Military Review

The remnants of the Soviet backlog: what weapons does modern Russia sell?

54
The remnants of the Soviet backlog: what weapons does modern Russia sell?
Source: artfile.ru



Gun supermarket


In the Soviet Union, forced to compete with the United States for several decades, a powerful military-industrial branch has developed. So powerful that even the dashing 90s could not break its potential. It was possible to slow down and partially stop development, but not to destroy it.

Weapons The USSR produced in excess even for its own multi-million army, so the domestic military-industrial complex can be safely called export-oriented since Soviet times. Only two countries in the world could boast of a full range of manufactured weapons - from a bayonet to a ballistic missile.

As a result, the planet was divided into two client camps.

The first American is Latin America, Western Europe, the Middle East, South Africa, Australia and Japan. Some of these regions themselves produced decent equipment, but still had to line up for American weapons.

The second camp of clients was staked out by the Soviet Union. It included South and Southeast Asia, Africa, Eastern Europe and Cuba. Only now the sale of Soviet weapons did not always bring a decent profit. The arms business is extremely politicized and often deliveries from the USSR to foreign friends were almost for nothing.

On the one hand, this was a serious burden on the economy, on the other hand, it allowed Moscow to project its influence around the world. Buyers of Soviet equipment were forced to get on the needle of communist imports, which in the future had a very positive effect on the Russian arms business. Often, those who now make decisions on the purchase of weapons with the “made in Russia” mark have worked with Soviet technology all their adult lives. And she has a special charm - reliable, unpretentious and easy to use.

Nevertheless, since the beginning of the 90s, Russia has lost a considerable share of the world arms market. Almost all of Eastern Europe has gone under the American military-industrial complex, and recent events have only exacerbated this trend. Not everything is going smoothly in Southeast Asia, which is traditionally focused on Russian military equipment. Vietnam, though by no means the largest customer, willingly buys weapons from the United States.


Despite the US call not to buy Russian, weapons made in Russia are and will be in demand. Source: sinodefence.wordpress.com

In the future, the situation with Russian arms exports will inevitably worsen. With sanctions, the West seeks to strangle the domestic high-tech industry, which means that the arms sector will inevitably suffer as well.

At the same time, the events in Ukraine openly showed the importance of a powerful army, independence from the country's membership in this or that organization. The world will arm itself, and Western weapons will not be enough for everyone. The example of Europe, which is forced to supply weapons to the Kyiv regime drop by drop, is very indicative. Nowhere and never can you save on your own defense, which the Europeans have been doing in recent decades.

This approach suits Russia completely - the country will never become an outcast at the world arms fair.

What is Russia trading?


Slightly less than twenty percent of the world arms market is accounted for by Russian exports. The hottest item - Tanks and light armored vehicles, aircraft and helicopters, as well as the hallmark of our military-industrial complex - air defense systems.

Some statistics. From 2017 to 2021, Russian exports have fallen by 26 percent, according to the world’s top arms spies, the Swedish firm SIPRI. The culprits were India and the mentioned Vietnam, who decided to take a breather. Indians in general are our most expensive customers, in different years the country accounted for up to one quarter of all sales. In the top list China with 18 percent and Algeria - with fifteen.

While Russia experienced a decline in sales, the Americans, on the contrary, increased their exports by 14 percent. Now the United States sells weapons in the world twice as much as Russia. It is too early to talk about the situation as a current trend. In the world of arms supplies, years of downtime can be replaced by one or two contracts, the profit from which will cover all losses. So SIPRI is expecting large deliveries of Russian weapons to India in the near future.

In mid-August, Sergei Chemezov reported on contracts worth one trillion rubles signed with foreign customers. Given the growth of the national currency, this looks impressive. At the same time, Rostec refused to name the buyers. This can be understood, given the level of American hunting for everyone who has trade ties with our country. No one intends to publicly expose their partners to blows.

On average, Russia sells $14-15 billion worth of weapons annually. By the end of August of this year, according to Rosoboronexport, equipment and weapons worth 5,4 billion have been handed over to customers. The exact figures on the annual turnover will not be known until next spring. According to Dmitry Shugaev, director of the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation, the portfolio of orders for the current year is $57 billion.

More than half of Russian arms exports are combat aircraft, primarily of the Su family. India willingly takes the carrier-based MiG-29K and KUB for aircraft carriers. There are also buyers for the combat training Yak-130, for example, the car is popular in Bangladesh, Algeria and Myanmar. Motor builders supply a wide range aviation engines to the Chinese, who still cannot master the full-fledged production of this critical technology.


Russian helicopters serve in China, Peru, Algeria, Iraq, Brazil, Venezuela and Kazakhstan. Uganda this year purchased the first vehicles under the contract for the supply of Mi-28NE. Source: rutube.ru

Large volumes of deliveries have recently fallen on air defense systems. Domestic gunsmiths not only exported the S-300, S-400, Pantsir-S1 and Buk-M2 systems to a number of countries, but also participated in the development of the South Korean KM-SAM system.

It should be noted that the special operation confirmed the high combat qualities of a number of Russian military equipment. Tanks, including domestic ones, have been buried for decades, but in Ukraine they have shown their indispensability. Moreover, Russia is far from the technological impasse here.

Even foreign observers point out that it is modern technology that dies the least in battles. According to the Oryx agency, the losses of the T-80BVM and T-90 are much less than the outdated T-72 series vehicles. And the point is not in the numerical advantage of the latter, but in the qualitatively better protection, firepower and mobility. This confirms the experience of selling tanks in recent decades - the T-90s have entered service in India, Azerbaijan, Algeria, Vietnam, Iraq and Uganda.

Light armored vehicles are also popular in a number of countries. For example, Algeria recently upgraded its fleet of BMP-2s with Russian help.


Russia supplies guided artillery weapons to, among others, Turkey, Serbia and Algeria. Photo by Vitaly Kuzmin.

Air defense systems of various levels have also shown themselves to be successful, which will also add points to the international arms market. Undoubtedly, army aviation equipment deserved the best ratings, which in the future may become an even more important item for arms exports. From 2000 to 2020, at least 1,1 thousand combat and military transport helicopters went to foreign customers.

Shipbuilders are ready to sell the most modern technology. Everyone knows contracts with India for the supply of Project 11356 frigates, leasing of the nuclear submarine 971U Shchuka-B and, of course, the flagship of the local Navy, the Vikramaditya aircraft carrier, formerly Admiral Gorshkov. The boats "Lightning" (project 1241) and hovercraft of various form factors are also exported. The latter were bought by the Greeks and Koreans.

How good is everything?


The level of arms export directly depends on the volume of the state defense order. In this regard, the special operation of Russia in Ukraine is able to disperse the domestic military-industrial complex to a new level.

As you know, a couple of years ago, Vladimir Putin called on gunsmiths to diversify their capacities. Translate enterprises on a peaceful footing. For example, the Almaz-Antey concern announced an electric car last year. The market prospects of this creation even before the special operation inspired great doubts, and now they look like fantasy at all. The domestic manufacturer of air defense systems now has much more important issues on the agenda.

How important the defense order is is illustrated by the example of KamAZ and UAZ, which for the first time in many years found funds to modernize their capacities. Both plants are now fully loaded with the production of equipment for the army.

Can't do without this stories without a fly in the ointment.

The main mistake that lies in wait for the mobilization economy is the low level of spending on research and development (R&D). In pursuit of tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and KamAZ trucks, of which the front needs a huge amount, it is important not to oversleep the high-quality modernization. First of all, this concerns drones, critical microelectronics and aircraft engine building. The unique backlog of the Soviet design school made it possible to create a number of already Russian types of weapons that are in no way inferior to foreign ones.

However, the technique developed from scratch can be counted on the fingers. At the same time, a large part of the fundamentally new weapons either did not reach the military, or are present in trace amounts. We are now talking about the platforms "Armata", "Kurganets", "Boomerang" and fifth-generation aircraft. Unfortunately, these are far from the only examples.

Foreign buyers ask reasonable questions:

“Why should we buy equipment that they themselves do not particularly exploit in the Russian Federation?”

All this creates a number of problems that may prevent our defense concerns from demonstrating growth in world markets in the future.
Author:
54 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Uncle lee
    Uncle lee 25 November 2022 05: 24
    +16
    the technique developed from scratch can be counted on the fingers
    But soon the Soviet backlog will end ....
    1. Olddetractor
      Olddetractor 25 November 2022 05: 46
      +7
      All backlogs, like the Soviet one, will soon end. All these deliveries of old military equipment to Ukraine are confidently clearing the market for new batches of weapons. In times of crisis, the arms business blooms and smells
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 26 November 2022 17: 03
        +3
        Here, for example, we see that the groundwork for armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles from the USSR ended conceptually ... (unlike MBT), but the industry cannot do it. And this, in turn, is based on the same groundwork for trucks ... .. and its units (automatic transmissions and new diesel engines)
    2. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 25 November 2022 09: 22
      0
      Quote: Uncle Lee
      But soon the Soviet backlog will end ....

      Well, not soon, but in 2022 no new major contracts were announced.
    3. paul3390
      paul3390 25 November 2022 09: 34
      +17
      Come on - after all, everyone knows that the Soviet Union did not produce anything other than galoshes ... Then why are you sad? Yes, highly effective owners will simply overwhelm us with the most modern models, just pay them. Is not it? Well - or at least we were not assured of this?

      And for verification - everything, absolutely everything with which we live, everything that the bourgeoisie cannot plunder in 30 years - comes from the damned USSR ... The same thing that they try to do like themselves - either does not work, or costs crazy money, or still a converted Soviet ..

      So maybe - it's better to just return Soviet power? Since we can’t do without her great heritage? ..
      1. SKVichyakow
        SKVichyakow 25 November 2022 14: 20
        +3
        Quote: paul3390
        So maybe - it's better to just return Soviet power? Since we can’t do without her great heritage?

        And where to get people of Soviet hardening? Under the current government, only consumers are multiplying.
        1. paul3390
          paul3390 25 November 2022 14: 22
          +2
          And where did the Bolsheviks take them? They didn't bring it from Mars, did they?
          1. SKVichyakow
            SKVichyakow 25 November 2022 15: 22
            +2
            Quote: paul3390
            And where did the Bolsheviks take them? They didn't bring it from Mars, did they?

            So then everything was popular, and for the people. And now?
            1. ch28k38
              ch28k38 26 November 2022 21: 45
              -1
              The deepest delusion of dislocated ideology. I can say this, because I was born in 1943 and the whole post-war history went through me. The people were kept in a black body, it is enough to compare prices and salaries. It is better not to remember the nomenclature and quality of consumer goods.
              1. paul3390
                paul3390 27 November 2022 14: 59
                -2
                The nonsense of liberals has not been interesting for a long time. Precisely because of the stupidity. I, too, is by no means 20 years old, so I don’t need to broadcast here about the type of horrors of Soviet power.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                2. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA 28 November 2022 14: 12
                  +1
                  Why talk about them? Suffice it to recall when rural workers got pensions, and how much they amounted to.
                  Or you can recall the annual pathos "battles for the harvest", bravura reports on the results of which were very well combined with the sale of meat by registration outside the cities of the first category of supply even when dear Leonid Ilyich and famous"long, green, smelling like sausage".
                  1. paul3390
                    paul3390 28 November 2022 14: 29
                    -2
                    when rural workers got pensions

                    Like any liberal, you write nonsense about things that you absolutely don’t understand ... And you don’t even bother to think.

                    The collective farm is an agricultural cooperative. Who should pay pensions to collective farmers - the state? Why all of a sudden, if the collective farmer does not work for him, and does not pay pension contributions ?? But his old age is ensured by the fact that he has a share on the collective farm. It doesn't matter if it still works or not. And the distribution of profits by shares is determined by the collective farmers themselves at the general meeting.

                    Well - and what is your passage about the horrors of the USSR worth ??
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. paul3390
          paul3390 27 November 2022 14: 57
          0
          It's a pity that I didn't get to you, my dear.
      3. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 28 November 2022 14: 07
        0
        Quote: paul3390
        Come on - after all, everyone knows that the Soviet Union did not produce anything other than galoshes

        All - this is for those who, apart from the training manual putindola doesn't read anything? wink
        In fact, immediately after the criticism of "galoshes" (that is, Soviet consumer goods), it was directly said that the Soviet defense industry and space - this is our common pride, these are the achievements of the Soviet government, of which we are all proud.
        Yes, my dear, yes. No need to discuss. The fact is that what we produced (and we don’t have to wave our hands), nobody needed, because nobody bought our galoshes, except for the Africans, who had to walk on the hot sand. That is the whole point.

        We had a defense industry - cool, strong, and we are still proud of it. We are grateful to our grandfathers and our fathers for creating such a defense after the Great Patriotic War.

        From the audience: ... And the first satellite.

        Vladimir Putin: Both the first satellite and the first man in space are our common pride, these are the achievements of the Soviet government, of which we are all proud. These are nationwide achievements.

        But consumer goods ... Zhirinovsky has already said this. Where were they? There were none. Let's not lie to each other and the people. The people know what was and what was not.
        1. Chack wessel
          Chack wessel 29 November 2022 08: 00
          0
          I will not talk now about what was produced in the USSR except for galoshes. Although it seems to me that not only these were produced in the USSR. But Putin should not be blamed for the release of some galoshes in the USSR, because in the Russian Federation galoshes are ALL made in China.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 29 November 2022 10: 39
            +1
            Quote: Chack Wessel
            But Putin should not be blamed for the release of some galoshes in the USSR, because in the Russian Federation galoshes are ALL made in China.

            Once again and slowly: Putin did not reproach the USSR for producing only galoshes. Putin said that the USSR had an excellent defense industry and space (however, space was also a defense industry - the same Buran began with military wishes). But with consumer goods in the USSR it was extremely bad - both in quantity and quality.
            However, Soviet consumer goods had one advantage - they brought up handy and big-headed people who were forced to refine them after purchase. Not for nothing that electrical circuits of devices were attached to all electronics. smile
            1. Alexfly
              Alexfly 29 November 2022 13: 24
              +1
              TNT is an industry group B - it just received insufficient attention and it's true
  2. Edward Vashchenko
    Edward Vashchenko 25 November 2022 05: 55
    +31
    Dear author,
    The arms business is extremely politicized and often deliveries from the USSR to foreign friends were almost for nothing.

    Just for nothing, since Perestroika this is an "old song about the main thing" and, as usual, for 30 years already - not a single proof.
    For understanding, foreign economic activity, as well as other foreign activities in the USSR, was carried out by PROFESSIONALS.
    Nothing was "gifted".
    How many howls were about the African camps, Angola, Mozambique - they got everything for nothing, "everything that was acquired by overwork."

    Yes, there was nothing to take directly from these countries, and the USSR was different in structure than the neo-colonizers from the capital. countries.
    But fishing, in exchange for help, in coastal waters for 20 years, is it for nothing?
    And what about the development of our own military-industrial complex, thus stimulating it?
    What about the geopolitical interests of the communist "superpower" throughout the world?
    For nothing?
    And the voting in the UN of a huge bloc of countries supporting the USSR, as if on command, for free?
    All this ensured the stability of the world, predictability in the development of the situation.
    For nothing?
    1. insafufa
      insafufa 25 November 2022 08: 16
      +7
      The USSR did not give everything disinterestedly to anyone for a gift, he was the first to leave us as the feeder closed.
      From Cuba we received sugar in exchange for fuel and other foodstuffs.
      From Africa, we received cocoa and bananas that did not grow in the USSR in exchange for other food and weapons. Mauritania and Algeria were generally calculated by quotas for fishing with oil and uranium. Indonesia ores for the production of aluminum and copper. And so you can continue ad infinitum. But our revolutionaries of all bridges were supported for a gift with an eye to the future and mostly old weapons for decommissioning. Vietnam received old German rifles, machine guns and anti-aircraft guns of which in our warehouses there were many later decommissioned PPSh and PPS (the latter was in demand with them) SKS and SVT. Homeopathic doses received modern weapons for running in battle. Egypt, in general, also paid off with what it could, mainly oranges, tangerines and lemons in exchange for weapons with garlic and potatoes in exchange for platinum. The most privileged ally of the USSR was Syria, which received weapons on credit, which it was often forgiven
      1. Edward Vashchenko
        Edward Vashchenko 25 November 2022 08: 45
        +10
        he was the first to leave us as the feeder closed.

        It was quite the opposite, most of the allies outside the Warsaw Pact and the Comecon, were ready to work with us, sincerely supported our country.
        But the politicians of the Russian Federation, who destroyed the USSR, put them all out the door, following Gorbachev. What is the denial of assistance to Afghanistan.
        1. insafufa
          insafufa 25 November 2022 09: 06
          +6
          What is the denial of assistance to Afghanistan.
          Well, that was a total shame.
        2. insafufa
          insafufa 25 November 2022 09: 07
          -2
          I’m just talking about the CMEA, that they received everything for dorma and were the first to leave us
          1. Edward Vashchenko
            Edward Vashchenko 25 November 2022 09: 30
            +10
            I’m just talking about the CMEA, that they received everything for dorma and were the first to leave us

            They were just thrown out the door. No Erik Honecker or Jaruzelski betrayed us. Gorbachev did not ask them. Surrendered and closed CMEA.
          2. tatra
            tatra 25 November 2022 11: 13
            +2
            Whom you? Gorbachev's Perestroika is no longer Soviet power, but anti-Soviet.
          3. MBRSS
            MBRSS 25 November 2022 16: 29
            +6
            I'm just talking about the CMEA, that they received everything for dorma

            In CMEA there was barter and cooperation in general. Ikarus buses, Tatra trams and trucks, Bulgarian loaders and telphers, Yugoslav clothes, etc. I'm not talking about Eastern Europe as a buffer from NATO. Now this buffer is gone.
        3. tatra
          tatra 25 November 2022 11: 11
          +2
          Gorbachev surrendered both the republics of the USSR and the socialist countries of Eastern Europe to the enemies of the communists and the USSR.
    2. parma
      parma 25 November 2022 08: 54
      +1
      Quote: Edward Vashchenko
      Dear author,
      The arms business is extremely politicized and often deliveries from the USSR to foreign friends were almost for nothing.

      Just for nothing, since Perestroika this is an "old song about the main thing" and, as usual, for 30 years already - not a single proof.
      For understanding, foreign economic activity, as well as other foreign activities in the USSR, was carried out by PROFESSIONALS.
      Nothing was "gifted".
      How many howls were about the African camps, Angola, Mozambique - they got everything for nothing, "everything that was acquired by overwork."

      Yes, there was nothing to take directly from these countries, and the USSR was different in structure than the neo-colonizers from the capital. countries.
      But fishing, in exchange for help, in coastal waters for 20 years, is it for nothing?
      And what about the development of our own military-industrial complex, thus stimulating it?
      What about the geopolitical interests of the communist "superpower" throughout the world?
      For nothing?
      And the voting in the UN of a huge bloc of countries supporting the USSR, as if on command, for free?
      All this ensured the stability of the world, predictability in the development of the situation.
      For nothing?

      At one time, in the book “Dogs of War” about the turbulent events of the 60s in Africa, one of the heroes said something like this: “communists demand influence from Africans for help, and capitalists demand money, which is essentially the same” ... yes, very similar, but money a more convenient and practical thing, even debt obligations ... suppose that the USSR supplied military equipment to African country A in exchange for fishing, for a certain amount over 20 years, and the United States supplied military equipment to neighboring country B for the same amount, but in a loan (not even repayable) ... in a year the United States can demand anything in exchange for debt cancellation (deployment of a military base, support at the UN, the right to fish for 20 years, etc.), but the USSR does not ... it is unlikely that the union this fishing thousands of kilometers from its borders is generally needed, most likely fish, if it is caught, then for delivery to this very country A (also at non-market prices) ... from more life examples - look in how many countries American oil companies have expansion (if not un ical) production rights, and it doesn’t matter how long ago and with what government the deal was concluded ... or a military base in Cuba, even Soviet nuclear missiles did not change this fact, or the Panama Canal ... and so on and so forth, there are dozens of examples ...
      PS: there was no stability, predictability and security in the world for the supply of weapons to Syria, Libya, Iraq, Somalia, etc. ...
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Edward Vashchenko
        Edward Vashchenko 25 November 2022 09: 17
        +6
        “Dogs of War” about the turbulent events of the 60s in Africa, one of the heroes said something like this: “the communists demand influence from Africans for help, and the capitalists demand money, which in essence too” ...

        This could only be said by another "dog of war", a mercenary bandit who measures everything with money.
        And what did those who fought for their freedom from colonialism say? Against these "dogs of war", whose task is to force "blacks" to work on French or Belgian capitalists? or Portuguese?
        there was no stability, predictability and security in the world for the supply of weapons to Syria, Libya, Iraq, Somalia, etc. ...

        Is Libya attacking someone? Syria provided some stability in Lebanon, where a civil war was inspired in the 70-80s of the XX century.
        Today, any criticism of the international stability of the times of the USSR sounds like a mockery ... in cancer of conflicts on the territory of the USSR.
        1. parma
          parma 25 November 2022 09: 49
          0
          Quote: Edward Vashchenko
          “Dogs of War” about the turbulent events of the 60s in Africa, one of the heroes said something like this: “the communists demand influence from Africans for help, and the capitalists demand money, which in essence too” ...

          This could only be said by another "dog of war", a mercenary bandit who measures everything with money.
          And what did those who fought for their freedom from colonialism say? Against these "dogs of war", whose task is to force "blacks" to work on French or Belgian capitalists? or Portuguese?
          there was no stability, predictability and security in the world for the supply of weapons to Syria, Libya, Iraq, Somalia, etc. ...

          Is Libya attacking someone? Syria provided some stability in Lebanon, where a civil war was inspired in the 70-80s of the XX century.
          Today, any criticism of the international stability of the times of the USSR sounds like a mockery ... in cancer of conflicts on the territory of the USSR.

          You obviously haven’t read this work, because it ends with a detachment of mercenaries hired by a corporation to overthrow the pro-Soviet dictator and replace him with a corporate puppet, as a result, transfers power to the locals, who start reforms in the interests of the population, and not of the superpowers...
          As for Libya, no matter how much I sympathize with Gaddafi (more due to his pseudo-romantic charisma, he is a very “funny” person, but I wouldn’t want to live in Libya with him, just like Bokassa in the Central African Republic), but he unleashed a conflict with Chad (the Libyans got hit in the teeth, commander Haftar was captured and Gaddafi disowned him), in the conflict with Egypt, it was the Libyans who were the first to cross the border of Egypt ...
          Syria is the only country in the Middle East (well, except for Iran) who has not yet made peace with Israel, and its role in the Civil War in Lebanon is quite controversial (Israel is no better, if anything) ... in general, Soviet weapons in these countries did not add stability ...
          As for the conflicts on the territory of the former USSR and world stability, if we do not take the events after February 24.02, in general, a fairly ordinary situation for countries where the borders were drawn by big bosses in the metropolis without any investigation into the issue of the residence of different nationalities in these regions (in India and Pakistan, the countries of Latin America, Africa, we get off problems) ... and the history of the times of the USSR is quite long and rich, it cannot be said that during the crisis of the Berlin Wall or the Caribbean crisis in the world it was very calm, again the Falklands ... the world does not revolve around a single country at all (and even around centers forces like the USSR and the USA, it does not spin entirely), because its stability is a rhetorical question ...
          1. Jack sklo
            Jack sklo 25 November 2022 10: 31
            +4
            Why on earth should Syria put up with Israel if it is still occupying its territory.
          2. Edward Vashchenko
            Edward Vashchenko 25 November 2022 10: 44
            +2
            Didn't read, sorry laughing
            in general, a rather ordinary situation for countries where the borders were drawn by big bosses in the metropolis without any investigation into the issue of the residence of different nationalities in these regions (India and Pakistan, the countries of Latin America, Africa, we have problems) ...

            Finish reprinting these stupid nonsense that is not justified in any way: Pakistan would not have fought with India if everything had been drawn differently somehow?
            Somehow bourgeois Russia under the current president lived for many years with bourgeois Ukraine and this did not bother them, but then suddenly, the borders are not the same. Or were they also "big bosses" in Lorraine and Alsace, somehow not so drawn?
            Or is it not so in Czechoslovakia in 1938, but today?
            And for the most exemplary leader of the "bourgeois dictatorship" - fascism, Hitler, all the borders were not the same, absolutely.
            For NATIONALISM, the borders are always not the same.
            For example, the USSR was Russia, but when the nationalists in the RSFSR yelled that we were feeding everyone, nationalists from the Lat SSR and others, including the Ukrainian SSR, sang along with them.
            Something then Russian nationalists, with Boriska at the head, in the RSFSR did not think that Russia was the USSR, when they waved the division of Russia into all sorts of bourgeois republics, expelling all of Central Asia from behind, nothing about Russians.
            If only to snatch something, quickly seize power and property, and then, crocodile tears - the Russians remained there ... Seriously ... And what did they do for them for 30 years, for "compatriots"? How did they help? For thirty years.
            But the national bourgeoisie was "sacked" there more than the RSFSR republics.
            I repeat - this is always not the same boundaries for bourgeois nationalism as for a bad dancer ...
            Good luck hi
          3. MBRSS
            MBRSS 25 November 2022 16: 41
            0
            Syria is the only country in the Middle East (well, except for Iran) who has not yet made peace with Israel ...

            Ah ha ha!
        2. Castro Ruiz
          Castro Ruiz 1 December 2022 18: 09
          0
          E. Vasenko
          Libya attacked someone?
          To Chad.
          Ttttttttttttttt
    3. Deon59
      Deon59 25 November 2022 15: 14
      0
      What is the reward. The buyer, as it were, buys equipment for money, but there is no money, which means on credit, and the loan may not be repaid, but there will be an iron kickback.
  3. parusnik
    parusnik 25 November 2022 06: 13
    +4
    All this creates a number of problems that may prevent our defense concerns from demonstrating growth in world markets in the future.
    Is there a future? smile
  4. Bingo
    Bingo 25 November 2022 06: 20
    +1
    What is actually happening is what is called the demilitarization of the state.

    A catchphrase of one colleague from the 90s. "We do everything either for the army, or it sucks!"
    And yet - the Amerian military-industrial complex can now slam down coolly. The first bell is Indonesia, which was bent to refuse Sushki, but ... they simply CANNOT buy F-15 at a price of 250 million / piece, the minimum that the United States agrees to is 4-5 Sushki. Therefore, they don’t buy, and either Drying, or at least Rafali for 120 lam
  5. Alex 1970
    Alex 1970 25 November 2022 06: 32
    +2
    or present in trace amounts, the loot is cut down, it’s not interesting anymore. If I’m not mistaken, Yuri Borisov said why Armata, the T72 is quite competitive, okay, at least not the T62, in my opinion, because of him and with Greece, the contract for the BMP 3 fell through. With such figures, there is no need for US efforts to squeeze us out of the market, we ourselves are blowing up.
  6. demiurg
    demiurg 25 November 2022 07: 19
    +4
    And you can ask the author, but is there a lot of technology on the whole planet that is being developed from scratch and exported? Why can the US saints sell the F-15, which is 27 years older than the Su-10, or EDPN? Not a single country of the European Union and the United States, in addition, has been building new tanks for 10 years. And the world didn't collapse.
  7. Stirbjorn
    Stirbjorn 25 November 2022 08: 07
    +2
    How important the defense order is is illustrated by the example of KamAZ and UAZ, which for the first time in many years found funds to modernize their capacities. Both plants are now fully loaded with the production of equipment for the army.
    I don’t know about UAZ, but KamAZ is forced to simply modernize after the Germans leave. And so it used to be good for management - just a SKD assembly of Mercedes (up to the cab), under its own brand.
  8. kor1vet1974
    kor1vet1974 25 November 2022 08: 47
    +2
    Almost all of Eastern Europe went under the American military-industrial complex
    In almost all of Eastern Europe, nationalist regimes came to power, dissolved the CMEA, the Warsaw Pact, and they went to the EU and NATO. Western weapons are being bought in the post-Soviet space, the former republics mean the same Azerbaijan, but what did you want? Market.
  9. Illanatol
    Illanatol 25 November 2022 09: 02
    +4
    On the one hand, this was a serious burden on the economy,


    The military-industrial complex in our country has never been a burden on the economy. It has always been a locomotive that provided economic development in our country, the development of industry and technology. In addition to the military-industrial complex and the fuel and energy complex, we still have no other locomotives, alas.
    If it were not for the need to develop the military-industrial complex, the need to protect itself from technologically advanced Western neighbors, Russia would still remain an agrarian country.
  10. Illanatol
    Illanatol 25 November 2022 09: 12
    +3
    Quote: parma
    At one time, in the book “Dogs of War” about the turbulent events of the 60s in Africa, one of the heroes said something like this: “communists demand influence from Africans for help, and capitalists demand money, which in essence too”


    It's good to drive. In fact, the USSR also sold weapons for hard currency, just like the United States - on credit.
    They were not always paid by barter. By 1985, the debt of other countries to the USSR amounted to 140 billion dollars (part of it was just for the supply of weapons), and the debt of the USSR itself was less than 30 billion.
    Despite the fact that the United States was already in debt then.
    For free or almost free of charge, the USSR supplied only morally obsolete (sometimes used) equipment, the disposal of which was planned unprofitable (why, by the way, such equipment is stored in the USA). It’s better to pass it on to an ally than stupidly bury it or drown it in the sea.
    1. tatra
      tatra 25 November 2022 11: 19
      0
      The enemies of the USSR, who seized the RSFSR, took on not only the debt of the USSR, which before Gorbachev amounted to 20-30 billion dollars, but also appropriated all the foreign real estate of the USSR, and 150 billion dollars, which other countries owed to the Soviet Union.
      And generous Putin forgave all these 150 billion dollars to those countries. But on the other hand, the enemies of the USSR have been squealing for many years that they paid off the debts of the USSR, most of which were collected by their "Liberator" Gorbachev in the anti-Soviet Perestroika.
  11. Eule
    Eule 25 November 2022 09: 49
    +1
    The mistake that lies in wait for the mobilization economy is the low level of R&D spending.

    This mistake was especially demonstrated by the Third Reich, when new weapons were created under the bombing, and until 1943 they did not stop the production of complex civilian equipment.
    R&D means time and people. Just remove the obligatory extortions in the Pension Fund from the neck of enterprises - and it will become much easier to conduct development. And to simplify the legislation in general.
  12. Bayun
    Bayun 25 November 2022 11: 16
    +2
    Appealing reasoning:

    It is cheaper to place an American or Russian base in the country than to buy and maintain their expensive weapons. Want to dominate the world? Yes, and please. Don't like Russians and Americans? Post Chinese.

    If it's cheaper to feed someone else's army than your own, it's easier to feed someone else's. It used to be scary when they were sold into slavery, but today - what's the difference at all? If a native world-eater capitalist exploits you more inhumanly than a foreign one, it is better to work for a foreigner.

    For example, Germany and Japan have been "occupied" by the US for almost 80 years. And people live there, faring better than in "independent" countries.

    A long time ago there lived and were specific principalities, then they were replaced by kingdoms-empires ... Maybe it was just the turn of the transition from nation-states to a planetary one? And Russia is a retrograde of the evolution of mankind? Or is there a catch somewhere?
  13. Sergey39
    Sergey39 25 November 2022 12: 48
    0
    We must not forget that the USSR handed out a lot of weapons to developing countries on credit, which they did not return and were written off! (((
    Without a Soviet backlog, it is impossible to advance the development of weapons!
    Any weapon relies on the foundations from previous generations and there is no need to reduce the capabilities of the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation.)))
  14. veteran tanker
    veteran tanker 25 November 2022 13: 53
    -1
    Even foreign observers point out that it is modern technology that dies the least in battles. According to the Oryx agency, the losses of the T-80BVM and T-90 are much less than the outdated T-72 series vehicles. And the point is not in the numerical advantage of the latter, but in the qualitatively better protection, firepower and mobility.

    I must object.
    Firstly, the point is not in the qualitatively better protection of the T-80BVM or T-90 tanks in comparison with the T-72 (although this is the case with older versions of the T-72), but in the fact that the number of T-72 tanks in the zone SVO is a multiple of the number of other tanks.
    As for firepower and mobility, here, the difference between these tanks is not so significant.
    Secondly, the Oryx agency is a Dutch defense analytics and military research site that collects information from open sources. It is somehow hard to believe in the possibility of obtaining complete and reliable data on the losses of tanks on the battlefield from open sources, especially when the front line is constantly changing, and correspondents in these places, as a rule, are absent. Depending on the plan, the enemy can increase the losses of the opposite side by removing the same wrecked tank from different angles and at different times of the year.
  15. veteran tanker
    veteran tanker 25 November 2022 14: 03
    0
    Foreign buyers ask reasonable questions:
    “Why should we buy equipment that they themselves do not particularly exploit in the Russian Federation?”

    It should be noted that the success of the trademark "Russian Weapons" is determined by such conditions as:
    - the presence of these weapons, in sufficient quantities, in their own army;
    - the success of the use of these weapons on the battlefield.
    During negotiations with India in 1998 on the purchase of T90 tanks, the negative factor was that our army then had only 120 T-90 tanks, and even then, not in the direction of the main danger from NATO, but hidden in Transbaikalia, on the border with Mongolia.
    Since there were no deliveries to other countries, there was no experience of using T-90 tanks at that time anywhere.
    The decisive factor in India's consent to the purchase of the T-90 was that:
    - In 1998, Ukraine delivered to Pakistan 320 T-80UD tanks (T-80 with a Ukrainian diesel engine). Pakistan's interest in Ukrainian tanks was due to the fact that the United States refused to sell tanks to Islamabad back in 1990. And Russia could not supply its tanks to a potential enemy of India (Hindi rusi bhai bhai);
    - the cost of the T-90 was significantly lower than American, German and French tanks;
    - deliveries were made on credit.
  16. MBRSS
    MBRSS 25 November 2022 16: 09
    +3
    So powerful that even the dashing 90s could not break its potential.

    but for some reason they didn’t mention the “tricky” 2000s and 2010s. Meanwhile, the "optimization" of the industry was no less, and even more.
  17. Vladimir Postnikov
    Vladimir Postnikov 25 November 2022 17: 22
    0
    I read the article. With difficulties. What's this? Analytics? Absolutely not. Information? If yes, then outdated. Review? Then a review of what? In short, it turned out something similar to a compact information dump.
  18. Donbass Russia
    Donbass Russia 26 November 2022 02: 26
    0
    “Even foreign observers point out that it is modern equipment that dies the least in battles. According to the Oryx agency, the losses of the T-80BVM and T-90 are much less than the obsolete T-72 series vehicles. And the point is not in the numerical advantage of the latter, but in quality better protection, firepower and mobility."
    I was not too lazy to count how many and what kind of tanks there were and how many Oryx counted. So there were about 3300 tanks, 2300 different T-72s, 600 T-80 BVM, BV, U and 400 T-90 A and M. Losses according to this counting rhyme - 1500 pieces of which 370 T-80, 30 T-90, 870 T-72, the rest T-64,62 and unknown. Conclusion: T-80 destroyed 60%. T-72, even if there are many among the unknowns, about 40%. T-90A, essentially the same T-72B3M. They have no superiority in firepower over the T-72, the security of the T-72B is better than the T-80BV and is approximately the same for the T-72B3M and T-80BVM.
    “Shipbuilders are ready to trade in the most modern equipment. Everyone knows the contracts with India for the supply of Project 11356 frigates, the leasing of the nuclear submarine 971U Shchuka-B and, of course, the flagship of the local Navy, the Vikramaditya aircraft carrier, formerly Admiral Gorshkov. They are exported also boats "Lightning" (project 1241) and hovercraft of various form factors. The latter were purchased by the Greeks and Koreans. "
    11356 is no longer the most modern ship, and the Indians themselves are building both frigates and destroyers like it. 1241 obsolete boats were made only by the Vietnamese. We haven’t been making KVP for a long time, maybe now, when we establish mass production of gas turbine engines, we will start producing. And sold them decades ago.
  19. The comment was deleted.
  20. The comment was deleted.
  21. BigMaxMack
    BigMaxMack 26 November 2022 12: 28
    +1
    Soviet technology is simple and reliable, but as soon as the countries were given a choice, they immediately began to look for ways to transfer to Western weapons .. Something clearly does not add up here. (And by the way, I'm not talking about Eastern Europe)
  22. The comment was deleted.
  23. Illanatol
    Illanatol 29 November 2022 09: 23
    0
    Quote from BigMaxMack
    Soviet technology is simple and reliable, but as soon as the countries were given a choice, they immediately began to look for ways to transfer to Western weapons .. Something clearly does not add up here


    Decisions are made not by countries, but by officials. Their choice can be influenced. The USSR has been gone for a long time and it cannot "lubricate" anyone. And in Western (primarily American) corporations, mechanisms of influence and dough are available and in abundance.
    Officials are of little interest, as the purchased military equipment will later show in real combat conditions. Not for officials to fight, and not for the children of these bureaucrats. And the gesheft from "modernization" is very useful for them. New villas, new yachts...
  24. Chack wessel
    Chack wessel 13 December 2022 07: 24
    0
    Quote: Alexey RA
    Once again and slowly: Putin did not reproach the USSR for producing only galoshes. Putin said that the USSR had an excellent defense industry and space (however, space was also a defense industry - the same Buran began with military wishes). But with consumer goods in the USSR it was extremely bad - both in quantity and quality.

    Once again and slowly: it’s not for Putin to reproach the USSR for the fact that it was crap @ new with consumer goods, because now in Erefia, after decades of the reign of the All-Great, even Chinese galoshes. Unlike.