Military Review

Russia needs a “full-fledged” return of North African and Middle Eastern countries to the APT market

44
Russia needs a “full-fledged” return of North African and Middle Eastern countries to the APT market

In recent years, Russian military exports have been growing steadily. The question arises: at the expense of what, and what are the future prospects of Russia against the background of increasing competition in India, as well as losses in the markets of the countries of North Africa and the Middle East?


Indeed, since 2001, Russia has steadily increased its arms exports. In particular, according to official data, in 2012, Russia exported weapons worth 15,2 billion dollars (absolute record for the post-Soviet period) against 13,5 billion dollars in 2011 (10,4 billion dollars 2010, 8,5 billion dollars in 2009, 8,35 billion in 2008 year, 7,5 billion dollars in 2007 year, 6,5 billion dollars 2006 year, 6,126 billion dollars in 2005 year, 5,778 billion dollars in 2004 year, 5,568 billion dollars in 2003 year, 4,8 billion dollars in 2002 year, 3,705 billion dollars in 2001 year, 3,68 billion dollars in 2000 year, XNUMX billion dollars in XNUMX year billion dollars in XNUMX year).

According to the general director of Rosoboronexport, Anatoly Isaykin, in 2012 the export structure became more balanced by the types of equipment supplied. The largest export volumes of military products accounted for aviation equipment, its share was 37%. At the same time, the export of land and military equipment of land forces increased to 27%. At the same time, the shares of naval equipment and air defense equipment increased to 18% and 15% of fulfilled contractual obligations, respectively. The export of other PVN samples was 4%. In general, the distribution by types of equipment in the structure of Russian exports is in line with global trends. Rosoboronexport supplies of military products in 2012 were made in 60 countries.

As a merit of Russia, it should be noted that high results in the 2012 year were achieved with almost complete loss of the Iranian market, complete loss of the Libyan market, disruption of part of supplies for Syria (one example is the repaired Mi-25 helicopters, which is only the tip of the iceberg in parts of possible short delivery weapons Syria, especially in the second half of 2012, as well as the actual ousting of Russia from the arms market in Saudi Arabia by the United States of America.

According to TSAMTO, taking into account the cessation of all current and future programs, the loss of profit of Russia on the Iranian market is about 13,5 billion dollars, on the Libyan market - about 4,5 billion dollars. Unrealized contracts with Saudi Arabia are estimated at 4,5 billion dollars. That is, only in these three countries, the loss of profit of Russia in the medium term is estimated at about 22,5 billion dollars. Of course, these figures are indicative, since not all promising programs, even with a favorable development of the situation, would ultimately lead to the conclusion of firm contracts (first of all, this concerns programs with Iran and Saudi Arabia). Nevertheless, they take into account the real volume of programs planned for implementation with these countries.

As for Iraq, in the perspective of the completion of the period of the American occupation of this country, Russia is just beginning to “enter” this market on a large scale. In recent years, Russia has supplied only military helicopters to this market (with the permission of the US administration). Now Iraq makes its own decisions about who to buy weapons from. The first “swallow” was the announced package agreement worth 4,2-4,5 billion dollars. These contracts have not yet entered into force, work on them continues. It is obvious that the United States will do everything possible to prevent the conclusion of Iraq’s deal with Russia.

How did Russia manage to achieve a very sharp increase in exports over the past two years, despite such large-scale losses?

At firstIt should be noted the expansion of the range of modern weapons offered for sale. Optimism inspires the high competitiveness of many samples of exported Russian POS.

Rosoboronexport associates the strengthening of its position with the prospective promotion of Su and MiG fighter jets, Yak-130 combat trainers, Mi and Ka helicopters, anti-aircraft missile systems and S-400 Triumph systems on the world market , S-300VM Antey-2500, Buk-M2E, Tor-M2E, Shell-S1, MANPADS Igla-S, frigates of project 11356 and Cheetah 3.9, submarines of project 636 and Amur-1650 ", boats" Firefly "and" Lightning ", modernized tanks T-90S, BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicles and vehicles based on them, Tiger armored vehicles, and Kornet family ATGMs.

For reference: according to official data, in 2012, the year Rosoboronexport received and reviewed 1877 foreign customers. According to the results of this work, 1309 contract documents for the export of defense products were signed. Compared to 2011, the volume of contracts signed increased by more than 2,5 times. In 2012, the amount of new contracts for aviation equipment increased by 1,9, by ground forces for ATC - by 2,9, by means of air defense - by 2,1 times, by naval technology - by 7. In 2012, the countries of South-East Asia and the Asia-Pacific region accounted for 43% of the total supply of defense products, the region of the Middle East and North Africa - 23%, the region of South America –18%, CIS - 12%, countries of Africa south of the desert Sahara - 1%, in Europe and North America - 3%. Rosoboronexport CEO A.Isaykin presented this data at a press conference on the results of 2012.

SecondlyIn the face of the loss of large markets for Russian military products, primarily Iran and Libya, Rosoboronexport promptly resolves the issue of expanding the geography of Russian arms exports.

In particular, at present, the share of the CIS countries in the supply line of Rosoboronexport MPP is 12% (previously this figure was 5-6%). The increase in sales is due to the growth of cooperative ties.

The volume of military-technical cooperation with China significantly increased: last year China accounted for 12% of the total supply of Rosoboronexport, which exceeds the previous figures more than twice (5%).

Russia confidently entered the arms market in Latin America (Venezuela, Brazil, Peru, Argentina, Colombia, Bolivia, Mexico, Ecuador), strengthened its positions in several African countries (Uganda, Angola, Ghana, etc.). Discusses promising programs from South Africa.

Good prospects exist in Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, and Bangladesh. The new customer was Mongolia. Algeria is a major importer of Russian arms in North Africa, in the Middle East region - Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates.

It should also be noted the expansion of cooperation with the United States and NATO as a whole as an organization for the supply of helicopter equipment, primarily for the Afghan army being formed.

It is noteworthy that during the exacerbation of the situation in Mali, the leadership of this country turned specifically to Rosoboronexport on the supply of small arms, although France assumed the brunt of responsibility for restoring order in Mali.

Undoubtedly, India will remain the largest market for Russian defense products in the foreseeable future. Relations with New Delhi in the sphere of military-technical cooperation are of particular importance for Moscow. India is the only country with which Russia has a long-term program for military-technical cooperation, designed for the 10-year period from 2011 to 2020. Cooperation in the sphere of military-technical cooperation of Russia and India has the character of a strategic partnership. Cooperation between Russia and Vietnam, with which in recent years a very large volume of contracts has been concluded, also goes to the same level of mutual relations.

ThirdlyRussia began to more actively use the practice of issuing state loans for the purchase of Russian weapons. Of course, this has a positive effect on the increase in exports of defense products. As an example, we can cite the recently adopted decision on the allocation of Bangladesh state credit worth 1 billion dollars for the purchase of Russian weapons.

Fourthly, a greater focus on the creation of joint ventures for the licensed production of Russian technology. This is beneficial to customers of the Russian military equipment as it allows you to create additional jobs and develop your own defense industry. Increasingly, Russia is moving to a higher level of cooperation - this is the joint development of advanced weapons and military equipment (one of the most prominent examples is the Brahmos cruise missile program with India).

Joint development of military hardware, the creation of joint centers for the repair, maintenance and promotion of Russian equipment to the markets of third countries, as well as technology transfer programs are the most promising areas of Russian cooperation with foreign countries. Only on the basis of 2012, about a dozen such agreements were concluded.

FifthlyThis is the revitalization of work on the modernization of military equipment previously supplied to foreign customers. Russian defense industry has developed a large number of proposals in this segment. This applies to all types of technology. In some segments of Russia, here it is necessary to wage a tough competition with Israel and a number of Eastern European countries, which enter the market with their proposals, without having the appropriate permission from the developer of the equipment.

At sixth, significantly increased the volume of contracts for service and repair of previously supplied equipment. Service of previously supplied equipment makes a significant contribution to the total volume of Russian military exports. This applies, among other things, to the countries of Eastern Europe, which are now members of NATO. The new authorities of Libya will come to this, since no one except Russia will be able to maintain the fleet of Soviet-Russian military-military vehicles made by Tripoli in combat condition (although the volume of these contracts is unlikely to be significant).

Seventh“Rosoboronexport” began to actively develop the space direction, first of all, we are talking about military and dual-purpose satellites, as well as services for their launching into orbit. Moreover, services for the removal of military satellites are also offered to Western countries.

Eighth, the work on the delivery of special weapons to special units of law enforcement agencies, including such work with Western countries, has intensified significantly.

The problem of "shortage" of contracts with countries in the region of North Africa and the Middle East

All of the above in aggregate made it possible to significantly increase the volume of exports to 2011-2012, and to provide a groundwork that allows us to count on a positive trend in the growth of exports of anti-virus equipment in the short term.

However, despite the above measures taken by Rosoboronexport, the losses incurred in the markets of a number of countries in the Middle East and North Africa will not go unnoticed for Russia and may affect the slowdown in the dynamics of growth in the export of anti-terrorist equipment in the medium term.

Acceptable level of arms supplies to countries in the Middle East and North Africa in 2011-2012 it was possible to support mainly at the expense of previously concluded large contracts (up to the so-called “Arab Spring”). In particular, according to official data, the region of the Middle East and North Africa accounted for 23% of Russia's total military exports in 2012. Most of the Russian military exports in 2011-2012. in the countries of this region led to large arms shipments to Algeria (however, for the most part, the delivery programs have now been completed, that is, new large contracts must be signed with Algeria to support the dynamics of exports). Significant contribution to the total volume was also made by the supply of arms to Syria (until the actual blockade by Western countries of the transport routes of arms to the lawful authorities of Syria). Large programs in the last two years were implemented with Jordan, and planned arms supplies to Egypt continued. Military-technical cooperation with the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Kuwait was carried out in somewhat smaller volumes. A significant contribution was also made by the supply of helicopters for the new army of Afghanistan (US funding). Helicopter shipments were also made to Iraq.

Short-term short-term deliveries to the countries of North Africa and the Middle East as a result of the loss of the Iranian and Libyan markets and the displacement of Russia from the Saudi Arabia’s market will be compensated by the growth rate of supplies to other regions of the world, including through the measures taken by Rosoboronexport, which were listed above.

A completely different situation may occur in the medium term, when even these measures may not be enough. For this period, the existing “shortage” of the portfolio of orders in North Africa and the Middle East can reduce the growth dynamics of Russian arms exports as a whole, since the overwhelming part of large promising programs with Iran, Libya and Saudi Arabia provided for the supply of weapons in the medium term.

It was said above that only in three countries (Iran, Libya and Saudi Arabia), the loss of profit of Russia is estimated by TSAMTO at 22,5 billion dollars. Such huge losses cannot be compensated for by strengthening positions in other regions (especially considering the limited budgets for the purchase of weapons in many countries and the recession in the global economy that has begun), which may affect Russian military exports in the medium term, since almost half of the current total portfolio of orders of Russia for arms exports (according to official data - about 46 billion dollars).

Therefore, in order to maintain a positive trend in the growth of arms exports in the medium and long term, Russia needs to ensure its “full-fledged” return to the markets of North Africa and the Middle East.

At the moment, it can be stated that as a result of Russia being squeezed out of the arms market, the countries of the Middle East and North Africa region have significantly weakened the geopolitical influence of the Russian Federation in such an important region of the world.

Syria problem

From the point of view of preserving Russia's geopolitical influence in the region, Syria is of particular importance. In this country, Western countries (first of all, the United States) have chosen a completely different tactic than in the case of Libya. There was direct aggression, here, without having achieved a consolidated solution in the UN Security Council, with the active assistance of the monarchist regimes of the Gulf countries, primarily Saudi Arabia, terrorist groups inside the country and foreign mercenaries are funded. The emphasis has been placed on depleting the regime of B. Asad, including due to the gradual destruction of the military infrastructure - military facilities, bases and depots. Moreover, the practice of double standards is obvious - condemning terrorism in their own countries, gangs are being encouraged to overthrow unwanted regimes in other countries.

Even before the aggression of the Western coalition against Libya, it was obvious that various types of weapons and military equipment, primarily MANPADS, RPGs and small arms, could be brought into the hands of terrorists (primarily MANPADS) from the plundered warehouses of the army of Gaddafi, which It was further confirmed by both military experts and at the level of the political leadership of the countries that participated in the aggression against Libya.

With Syria, the situation is much more dangerous due to the fact that there are significantly more weapons in the military stores in this country. In addition, it is more technologically advanced than in the case of Libya. In this regard, it would be more logical for the Western countries to stop financing this “gangster” orgy, since in the future it may become sideways for the Western countries themselves in terms of increasing terrorist danger.

Another aspect that directly affects the interests of Russia is the fact that Syria was supplied with weapons without the right to transfer them to third countries. In this regard, when the situation evolves according to the worst scenario, Russian “know-how”, for example, the Bastion PBRK technology, may fall into the hands of foreign intelligence services, which is absolutely not suitable for Russia in terms of ensuring its security.

Gangs, funded by Western countries and the monarchical regimes of the Gulf countries, have already largely destroyed the infrastructure in Syria (residential sector, industrial enterprises and military facilities). With the further dragging of the conflict, even if B.Asad remains in power, the country will not be able to repay loans, and this applies not only to the military-technical sphere, but also to other sectors of the economy.

If the legitimate authority is overthrown, chaos in the country will lead to an even more uncontrolled spread of arms into the hands of terrorist groups, with all the ensuing consequences. The armed opposition is too heterogeneous and the fundamental contradictions between the separate groups arise already now.

Among the largest programs that are currently implemented with Syria, it is worth mentioning the delivery of several divisions of the Buk-М2Е system (estimated, 18 combat vehicles) and 36 ZRPK Pantsir-С1, modernization of the OBT T-72 fleet to the level of T -72М1, delivery of two PBTB Bastion-P, a large batch of aircraft armament, repair of the fleet of MiG-23 fighters, modernization of several MiG-29С fighters, delivery of Igla-1 MANPADS as part of the Streletz launch modules, training equipment for helicopters Mi-17 and Mi-24 and a number of other programs.

Among the promising projects were discussed the possible purchase of diesel-electric submarines, MBT T-90С, various types of combat surface ships, a number of other weapons, as well as the modernization of the C-125 air defense system.

Currently, contracts for the supply of XG MUMNUMX / M24, 29 Yak-2UBS and other vehicles to 36 fighters are underway with Syria, but now they are suspended because of the actual blockade of transport routes by Western countries.

Blocking the supply of Russian weapons to the legitimate authorities of Syria from the point of view of international law is nonsense. Due to the fact that the UN Security Council’s embargo on arms supplies to Syria has not been announced, the question of the illegality of such a blocking should be put to the Russian leadership in the relevant international organizations, including the UN, since “by itself” this situation cannot be unlocked, especially in conditions of active arms supplies to the Syrian opposition by Western countries, which are indeed illegal and constitute a flagrant violation of the norms of both international law and the sovereignty of Syria. In this regard, blocking the supply of Russian weapons to the legitimate government of Syria can be described as “international piracy”.

The total amount of current and future projects (programs are considered that were under discussion) with Syria is estimated at about $ 3,5 billion dollars.

In the event of the loss of the Syrian market, the total “shortage” of potential deliveries of Russian weapons to the countries of the region will increase to 26 billion dollars (taking into account losses in Iran, Libya and Saudi Arabia).

From the point of view of ensuring its geopolitical influence in the region for Russia, the preservation of the item of material and technical support of the Russian Federation is of key importance. fleet in the Syrian port of Tartus. The MTO point in Tartus is the only reference point of the Russian Navy in the Mediterranean Sea.

With the loss of Tartus, the Russian naval grouping on a permanent basis in the Mediterranean Sea will become problematic (plans for such deployment have been much spoken about lately at the level of Russia's top leadership).

If, as a result, the actions of the armed opposition financed by foreign countries lead to the violent overthrow of the legitimate authorities in Syria, the next predicted step will be the US and Israeli military operations against Iran, which will complete the logical chain of change of power in the countries along the Libya-Syria-Iran axis.

Iran problem

In terms of Iran, Russia needs to solve two serious problems.

The first concerns the issue that could lead to additional costs for Russia as a result of joining the UN Security Council resolution imposing an arms embargo on Iran.

Six months later, after Russia refused to deliver the C-300 ZRS to Iran, Tehran filed a lawsuit to the Arbitration Court of Geneva on 13 on April 2011. The total amount of the claim of Iran is about 4 billion dollars. If Russia loses in court, the amount of losses in the sphere of military-technical cooperation with the countries of the region will increase to 30 billion dollars. And it will not be the loss of profit, but direct payments to the plaintiff in the amount of 4 billion dollars.

Here, all efforts, primarily through the Foreign Ministry, should be directed to Iran withdrawing its lawsuit. If this does not happen, it is necessary to prove in court that the C-300 systems were part of the nomenclature of weapons prohibited for export to Iran according to the UN Security Council resolution.

Despite the importance of solving this problem, a much more significant strategic task is the adoption of all preventive measures at the level of the leadership of Russia and the Russian Foreign Ministry to eliminate possible US and Israeli aggression against Iran under the pretext of the implementation of Tehran’s military nuclear program.

The United States, a number of other Western countries and Israel suspect Iran of developing nuclear weapons under the cover of a peaceful atomic program. For its part, Tehran states that its atomic program is aimed solely at meeting the country's electricity needs.

It is necessary to do everything possible to resolve this issue through diplomacy. Russia in this regard, taking into account trusting relations with Iran in the part of the “peaceful atom”, should play a key role in resolving the issue.

The military solution of the Iranian “nuclear problem” is unacceptable for Russia, since it brings the “conflict” zone closer to the borders of Russia. Iran has a land border with Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan and Armenia, and the Caspian Sea has direct access to Russia.

General assessment of the current position of Russia in the region

In the Middle East, Syria is currently the largest importer of Russian weapons. The three leaders in the import of Russian weapons in this region also include Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. Russia has a good position in the market of Jordan. Relatively low-cost programs are carried out with Qatar and Kuwait (mainly for the repair of previously supplied equipment).

Cooperation with Iran is now continuing on those weapons systems that are not prohibited by the UN Security Council resolution. This is a very limited range of weapons and the value of these supplies is extremely small.

Turkey made only one-time deliveries of Kornet-E ATGM.

Active cooperation with Israel in the field of military-technical cooperation is excluded, since Tel Aviv is focused on arms purchases in the United States and Germany. In addition, Israel and Russia have diametrically opposed approaches to the issue of resolving the situation in Syria and Iran.

In Egypt, Russia has not lost anything. Contracts with this country remained in force, although their execution shifted somewhat in time.

Russia has a significant loss in terms of lost profits as a result of an unstable domestic political situation in the Yemen market.

With Tunisia, where power also changed, Russia did not carry out military-technical cooperation.

In terms of future prospects, it should be noted that the resumption of contacts with the new Libyan government is hardly possible, in any case, in the short term. The United States and Western countries, after normalizing the situation, will not allow Russia into this market. And he is very promising, since the new army will have to be reequipped almost anew, which implies the conclusion of large contracts. Russia can only rely on contracts for maintaining the previously supplied equipment in combat readiness (the amount of this equipment remaining in maintainable state has been significantly reduced as a result of the military operation against Tripoli of the countries of the Western coalition).

With Yemen, after normalizing the situation, it is quite possible to continue cooperation in the field of military-technical cooperation, although this country has a very limited military budget.

As a stable partner of Russia in the Middle East, Jordan can be considered.

Turkey, as a result of Ankara’s tough stance against Damascus, is unlikely to make a decision in the ongoing tender for the purchase of long-range systems worth several billion dollars in favor of Russia.

Algeria’s arms market, which is currently the only market for Russian weapons in North Africa, has been fiercely competitive. In particular, France, Germany and a number of other countries received large orders.

In the market of Morocco, Russia will be very problematic to build on the success achieved several years ago. This market was monopolized by the USA and the Netherlands.

conclusions

In general, it can be stated that the two regional markets (Middle East and North Africa), which ranked second and third in the structure of the balance of military exports of the Russian Federation for the previous 8-summer period, are largely lost for Russia. This applies to the markets of Iran, Libya and Yemen. The United States actually squeezed out Russia from the market of Saudi Arabia and a number of other countries of the Persian Gulf, as well as from the market of Morocco. Syria’s market remains a big question. In addition, due to the exacerbation of the situation around Syria for political reasons, the prospective programs of Russia and Turkey are being questioned.

In this regard, Russia's success in the arms market of Iraq, which until recently was fully controlled by the United States, can be described as an important victory. Despite the fact that promising contracts with Iraq only to a small extent compensate for the losses of Russia in other countries of the Middle East and North Africa, their significance lies in the fact that they can be viewed as a work of Rosoboronexport from scratch with the countries of the region. This gives a chance that the same work “for the future” after the normalization of the situation can be continued with other countries of the Middle East and North Africa region.

One of the major promising programs could be a proposal with the Jordan to the countries of the Middle East and North Africa RPG-32 "Hashim".

The promotion of multiple rocket launchers to Kuwait and Qatar is possible, as well as the continuation of armored vehicles with these countries.

With Egypt, it is possible to continue work on helicopter-related topics and air defense systems.

Of course, it is necessary to do everything possible and impossible in order to preserve Syria in the sphere of Russia's geopolitical influence.

If the international aspect is able to resolve the issue of the Iranian “nuclear program”, the next logical step will be to intensify work, primarily through the Foreign Ministry of the Russian Federation, to lift the arms embargo to Tehran (although at the moment it seems highly unlikely), and in the future on the restoration of military-technical cooperation with Iran in full. Moreover, if it is hypothetically assumed that such a situation will become possible in the future, Russia will face tough competition with China in the Iranian market.

In addition, in the perspective of the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan, it is necessary to significantly expand work with this country. Moreover, in order to ensure geopolitical interests of Russia, it is necessary to step up work with Kabul in terms of free transfer of weapons or practice preferential supplies of military hardware, taking into account the extremely limited military budget of this country and, at the same time, its key geographical position in terms of ensuring Russia's security from the south.

In general, to ensure the geopolitical interests of Russia in the region of the Middle East and North Africa, it is necessary to maintain in its sphere of influence, at least, Syria and Algeria (including as major customers of Russian weapons). In the future, it will be quite possible for Russia to regain its positions in the markets of Iran (in the event of a settlement of the Iranian “nuclear program”), Iraq, to ​​strengthen its positions in Afghanistan. It is possible to expand cooperation in the future with Jordan, Egypt and Yemen.

A significant expansion of the already existing level of cooperation in the sphere of military-technical cooperation with the monarchies of the Gulf countries is hardly possible. This is due to the squeezing of Russia from these markets by the United States, as well as the policy adopted by the monarchical regimes of the Persian Gulf countries to overthrow the B. Assad regime in Syria, primarily from the leadership of Saudi Arabia, including through the financing of armed formations that lead full-scale fighting against the Syrian government forces. Most likely, cooperation with these countries as a whole will remain at the current level. Nevertheless, the expansion of Russia's presence in the markets of the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Kuwait is quite possible.

Turkey may become a big problem in the future for Russia, which is actively trying to involve Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan in the sphere of its geopolitical interests, expanding cooperation with these countries in the military-technical sphere.

In general, it should be noted that Russia needs to significantly intensify its work in the markets of the countries of North Africa and the Middle East to ensure both its geopolitical interests and the restoration of positions in the arms markets of these countries. Without a full-fledged return of Russia to these markets, the growth of Russian military exports in the medium term is hardly possible.
Originator:
http://www.armstrade.org/
44 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 April 26 2013 08: 37 New
    +2
    In general, it should be noted that Russia needs to significantly intensify its work in the markets of North Africa and the Middle East in order to ensure both its geopolitical interests and the restoration of positions in the arms markets of these countries.
    Of course, it is alarming that the whole world has begun to "rearm" so actively and, frankly, I am very happy for our gunsmiths, because their products can become that locomotive that will pull our country out of the "pit of dependence on oil exports", but I would like our army received weapons as soon as possible, from the mention of which all "ill-wishers" lost any interest in burrowing at our country ...
    1. Russian
      Russian April 26 2013 09: 22 New
      +4
      The news is really encouraging, because if our products are bought, then it is competitively capable! But, I do not like these things:

      with almost complete loss of the Iranian market, complete loss of the Libyan market, disruption of part of supplies in Syria

      Well, why, why are we joining this UN Security Council embargo ??! This is absolutely unprofitable for us! In addition, we turn in our allies. Yes, to sneeze us at this UN.

      The volume of military-technical cooperation with China significantly increased: last year China accounted for 12% of the total supply of Rosoboronexport, which exceeds the previous figures more than twice (5%).

      Well, you need to trade with China very carefully, you should definitely not sell the latest technology, but the fact that you are always older please)

      Russia began to more actively use the practice of issuing state loans for the purchase of Russian weapons.

      Here I have a double feeling. Of course, the allied countries need help, but do it wisely. And it is necessary to focus on this issue first of all on Belarus, Kazakhstan, and relations with Ukraine should be improved, and only then you can think about all Bangladesh)
      1. Gluxar_
        Gluxar_ April 26 2013 12: 14 New
        0
        Quote: р_у_с_с_к_и_й
        Here I have a double feeling. Of course, the allied countries need help, but do it wisely. And it is necessary to focus on this issue first of all on Belarus, Kazakhstan, and relations with Ukraine should be improved, and only then you can think about all Bangladesh)

        I completely agree. The article was pleased that the volume of deliveries to the CIS grew more than 2 times. Venezuela and Bolivia are good, but neighbors are always more important. Ukraine is especially important.
    2. vadimus
      vadimus April 26 2013 10: 28 New
      0
      Of course, we hope that we have worthy trump cards before we sell RUSSIAN weapons ....
    3. Gluxar_
      Gluxar_ April 26 2013 12: 11 New
      -2
      Quote: svp67
      Of course, it is alarming that the whole world has begun to "rearm" so actively and, frankly, I am very happy for our gunsmiths, because their products can become that locomotive that will pull our country out of the "pit of dependence on oil exports", but I would like our army received weapons as soon as possible, from the mention of which all "ill-wishers" lost any interest in burrowing at our country ...

      So, the article is not about the entire defense industry, but only about its export part. In the military-industrial complex plan, 110 billion per year should be added to the amount of transactions for own purchases.

      As a whole, the article is good and "balanced", I would say it takes into account the Western scenario.
      However, such a moment is not taken into account that Assad can win quickly enough and begin re-equipping its army, which will significantly increase orders for our products. In addition, while preserving Syria, Iran will feel the strength and may go into confrontation. Which again, given a certain position of the leadership of the Russian Federation, can significantly increase orders for our defense industry.
      In addition, the question of the whole of Africa is not being considered, and the competition for this region is only just beginning. The events of Mali, the Central African Republic and Nigeria indicate that the demand for weapons there will soon grow significantly.
    4. APASUS
      APASUS April 26 2013 20: 35 New
      +1
      Quote: svp67
      Of course it is alarming that the whole world has become so actively "re-armed"

      Yes, there are no blind countries in the world !!
      Everyone sees that you are either a vassal or an enemy!
      So they are arming themselves, and recent attacks on Iraq and Libya have so increased the demand for air defense systems that this is perhaps the most sought-after product!
    5. opkozak
      opkozak April 26 2013 22: 48 New
      +2


      First of all, we need non-standard solutions. Creativity has always been a positive side of Russians.
      An element of a show when selling arms is never a hindrance.
  2. Romn
    Romn April 26 2013 08: 42 New
    +3
    This movement is very happy, Russia has achieved very good success in the export of weapons. The only thing is to fight more for buyers (they have lost Libya, now Syria needs to be defended) and begin an already tougher foreign trade policy!
  3. darksoul
    darksoul April 26 2013 08: 53 New
    +3
    China can compete with us in third world countries ... with copies of our own weapons.
    1. iliq
      iliq April 26 2013 14: 00 New
      -1
      rather, we can try to compete with the Chinese in third world countries.
      if we don’t deal with scammers and non-fulfillment of contracts.
    2. waisson
      waisson April 27 2013 03: 18 New
      0
      our weapons are beyond competition here when the Chinese will produce good metal for the arms industry then yes and for now we are on a horse because we don’t need to produce them
  4. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 April 26 2013 09: 22 New
    +1
    In the USSR, the most advanced weapons were never sold to third countries, even to their allies. Now everything is the other way around, the most modern is for sale, its army takes what it can afford. A pocket is determined by the one who has his own pocket wider.
    1. vladsolo56
      vladsolo56 April 26 2013 10: 22 New
      0
      Minus without comment is just emotions, what is weak to substantiate?
    2. Ivan.
      Ivan. April 26 2013 11: 48 New
      +1
      Someone put a minus justifiably, the comparison is incorrect - the USSR was not occupied.
    3. elmir15
      elmir15 April 26 2013 12: 20 New
      +2
      I am also surprised at the shortsightedness of our officials, you cannot sell the most modern weapons, even to the closest allies, some countries, having bought or started assembling our weapons under a license, cover a gigantic defense of weapons, then they can compete with us in the markets. You must first cover your need for weapons and then sell weapons in a "truncated" export version.
      1. Gluxar_
        Gluxar_ April 26 2013 12: 58 New
        +1
        Quote: elmir15
        I am also surprised at the shortsightedness of our officials, you cannot sell the most modern weapons, even to the closest allies, some countries, having bought or started assembling our weapons under a license, cover a gigantic defense of weapons, then they can compete with us in the markets. You must first cover your need for weapons and then sell weapons in a "truncated" export version.

        This is possible in conditions of the total superiority of their products and the huge demand for them. In conditions of total competition and some technical lag in some categories, the opportunity to get money is very welcome. Of course you can not sell Su-27 to China at the time. Then today they would have beaten American or French aircraft, and we have the same su-27s. Since there would be no money for the development of the industry. But the Americans would build their F-22 and F-35. In today's world, excellence is a constant race, who has more resources and ahead. Our main competitor is the United States, not China. And the main adversary is NATO, not the PLA.
        1. elmir15
          elmir15 April 26 2013 13: 22 New
          +2
          Quote: Gluxar_
          Then today they would have beaten American or French aircraft

          By the way, the Americans do not even sell the latest types of weapons to their closest allies, for example, 5th generation aircraft.
          Quote: Gluxar_
          Our main competitor is the United States, not China.

          And I did not say that China is our main competitor, although I heard that the new Su-27 counterparts compete in the markets with us. That's why Russia refuses to sell su 35 in single copies, but offers to buy a batch of at least 30-40 pieces.
          Quote: Gluxar_
          And the main adversary is NATO, not the PLA.

          Where did you find that I affirm that the PLA is our main adversary, that you attribute yours to me. Even without your prompts, I know that NATO is the most likely adversary.
          1. Gluxar_
            Gluxar_ April 26 2013 13: 47 New
            0
            Quote: elmir15
            By the way, the Americans do not even sell the latest types of weapons to their closest allies, for example, 5th generation aircraft.

            The US does not sell the F-22 because it is a publicity stunt. If the world finds out about its real possibilities, then it will laugh. This is a van der wafer that remains so only due to the halo of mystery.
            Quote: elmir15
            And I did not say that China is our main competitor, although I heard that the new Su-27 counterparts compete in the markets with us. That's why Russia refuses to sell su 35 in single copies, but offers to buy a batch of at least 30-40 pieces.

            Then what are you saying?
            Quote: elmir15
            I am also surprised at the shortsightedness of our officials, you can’t sell the most modern weapons, even to your closest allies
            What does it mean ? The Su-35 is one of our best aircraft, but it is not an advanced one. The stake is on the "T-50", and since they are ready to sell the Su-35, it means that something is up the sleeve.
            1. elmir15
              elmir15 April 26 2013 14: 05 New
              +2
              Quote: Gluxar_
              The US does not sell the F-22 because it is a publicity stunt. If the world finds out about its real possibilities, then it will laugh. This is a van der wafer that remains so only due to the halo of mystery.

              Possibly and so
              Quote: Gluxar_
              Then what are you saying?

              I refute your statement to me that China is our main competitor
              Quote: Gluxar_
              What does it mean ? Su-35 is one of our best aircraft, but it is not advanced.

              Perhaps not the most advanced, but enough to significantly reduce its backlog
    4. DPN
      DPN April 26 2013 22: 01 New
      +1
      Russia is not the USSR, it is not suitable for him to be counted on this; The system was replaced by a capitalist one. The state used to have the money, now the billionaires have, so there is not enough money for armament, but enough for yachts and villas for the Chubaysky programs
      From here, so that the last plants would not fall apart, they should be sold to everyone who can pay, if only this weapon does not return to us as a boomerang.
  5. Kars
    Kars April 26 2013 09: 26 New
    +1
    No one thought about the effect of inflation on the totals in US dollars, about the rise in arms prices.
    1. Gluxar_
      Gluxar_ April 26 2013 12: 34 New
      -1
      Quote: Kars
      No one thought about the effect of inflation on the totals in US dollars, about the rise in arms prices.

      We thought, but this influence on the Russian military-industrial complex is insignificant, since the calculations are made in dollars. Over the past 12 years, the total volume of the arms market has grown by a little more than 2 times, while Russian exports have grown almost 4 times. Hence the conclusion that there is at least 40% growth in volumes. And do not forget that the period since 2001, and especially since 2003, is a new wave of wars, which leads to the growth of the common market. however, Russia does not participate in these wars, because the growth shown has exclusively economic roots. At the same time, the growth in US exports is largely due to its military companies, and hence the costs associated with them. This ultimately reduces the real competitiveness of the US military-industrial complex. One of the examples confirming this is the negotiations with "occupied" Iraq, which at the earliest opportunity chooses Russian weapons rather than imposed American ones. The same is true for the main monarchies of the Persian Gulf, where the purchase of American weapons is a political tribute. The same is true of the main buyers of US weapons - Australia, South Korea and other "dependent satellites". However, the United States today is pouring in and reducing its influence, and this can bring the vassals out of dependence, which again will affect the preferences of buyers.
      1. Kars
        Kars April 26 2013 12: 57 New
        0
        Quote: Gluxar_
        We thought, but this effect on the Russian military-industrial complex is insignificant, since the calculations are in dollars

        You know, the dollar is also subject to inflation, and its purchasing power is falling.
        But oh well, it was rather a rhetorical question.
        1. Gluxar_
          Gluxar_ April 26 2013 13: 25 New
          -1
          Quote: Kars
          You know, the dollar is also subject to inflation, and its purchasing power is falling. But oh well, it was rather a rhetorical question.

          I agree with you, but I only pointed out that inflation does not have a key effect on the calculation of the growth of defense industry exports. The trend is important. Even quantitatively, a decrease is possible, but not technologically. It’s like a discussion in the USA when they compared the number of ships in the USA, equating one modern aircraft carrier with 1 minesweeper of the Second World War.
  6. seller trucks
    seller trucks April 26 2013 10: 05 New
    +6
    Russia is quite a big competitor, Ukraine, which trades the remains of Soviet weapons: tanks, armored personnel carriers, aviation, and air defense systems. sooner or later they (Ukrainians) will end and we will calmly take over their market sometime. Cynical, maybe. but as the Americans say: business is business, nothing personal.
    1. Gluxar_
      Gluxar_ April 26 2013 12: 38 New
      0
      Quote: seller trucks
      Russia is quite a big competitor, Ukraine, which trades the remains of Soviet weapons: tanks, armored personnel carriers, aviation, and air defense systems. sooner or later they (Ukrainians) will end and we will calmly take over their market sometime. Cynical, maybe. but as the Americans say: business is business, nothing personal.

      This is also a factor unaccounted for in the article, as in other things is the growing competition of China, which, incidentally, is artificially inflated. The article basically considers only a market segment, namely, BV and North Africa. Although the same Ukraine does have major contracts with Iraq. But more importantly, the Ukrainian army needs a complete upgrade. And this is a huge market. Personally, I believe that emphasis should be placed on the CIS, because in the event of a world war these are our hypothetical allies.
      1. seller trucks
        seller trucks April 26 2013 13: 44 New
        0
        at the expense of Ukraine, remember as in "Carrier": - "We are different", let them first bring their brains, and then we will see, not so idealize. In the current situation, any attempt to enter somewhere can put Ukraine on the verge of a Civil War. IMHO
        1. Gluxar_
          Gluxar_ April 26 2013 13: 54 New
          0
          Quote: seller trucks
          at the expense of Ukraine, remember as in "Carrier": - "We are different", let them first bring their brains, and then we will see, not so idealize. In the current situation, any attempt to enter somewhere can put Ukraine on the verge of a Civil War. IMHO

          And this does not negate what I wrote above. At least 20 million Russians live in Ukraine, no matter how they are counted. These are our citizens. Those who have not decided it is another 25 million, are also promising our citizens. Those who muyat water are actually a minority, but a minority domineering. Ukrina has not yet been in a real crisis like Russia in the 90s, because the population there is amorphous. However, today Ukraine is indeed at the abyss, if the situation becomes more complicated, then I think the national fermentation will begin and the right choice will be made. In one state or another, Ukraine may enter the Eurasian Union. But strong countries are needed in the Union, which means that the Ukrainian Armed Forces will also be modernized and obviously not according to the NATO standard.
  7. fenix57
    fenix57 April 26 2013 10: 28 New
    +1
    Of course, it is joyful to realize that our weapons are valued in the world. Undoubtedly! yes good But!
    Quote: vladsolo56
    Now everything is the other way around, all the most modern is for sale

    Well, of course, export is money (huge), but it just didn’t turn, it would all be towards Russia. After all, Russia does not have allies, only partners, although strategic ... hi
    1. Ivan.
      Ivan. April 26 2013 12: 04 New
      0
      Of course, it is joyful to realize that our weapons are valued in the world. Undoubtedly!


      It gives me a feeling of deep satisfaction that in most cases it is directed against our "friends", for this it was done. If other countries stop buying our weapons, we will be left alone in confrontation, and therefore only the most modern weapons are sold, since the situation is critical.
      And I am secondarily respected in the world of Russian weapons - the main thing is AFRAID.
    2. Gluxar_
      Gluxar_ April 26 2013 12: 46 New
      -1
      Quote: fenix57
      Well, of course, export is money (huge), but it just didn’t turn, it would all be towards Russia. After all, Russia does not have allies, only partners, although strategic ...

      Export a year is 15,2 billion, and the domestic order is about 100 billion. What kind of damage are we talking about for ourselves? The more the plant produces, the cheaper the products. It is profitable for us and the more we sell, the more we will buy for ourselves. These are the basics of economics.
      The United States is not whining that it will receive less of its F-35 planes, but is praying that no one will give them up and continue to give them money. Increasing exports is always good. The threat of copying from China is largely inflated and is associated with the weakness of the state in the 90s, both financially and morally. Copying the same Su and armored vehicles was only possible thanks to the help of "sympathetic" engineers and designers, since they studied and served in a socialist country, and in the 90s only China remained like this with financial ability. The fact that the Chinese were able to copy the glider does not guarantee that they will be able to copy truly complex units. They have not learned to make the same engines and the level of technology of many industries is still somewhere in the 80s. The fact that with electronics the Chinese somewhere even bypassed our samples is due only to the fact that in China in the 90s the radio-electronic industry was more developed than in crisis Russia. Today these factors are absent, hence the large order for engines and a large contract for finished aircraft.
    3. Alex Nick
      Alex Nick April 26 2013 14: 57 New
      0
      We have allies, you and I. The word ally means engaging in hostilities when attacking one of the parties. These are serious agreements, and either they don’t sign it. And the forest partners are straightforward!
  8. valokordin
    valokordin April 26 2013 10: 56 New
    +2
    We support the United States by introducing or joining their sanctions to the detriment of ourselves, instead of making shaving, it takes care only of our interests. What is the blockade of Syria, that we can’t deliver weapons on our ships? This is nonsense.
    1. elmir15
      elmir15 April 26 2013 12: 30 New
      +3
      I agree that the naval blockade of Syria is easily lifted by our squadron, then Syria borders on Iran and any products from humanitarian to military can be delivered to Iran via the Caspian Sea. The USSR did not particularly pay attention to UN sanctions and delivered military equipment to any countries, it is time for our government to pursue an independent policy and not look around and take care what other countries say. It is necessary to justify the status of superpower at least striving.
      1. Gluxar_
        Gluxar_ April 26 2013 13: 01 New
        -1
        That's where such clowns come from here. Great strategists and fighters with the regime of gebni. They just forget to look at the map. the fact that there is such a US-occupied country as Iraq, they forget. But already experts.
        1. elmir15
          elmir15 April 26 2013 13: 36 New
          +2
          Quote: Gluxar_
          That's where such clowns come from here. Great strategists and fighters with the regime of gebni. They just forget to look at the map. the fact that there is such a US-occupied country as Iraq, they forget. But already experts

          Justify your indignation - THE MAIN STRATEG Do you doubt that the blockade of Syria can not pass our warships? or do you think that Turkey will not miss? You can enter goods into Syria and through Iran with their consent, everything is visible on the map.
          1. Gluxar_
            Gluxar_ April 26 2013 13: 57 New
            -1
            Quote: elmir15
            Justify your indignation

            http://www.sitesatlas.com/Maps/Maps/MEast-pol.gif
            Look through the eyes and see that they wrote nonsense from their stupidity.
            1. elmir15
              elmir15 April 26 2013 14: 16 New
              +1
              Why are you picking a card for me? in the comment that Iraq forgot to add above, even if there is no consent to the transportation of goods, it is easy to deliver the goods by sea.
              Quote: Gluxar_
              Look through the eyes and see that they wrote nonsense from their stupidity.

              You shouldn't have started to flirt because now I am "your well-wisher". Not a lot about yourself do you think that you are a beacon of the mind, and others are stupid?
              1. Gluxar_
                Gluxar_ April 26 2013 14: 59 New
                -3
                Quote: elmir15
                You shouldn't have started to flirt because now I am "your well-wisher". Not a lot about yourself do you think that you are a beacon of the mind, and others are stupid?

                Your right. I drew attention to your monstrous illiteracy. Which struck political provocation. In your first comment, you accused our authorities of collorationism and stupidity. Citing as an example how to do it. Only your example is so ridiculous that I could not remain silent.
                Your position betrays you a zakaznik and a provocateur, or, even worse, an illiterate jingoistic patriot a la "Red Allert". It is a shame that people who pretend to be "the conscience of the nation" actually dishonor their people with a complete lack of knowledge. Someone will not pay attention to this, someone else will unsubscribe, but there are people who will look at the "contingent" of their fellow citizens and leave in disappointment. This is an informational sabotage of the national consciousness of our people, covered by external illiteracy on a "different" issue.
                And that's what I paid attention to. Do you do it consciously or are already so programmed that you yourself do not understand your motivation does not matter. It is important to disclose the same "vyser-mines" so that people understand what's what.
                1. elmir15
                  elmir15 April 26 2013 15: 30 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Gluxar_
                  I drew attention to your monstrous illiteracy

                  But I'm sure that on the contrary, after such grammatical errors, which of us is illiterate? You don’t notice a log in your eye? Although I confess and I have errors slip through, but unlike you, I do not blame others for being illiterate.
                  Quote: Gluxar_
                  In your first comment, you accused our authorities of collorationism and stupidity. citing as an example how to do it.
                  Again errors ... Here is my first comment:
                  Quote: elmir15
                  I am also surprised at the shortsightedness of our officials, you cannot sell the most modern weapons, even to the closest allies, some countries, having bought or started assembling our weapons under a license, cover a gigantic defense of weapons, then they can compete with us in the markets. You must first cover your need for weapons and then sell weapons in a "truncated" export version.

                  I express my point of view, however, like you. You are trying to make me a provocateur, a wildlife sanctuary, as you say, but meanwhile, in some cases, my opinion is with the policy of the State - I recall that my position is that you cannot sell the latest military developments abroad, your position is that you need to sell thereby undermining the country's defense. After all, Russia does not sell the Iskander for example, but according to your opinion, well, who of us is a provocateur and zakaznik? And you do not need to build a whistleblower from yourself and if your point of view is at variance with others, blame them for sanctuaries, provocateurs and traitors. It’s also important for me to disclose such false patriots
    2. Gluxar_
      Gluxar_ April 26 2013 12: 53 New
      -1
      Quote: valokordin
      We support the United States by introducing or joining their sanctions to the detriment of ourselves, instead of making shaving, it takes care only of our interests. What is the blockade of Syria, that we can’t deliver weapons on our ships? This is nonsense.

      Can not. Look at the map. Turkey is blocking the Bosphorus, Egypt controlled by Suez, Britain, Gibraltar, Sweden and Denmark are also among these. Delivery is possible only on warships, hence the activation of exercises in the Mediterranean Sea. Warships are not inspected and licenses with old-timers are not taken from them.
      This state of affairs has in many ways enthralled Libya. Perhaps the leadership had other wishes, but the possibilities are extremely limited in this region. Therefore, we negotiated as much as we could. Russia does not have direct access to the Mediterranean.
      A difficult situation with Iran. He is not an enemy to us, but the region has a very strong competitor. If he gets a nuclear weapon and a powerful missile program, it will not be good for us either. Need a balance.
    3. astra
      astra April 26 2013 13: 06 New
      +3
      The USA and NATO are gradually strangling those countries with which we have established military - technical cooperation, thereby indicating to potential countries buyers of Russian weapons what the same thing can happen to you, because modern Russia is not the USSR that could have come to the rescue and protected in case of aggression from nato. So it turns out that some countries may be happy to buy Russian equipment, but they are afraid of America. I am sure that if Russia openly was not afraid to supply arms to Syria, Iran and if aggression could help them, Russia's authority would immediately increase, new arms markets would open. Russia regained the name of a superpower again.
      1. Gluxar_
        Gluxar_ April 26 2013 13: 31 New
        -3
        Quote: astra
        The USA and NATO are gradually strangling those countries with which we have established military - technical cooperation, thereby indicating to potential countries buyers of Russian weapons what the same thing can happen to you, because modern Russia is not the USSR that could have come to the rescue and protected in case of aggression from nato. So it turns out that some countries may be happy to buy Russian equipment, but they are afraid of America. I am sure that if Russia openly was not afraid to supply arms to Syria, Iran and if aggression could help them, Russia's authority would immediately increase, new arms markets would open. Russia regained the name of a superpower again.

        Well, if you study the matter a little better, you will discover that the growth in sales of Russian weapons is largely due to the fact that the United States is waging war against countries where this weapon is not or is old. Such a discovery would contradict what you just wrote.
        The same applies to Syria, to which Russia supplied equipment under contracts as it does today. The issue with Iran is also understandable for people following the topic. Iran may be an adversary of the United States, but not an ally either. The presence of nuclear weapons at our borders is not in the interests of the Russian Federation. In addition, Iranian exports are very closely intertwined with Georgian ones, the "crumbling" of both occurred simultaneously, which ultimately led to a decrease in the strength of Saakashvili's regime and political changes in the country. Is it worth giving up $ 700 million while maintaining leverage on Tehran?
        1. astra
          astra April 26 2013 13: 56 New
          +4
          Quote: Gluxar_
          Well, if you study the matter a little better, you will discover that the growth in sales of Russian weapons is largely due to the fact that the United States is waging war against countries where this weapon is not or is old.

          And with this I do not argue. want peace get ready for war. So some countries have to arm themselves with our weapons in order to at least somehow protect themselves from possible aggression.
          Quote: Gluxar_
          Such a discovery would contradict what you just wrote.

          Highlight lines that contradict my writing. If you give examples of American aggression - Yugoslavia, Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria - that is, if there is no direct intervention in Syria yet, then there is information, the supply of arms to the militants. So it turns out those countries that were largely oriented towards weapons from the USSR and now Russia is aggression, on the contrary, those countries that buy NATO weapons are in many ways NATO aggression bypasses them.
          Quote: Gluxar_
          Iran may be an adversary of the United States, but it is not our ally. The presence of nuclear weapons at our borders is not in the interests of the Russian Federation.

          But we cannot allow the fall of Iran and the pro-American government
          1. Gluxar_
            Gluxar_ April 26 2013 14: 49 New
            -1
            Quote: astra
            Highlight lines that contradict my writing. If you give examples of American aggression - Yugoslavia, Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria - that is, if there is no direct intervention in Syria yet, then there is information, the supply of arms to the militants. So it turns out those countries that were largely oriented towards weapons from the USSR and now Russia is aggression, on the contrary, those countries that buy NATO weapons are in many ways NATO aggression bypasses them.

            Here
            Quote: astra
            The USA and NATO are gradually strangling those countries with which we have established military - technical cooperation, thereby indicating to potential countries buyers of Russian weapons that the same thing can happen to youbecause modern Russia is not the USSR which, in case of aggression, could come to the rescue and protect from NATO. So it turns out that maybe some countries are happy to buy Russian equipment, but they are afraid of America.

            Neither Yugoslavia, nor Libya and the other listed countries have bought weapons from Russia. They had Soviet weapons from the 70s. Countries buying weapons from Russia are China, India, Venezuela and many others. Their governments are "not democratic" according to the US version, but no one attacks them, precisely because of the presence of Russian weapons. The same Syria managed to buy air defense from us, after the start of new American wars, therefore it is not under bombs today. Aggressive US policy is the best advertisement for our weapons, and not vice versa, as you wrote above. And the same Serbia today, following the EU, wants to buy our weapons, as no one guarantees anything. The same is with Iraq. There is no country that would itself give up Russian weapons due to US intimidation. This is nonsense, the same as giving a pistol under threat of a knife.
            1. astra
              astra April 26 2013 15: 44 New
              +3
              I do not agree with you, NATO countries are exerting pressure on countries oriented to the purchase of Russian weapons, although not everywhere, but this is and is called the market, that is, the competition is here in Western countries and does not disdain dirty tricks.
              Quote: Gluxar_
              The same Syria managed to buy air defense from us, after the start of new American wars, because it is not under bombs today.

              Although not under big bombing, however, 31.01.2013/XNUMX/XNUMX Izrail managed to launch a bombing strike on Syria
              Quote: Gluxar_
              Aggressive US policy is the best advertisement for our weapons, and not vice versa, as you wrote above.

              Why, then, India began to buy foreign weapons? we then broke several contracts. because America did not pursue an aggressive policy against India
  9. Vtel
    Vtel April 26 2013 11: 47 New
    +1
    Russia refused to supply S-300 air defense systems to Iran; Tehran filed a lawsuit in Geneva on April 13, 2011. The total claim of Iran is about 4 billion dollars.

    Looks scolded our top from Tel Aviv, and scared that they can not see the kosher.
    Turkey made only one-time deliveries of Kornet-E ATGM.

    And why the Turks, then, they will forward the opposition to Syria.
  10. knn54
    knn54 April 26 2013 12: 28 New
    +1
    Advancing weapons to Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar ???
    India is slowly losing its quality and timelines - there really is no way to do without a powerful military acceptance; there is no proper information and advertising support.
    And in addition: training export-MORE to recruit cadets from countries- POTENTIAL / PERSPECTIVE buyers of weapons.
    PS Very correctly said vladsolo56-you can’t sell the latest types of armaments. China and even will not say thank you (regarding its clones for export), and the Yankees do not need to recruit, for example, flyers for hijacking aircraft (as in the USSR) - everything is much simpler and cheaper .
  11. VadimSt
    VadimSt April 26 2013 12: 44 New
    0
    Clear pepper, what to trade in arms is not to sell bananas. In addition to technology and cost, one of the criteria is and must be looked back at the geopolitical mosaic and political preferences.
    Here is the last criterion, and it is just necessary to define it more pragmatically, because today's income from the supply of high-tech weapons to some countries may turn into trouble tomorrow.
  12. honest jew
    honest jew April 26 2013 16: 06 New
    +2
    Russia is a generous soul! As always, we don't learn from our mistakes! "Russia needs a" full "return to the arms and military equipment market of the countries of North Africa and the Middle East" !!!! What kind of return? Let's look back and see what results cooperation with the Papuans gave ... Don't look too far, but just look at the numbers ... over the past 12 years, Russia has provided assistance to write off debts to 12 states, and the total amount of write-offs amounted to $ 76 billion. Iraq, Libya, Vietnam, Ethiopia, Laos, Syria, Algeria, Afghanistan, North Korea, which stopped paying the USSR's debts back in 1990, were the countries that the Russian authorities helped to write off their debts. Meanwhile, in September last year, only this state of the Russian Federation canceled a debt of $ 11 billion. At the same time, the Russian Federation forgave all African countries from 2005 to 2011 $ 11,3 billion. This is a very serious amount, which we so lack for our resettlement programs citizens from dilapidated and dilapidated housing, maintaining our sport. For comparison: $ 76 billion roughly corresponds to the cost of building five high-speed highways from Moscow to St. Petersburg !!!

    Russia forgave Cuba a debt of $ 30 billion !!! Just so they took forgiven, allies after all, brothers in blood :-D

    An interesting picture is observed: the Americans are fighting in Afghanistan - ours forgive Afghanistan debts.
    Americans are fighting in Iraq - ours forgive Iraq for debts.
    Algeria actually ranks fifth in the world in terms of natural gas reserves and is the second largest exporter of this type of raw material.
    Algeria holds the 14th place in the world in oil reserves. Algeria has significant deposits of iron, zinc, lead, copper, arsenic, mercury, and phosphates. (Wikipedia).
    Libya, Vietnam are also oil-producing countries.
    Even Ethiopia could pay: to give Russians drink cheap coffee a couple of centuries ...
    Mongolia generally "threw" our simpletons, fools with the joint development of minerals. There was no need to forgive ...
    Isn’t it better to take a shred of wool from a black sheep, and not to corrupt anyone by forgiving debts. Something I did not hear that the state forgave a penny to its native citizens ...

    However, there were examples in history when countries long remembered the generosity shown once and as a result received at least something. For example, France for 79 years did not forget about the debts of tsarist Russia and in 1996 received a part of the amount. And the heirs of the British company Lena Goldfields, which was engaged in gold mining in Siberia by concession, received $ 65 million, although, after the Bolsheviks annulled the agreement in 1929, it would seem that there was nothing to count on.

    The question is, why do we need such cooperation? This is called simply-cut dough !!! Wiping folk money, money earned by sweat and calluses !!!

    For example, recently, Russia easily gave Indonesia a loan of 8 billion dollars! to see also our allies, with whom in Stalingrad porridge from a single pot was slurping porridge in one trench ... and Belarus, which is asking for 1 billion for the construction of a nuclear power plant, is still a combination of 3 fingers !!! It is worth recalling that Russia demanded the return of 132 million debt for gas, although Belarus itself had to 212 million for the transit of gas west through Belarus. Then the Old Man even turned off the tap to return Belarusian money from Russia.

    "A" full-fledged "return to the AME market of the countries of North Africa and the Middle East" is just a withdrawal of money to offshore companies in the West! They seem to have forgotten how recently Putn; Medvedev and a number of officials were negotiating with Cyprus on the default of the Cyprus offshore, because such companies as Gazprom, Sibneft, Rosoboronexport, etc., keep money there. !!!

    Therefore, let's first equip our army, equip our own home, build roads, feed the elderly, and then we'll see if we should cooperate with those who do not pay, and not squander the money for real freeloaders !!!!
    1. DPN
      DPN April 26 2013 22: 27 New
      -1
      Russia (the rulers) sent all friends to *** and now the USSR wants some debts, but the KUBU can only let ***** go, it needs to be converted into the Russian region.
  13. DPN
    DPN April 26 2013 22: 14 New
    0
    Sell ​​to everyone without looking back at the states and NATO and periodically send ONN to *** so as not to interfere with Russia. They are selling to the Syrian bandits, not looking at any ONN, and our equipment on the ships has been wrapped several times halfway back. It's a shame that our fleet does not help in escorting its ships.
    1. elmir15
      elmir15 April 26 2013 22: 54 New
      +1
      I agree with you, we need to help Syria and accompany military supplies to our warships and there is nothing to justify ourselves to Western countries