your military adversaries with your military advantage? As the article correctly points out, the United States does not do this, even with its allies! What benefit pushes the Kremlin to this? After all, the Turks were not shot down by an American plane, and not the American ambassador was killed ...
      1. Don
        Don 27 February 2018 10: 06
        +13
        I think the author as a whole is right when speaking about the main reasons for delivering our complexes to friends of the United States. At least he at least tried to drip a little deeper than what lies on the surface. Only a few people abroad should be aware of our true intentions, and only a few should know about Russia's strategic plans, and that is only from the leadership of our country .. Well, not crazy people, after all, are sitting in the Kremlin and the General Staff of Russia!
      2. Alex von Dorn
        Alex von Dorn 27 February 2018 11: 26
        +6
        My friend, you clearly underestimate our designers. S-400 Turkey will not be able to shoot at Russian aircraft, even if the Turks really want to. They don’t know where the S-400 has a “button”, with which it can be turned off, remotely. Why do you think dozens of Iraqi (made in America) planes did not “wound up” when the States attacked Iraq? :)
      3. Fedor egoist
        Fedor egoist 27 February 2018 11: 49
        +4
        Quote: Stas157
        Why touch your military adversaries with your military advantage? As the article correctly points out, the United States does not do this, even with its allies! What benefit pushes the Kremlin to this?

        Russia, as history periodically shows, has no friends, and there are only two ally - its own army and navy. All the rest can be safely recorded as "potential opponents." To trade then with whom?
        As for the air defense / missile defense systems, I’m sure they won’t be able to work on our aircraft - there are hardware and software bookmarks even on mobile phones and laptops, to say nothing about high-tech military equipment :) The technology itself is not transmitted, only finished products, with the letter "E", so with this, too, everything is in order. Let me remind you that Greece has long had our S-300s in service, and it, by the way, is also part of NATO.
        The benefit is direct - to close the sky of the air force of "a clear adversary." Or make it difficult for them to complete tasks. In short: as many A2 / AD as possible, different and dangerous!
        1. andj61
          andj61 27 February 2018 14: 32
          +4
          Quote: Alex von Dorn
          My friend, you clearly underestimate our designers. S-400 Turkey will not be able to shoot at Russian aircraft, even if the Turks really want to.

          Quote: Fedor Egoist
          As for the air defense / missile defense systems, I’m sure they won’t be able to work on our aircraft - there are hardware and software bookmarks even on mobile phones and laptops, to say nothing about high-tech military equipment :) The technology itself is not transmitted, only finished products, with the letter "E", so with this, too, everything is in order. Let me remind you that Greece has long had our S-300s in service, and it, by the way, is also part of NATO.
          The benefit is direct - to close the sky of the air force of "a clear adversary." Or make it difficult for them to complete tasks. In short: as many A2 / AD as possible, different and dangerous!

          good I absolutely agree with you! The only thing is that there may be a negative answer to the sale of our anti-aircraft missile systems to the question - can we produce enough SAMs for ourselves? Can we safely increase the production of such weapons for our defense? If we can, then there’s even nothing to argue about - to sell! Moreover, this is not a weapon for aggression. hi
          1. Grbear
            Grbear 27 February 2018 15: 02
            0
            andj61
            I absolutely agree with you! The only thing is that there may be a negative answer to the sale of our anti-aircraft missile systems to the question - can we produce enough SAMs for ourselves?

            Do you think that you are smarter than others repeat
            And that Shoigu will set Russia up fool
            What are your arguments?
            hi
            1. andj61
              andj61 27 February 2018 17: 12
              +1
              Quote: GrBear
              What are your arguments?

              The production of modern air defense systems is a very complicated thing, and to simultaneously increase the production of these systems by 10, for example, will not work. For this, it is necessary to invest in the technical base, and in the production of components. Yes, and there is too much sense, beyond their needs, the needs of their allies (Kazakhstan-Belarus-Armenia) and a small reserve for possible imports (20-25 percent - IMHO) there is no development of production. Invest in the production of the S-400, and here, you see - the S-500, or even the S-1000, the time will come to produce. And this is a new element base, new equipment for production, a new level of specialists. In the end, one, albeit a powerful anti-aircraft defense system, cannot win the confrontation - here, and other components are needed.
              Quote: GrBear
              Do you think that you are smarter than others

              Before my comment, I cited two others with which I agree. So I'm not alone! wink
              Quote: GrBear
              And that Shoigu will set Russia up

              Shoigu is the Minister of Defense. Its task is to maintain the army at the required level. Moreover, his requirements for industry, as well as for any other defense ministers, are of course overstated. And it will not be he who decides whether or not he can afford, if only for purely economic reasons. Although his opinion at the same time, as well as the opinion of the Ministry and the General Staff will also be taken into account.
          2. Mestny
            Mestny 27 February 2018 15: 09
            -1
            Can we safely increase the production of such weapons for our defense?

            “According to the decision of [President of the Russian Federation] Vladimir Putin, the Almaz-Antey concern built two plants - in Kirov and Nizhny Novgorod. So, at the Kirov machine-building enterprise, the design capacity for producing only promising anti-aircraft missile systems is thousands of missiles per year. "The Nizhny Novgorod Engineering Plant has already begun production of final systems of the S-500 and S-400 type on a car chassis and semi-trailers on a wheeled drive,"

            More on TASS:
            http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/4986966

            We can.
          3. faradien
            faradien 1 March 2018 01: 45
            +1
            For ourselves, we will be able to produce this in the right quantities, and more a series will reduce the cost of production. In Kirov and Nizhny, plants were specially built for the new complexes. And the development of the complex was carried out taking into account the possible great interest abroad.

            Chemezov recently said that if necessary, then we will put the S-400 in the USA (!!!). There is nothing secret in export options. The main problem is to technologically reproduce the product. And this is not for many Pts.
      4. EnGenius
        EnGenius 27 February 2018 19: 56
        +1
        It is logical with the author to agree in everything. Traditional questions for this - but what about Russian power? It seems to me, to the question why to sell, you need to add a couple of pluses:
        1) С400 is the modernization of С300 actually on the Russian element base due to the breakdown of cooperation after the collapse of the USSR. We can say that this is the first globally import-substituted product of Russia.
        2) Export versions of the complexes are cut off according to the characteristics of the detection and defeat ranges, which puts them on a par with the possibilities of both Chinese clones and Patriots, European counterparts, and Israeli ones - here, buying is a matter of geopolitical conjuncture.
        3) By selling these systems, we demonstrate "goodwill" by actually cutting off the path for aggression of our own air forces in the event of conflict.
        4) We are ahead of American plans for a global missile defense system, which, under the sauce of a global conflict, was managed to be shoved in Asia and the Middle East, ostensibly from defense against ballistic missiles of the DPRK and Iran. Over time, this hysteria will only gain momentum.
        5) The most advanced detection algorithms and long-range missiles with GOS will remain in Russia. They are NOT exported.
        6) Russia needs something like re-equipment on the C500 and patch up the hole from the military-industrial complex in the budget.
    2. Chertt
      Chertt 27 February 2018 11: 39
      +3
      Quote: siberalt
      It’s not a sin to earn a couple of billion bucks at the expense of your safety Well, well

      How will Russia's security suffer from the sale of the S-300 \ 400 to Iraq, or to whom else? Talk like your comment is beneficial to the US and NATO.
    3. Grbear
      Grbear 27 February 2018 14: 59
      0
      siberalt Today, 05: 30
      Yeah. It’s not a sin to earn a couple of billion bucks at the expense of your safety. Oh well

      Managed to tell? Did you think it yourself? fool
      Today, not clowns are sitting in the General Staff and Moscow Oblasts (I will not say anything about DUMU). They breed "allies" competently. hi
    4. nov_tech.vrn
      nov_tech.vrn 2 March 2018 22: 03
      0
      somehow I look everyone missed the news about the start of serial production of the S-500
  2. elenagromova
    elenagromova 27 February 2018 06: 08
    +2
    I would like the sky over Syria to be closed completely. Is it really impossible?
    1. Cxnumx
      Cxnumx 27 February 2018 07: 42
      +4
      Quote: elenagromova
      I would like the sky over Syria to be closed completely. Is it really impossible?

      Unfortunately, we now cannot afford to shoot down NATO aircraft over other states.
    2. Stas157
      Stas157 27 February 2018 07: 49
      +11
      Quote: elenagromova
      I would like the sky over Syria to be closed completely. Is it really impossible?

      When they installed the strategic S-400 in Syria, everyone shouted, everywhere they wrote that the sky of Syria is in our lock, and foreign planes in Syria will no longer feel free, if at all, to fly. When a rocket attack occurred on Shairat, they immediately explained to us that this is a purely personal matter of our partners, and that the Russian umbrella does not protect anyone except itself, and that we don’t have to harness anybody at all. That's just strange after that - what are we doing in Syria then? And now, in general, the partners are brutalized from their impunity! Jews regularly bomb our military ally, and the United States hit Russian PMCs.
    3. Reserve officer
      Reserve officer 27 February 2018 12: 33
      +1
      "... advanced air defense / missile defense systems are indeed becoming the number one geopolitical weapon ..."

      The number one weapon is not any advanced systems, but determination to respond to the adversary. In the same Syria, at least every kilometer there will be air defense systems, but not one of them dares to bring down a state aircraft.
      On the other hand, meetings of the leaders of two states work much more efficiently than any weapon.
      So all the author’s arguments about the connection between air defense and geopolitics have a weak connection with reality.
  3. lance
    lance 27 February 2018 06: 19
    +9
    S-400E is very different from the national one, the more we sell, the more states will be associated with us. and the less the United States will climb where it is not necessary, especially to those with whom we have economic relations.
    1. Stas157
      Stas157 27 February 2018 07: 36
      +5
      Quote: Lance
      S-400E is very different from the national one.

      And I'm sure not! Can you refute me? If the S-400E were not effective, then they would hardly be bought.
      1. alstr
        alstr 27 February 2018 10: 00
        +3
        The differences are as follows:
        1. friend or foe equipment
        2. communication systems
        3. other operating frequencies
        4. rockets are slightly different

        Well, let's not forget about bookmarks either.
        In general, everything that is sold from the air defense in the export version is not dangerous for us if you don’t rush with your bare ass.
        Here the explanation is simple: Take Turkey. How many Divisions are sold - 2. Accordingly, we have a maximum of 10 frequencies, which when overlapping electronic warfare at a time.

        Plus, the resource is also limited, which will require Turkey to contact us for service.

        So not everything is so scary.
        1. Cop
          Cop 27 February 2018 10: 46
          +1
          Quote: alstr

          So not everything is so scary.

          You are absolutely right. Once I read or heard, I don’t remember, an interview with the S-300 developer, and so he said that the main thing in him was the “firmware”. It is enough to change it and the complex becomes different. I do not think that in the case of the S-400 everything is somehow different.
      2. andj61
        andj61 27 February 2018 17: 18
        0
        Quote: Stas157
        Quote: Lance
        S-400E is very different from the national one.

        And I'm sure not! Can you refute me? If the S-400E were not effective, then they would hardly be bought.

        If we take, by analogy with the S-200, for example, the air defense systems delivered to non-ATS countries were slightly different from those used at home. As Comrade alstrz rightly remarked,
        Quote: alstr
        The differences are as follows:
        1. friend or foe equipment
        2. communication systems
        3. other operating frequencies
        4. rockets are slightly different
        Well, let's not forget about bookmarks either.

        And they also worked in the so-called. survivability mode, and not as part of the automated control system of the regiment brigade. This significantly reduced their combat capabilities. It seems that according to modern air defense systems, the situation is more or less similar. hi
  4. Snail N9
    Snail N9 27 February 2018 06: 39
    +3
    I don’t understand why Russia helps Turkey so much? Is it really just to get Turkey out of the influence of the United States and NATO countries and push it on the path of "Islamization"? Indeed, for example, the US coup prepared there, on the contrary, should have led Turkey to a real parliamentary republic, and not to the "sultanate" as Erdogan did now, completely removing the influence of the parliament from the life of the country. I do not understand what is the benefit of Russia in this? Is it possible that a secular state, even under the influence of “European-American values”, is worse than a totalitarian state that declared a march to the “Islamic roots”?
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 27 February 2018 06: 42
      +4
      Is it possible that a secular state, even under the influence of “European-American values”, is worse than a totalitarian state that declared a march to the “Islamic roots”?

      Of course worse ... smile a secular state under the influence of Euro-American values ​​infected with the bacilli of Russophobia is no less worse than a totalitarian state ...
      as they say radish horseradish is not sweeter.
    2. Don
      Don 27 February 2018 10: 25
      +7
      And you try to imagine what will happen if Turkey reaches such a state as Syria or Libya? Then this fire in the south of Russia will be kindled with such force that it will burn Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, and our former Central Asian republics. Inevitably, our Caucasus flares up. Even Russia with its nuclear arsenal cannot put out this fire. Our strategists are afraid of such a terrible scenario prepared by the Americans. That is precisely why Russia began to act in the Middle East as it does. At least some smart people think so.
  5. Uncle lee
    Uncle lee 27 February 2018 06: 55
    +3
    Good. We gave Turkey S-400, got it out of US influence, and a month later Trump offered Erdogan a bunch of gingerbread cookies and he ran into the arms of the USA! And how will we look?
    1. flicker
      flicker 27 February 2018 14: 12
      +5
      Trump offered Erdogan a bunch of gingerbread cookies and he ran into the arms of the United States
      First, Erdogan himself will choose these gingerbread cookies, then he will want to get them, and only then he will throw himself in a hug. Gingerbread is a concession to the United States, a concession to the United States is a loss of dominance. If Turkey passes this, then many US-dependent countries will want to repeat the Turkish feat, they will say that they want to buy the S-400, and then they will begin to bargain with the USA.
    2. 97110
      97110 27 February 2018 16: 41
      0
      Quote: Uncle Lee
      and after a month Trump offered Erdogan

      and Trump Gingham with McCain will be banned from the principle through Congress, they will prove to all US electors that he is following Putin’s instructions again. Our talk showmen and talk showmen have enough time to laugh at the grins for a month.
  6. Michael R
    Michael R 27 February 2018 07: 18
    +7
    Everything is stated logically and wisely. And as regards Erdogan, the old man likes to reign, that our GDP understands very well and the very S-400s will ensure the sultan’s power and safety from mattresses. This is the very weapon that Erdogan will hold in his hands and firmly, and not the Patriots, that mattresses do not give him in his hands.
  7. X Y Z
    X Y Z 27 February 2018 07: 27
    0
    To possess, this does not mean to be able to manage it effectively. We have rich experience in supplying modern weapons to Arab countries. And, if it is not our "internationalist" who controls it, the matter almost always ends with the quick death of equipment and personnel. Is there any certainty that these deliveries will not end with the same result?
    1. 97110
      97110 27 February 2018 16: 43
      +1
      Quote: XYZ
      Is there any certainty that these deliveries will not end with the same result?

      We’ll also deliver, on a prepayment it’s even more profitable.
  8. Lynx33
    Lynx33 27 February 2018 07: 43
    +3
    As we like the whole phrase “having no analogues in the world”, without even making sure that this is true. Example: the C-350 system (the Korean name is km-sam "cheolmae-2"), manufactured and put into service in South Korea, developed by Almaz-Antey (for myself, it seems that they are still collecting papers for their military representatives). The Chinese, I hope not to mention.
    1. lance
      lance 27 February 2018 10: 29
      0
      but even in this case export restrictions apply, although with South Korea there are concessions not contested by the hegemon
      1. Lynx33
        Lynx33 27 February 2018 13: 19
        0
        And what does the export restrictions have to do with it? The manufacturer is not alone, it means that this weapon cannot be “unique”. The actual performance characteristics of the Chinese are unknown, most likely they fought the S-300 one to one.
        1. lance
          lance 27 February 2018 13: 26
          0
          five with a plus for quick wits, China received the same export option, which sold both the DPRK and Iran. however, Iran insisted on selling him products from the Russian Federation and is going to buy s-400. which does not remind with .... akm.
  9. Loess
    Loess 27 February 2018 08: 23
    0
    The article is interesting ... yes ... but this phrase
    Thus, the ultima ratio, or, if you want, the Archimedean lever of world politics, which is really capable of shifting the geopolitical axis of the earth.
    inspired the memories of the child prodigy ... Although I agree with the idea that the presence of modern air defense systems is sobering in the United States.
    1. yuriyselivanov
      27 February 2018 09: 42
      0
      In Russian there is such a concept - literary hyperbole.
  10. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 27 February 2018 10: 34
    0
    “Iraq is striving to have S-400 missile systems at its disposal to protect its territory and sky from airborne threats. This was stated on Saturday by Al Ghad Press to the head of the Iraqi Parliament’s Defense and Security Committee, Hakim al-Zamili ... “Iraq has the right to possess advanced weapons to protect its land and sky from outside air threats,” he said.

    It is unlikely that this will happen ... through Iraq lies the air route to Iran. The closure of this path (even simply by modern radars) will dramatically complicate the strike on Iran, both the Kyrgyz Republic and aviation.
  11. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 27 February 2018 11: 45
    +3
    When our president began to implement the theme of "Asher's Gun Shops," word for word, I was in complete admiration. And he was afraid to breathe, looking at how no one understands the terrific situation ...
    Alas, the Americans have already reached it. Emissaries rushed around the world, trying to block deals. Now the whole world is swinging on the finest edge. If our “gun shops” work, the Anglo-Saxon robbery will soon end. If they succeed ... It is not for nothing that sanctions take package after package. Oh and the situation ...
    1. Lynx33
      Lynx33 27 February 2018 13: 22
      0
      The "emissaries" will achieve only one thing - they will drop prices for the supply of goods, which means we’ll have more in terms of quantity.
      1. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 27 February 2018 15: 03
        0
        Is not a fact. And the price is not so important, it’s profitable for us to simply distribute the complexes, even for nothing, if only as many countries as possible take them. Google Asher Weapon Shops topic.
  12. flicker
    flicker 27 February 2018 12: 44
    +3
    Number one geopolitical weapon
    Yes, yes.
    the basis of Western hegemony is ... unquestioned military power. Lack of effective force arguments by most states ...
    The Achilles heel of the western machine of the global military dictate is also quite obvious. Which becomes fatally ineffective in a situation where a potential adversary of the West manages to resolve the issue of effectively neutralizing its air force. Because it’s them, and not the Western infantry, which is too expensive for the integrity of its skin,
    Everything is correct, and some of them only see the commercial side. Moreover, even if Turkey refuses the deal (it is only on its own terms and with huge concessions to the United States - because it knows its significance for NATO), then concessions from the United States will already mean curtailing world domination. If such a ride from Turkey, then other countries will follow her example (refusal to purchase the S-400 for concessions from the United States). The concessions from the United States is to curtail their dominance.
    And in this sense, the Russian advanced air defense / missile defense systems are indeed becoming the number one geopolitical weapon ... And this, you see, is a completely different issue price than a couple of billions earned on the occasion at the world arms flea market.
  13. Radikal
    Radikal 27 February 2018 12: 48
    0
    Quote: K0
    Quote: elenagromova
    I would like the sky over Syria to be closed completely. Is it really impossible?

    Unfortunately, we now cannot afford to shoot down NATO aircraft over other states.

    ... and for a very long time we can’t. sad
    1. lance
      lance 27 February 2018 13: 30
      0
      I really want this for 50-100 years. For this, we sell it to the right and to the left so that they do not climb into us.
  14. Radikal
    Radikal 27 February 2018 13: 34
    0
    Quote: Lance
    I really want this for 50-100 years. For this, we sell it to the right and to the left so that they do not climb into us.

    I agree, only modern realities do not inspire enthusiasm in this matter! This is such an answer, in the style of Lavrov wassat
  15. Dmitry V.
    Dmitry V. 27 February 2018 14: 42
    0
    In Russia there are only 23 regiments of S-400/46 air defense divisions / 368 PU / 1472 SAM missiles (as of November 15, 2017). We produce about 6-8 S-400 systems per year (each of them is 6 anti-aircraft missile systems. Maximum 10 targets with 20 missiles pointing at them). It’s time to sell it until it is completely out of date. The future is with laser weapons. Already in service in the United States adopted systems that can directly hit targets with a laser beam.
    1. EnGenius
      EnGenius 27 February 2018 20: 02
      +1
      Laser weapons can effectively fight only against slow reconnaissance UAVs and rubber boats, which will appear within a radius of 3 km from the ship and in good weather conditions.
      1. The comment was deleted.
  16. Wolka
    Wolka 27 February 2018 18: 24
    0
    ladies and gentlemen, everything is for you, in the morning money in the evening chairs, money in the evening, in the morning chairs and nothing more, all for garlic
  17. klm-57
    klm-57 27 February 2018 20: 55
    0
    Here it must also be taken into account that this "anti-aircraft and anti-missile shield" cannot be used against the party that provided it. For Russia itself, it does not pose a threat, but it is very expensive. And the sale of domestic missile defense / air defense systems to Turkey is, in fact, a trade in one of the most science-intensive and technological types of products with extremely high added value.
  18. Old26
    Old26 28 February 2018 00: 07
    0
    Quote: Stas157
    The US does not do this, even with its allies!

    This incidentally does not correspond to reality. It corresponded in the 90s, but not now. The Americans sold the same Saudi Arabia to the Patriot, and they are going to sell the TAAAD. Sold "Patriots" in Poland and Romania

    Quote: Alex von Dorn
    Why do you think dozens of Iraqi (made in America) planes did not “wound up” when the States attacked Iraq? :)

    Iraqi ?? As far as I remember, aviation was almost all Soviet, with the exception of about a hundred French Mirages and 70 Chinese cars. Iraq didn’t haveAND ONE AMERICAN PLANE

    Quote: Uncle Lee
    Good. We gave Turkey S-400, got it out of US influence, and a month later Trump offered Erdogan a bunch of gingerbread cookies and he ran into the arms of the USA! And how will we look?

    He has been trying for a long time to act on his own, without regard to the same Europe. He is already 20 years old, if not more chewed, using such a carrot as the European Union. Say you will behave yourself well - accept. Then they say: No led badly. In a couple of years, we’ll accept it if you correct yourself ... He seems tired of it. So without looking back it is unlikely to run. Nishtyaks must be very, very enticing, so that he agrees. And what can they offer him ??
  19. shinobi
    shinobi 28 February 2018 04: 10
    0
    The feature of our weapons is that they cannot be repeated in the west. Even the simplest samples. No, of course they are trying. What everyone knows. This is in the very general system of differences in the process. So, it’s not worth the special effort to arm the potential opponents. Moreover, our air defense systems in the Western network are not integrable in principle