Arab revolutions cut off oxygen supply of Russian weapons

Arab revolutions cut off oxygen supply of Russian weapons

The current world situation puts arms suppliers in a rather difficult situation. Many countries, including Russia, are bound by obligations to supply arms. Today, however, such commitments or urgently need to be reviewed, or even abandon them.

The problem lies in the so-called wave of Arab revolutions, which began to "cover" the world since the end of last year. Tunisia and Egypt, Yemen and Libya are just a small list of states with which contracts were concluded, however, they were either simply impossible to fulfill due to the decisions of the UN Security Council, or these contracts had to be suspended indefinitely. If only recently our “defense industry” received substantial support by financing production from Yemen, Syria, Iran and other countries, today the supply of various types of weapons to these countries either had to be reduced or stopped altogether. One example of stopping the supply of Russian weapons The situation with the C-300 complexes, which Russia was forced to stop transferring virtually all types of weapons to this Arab country, could happen abroad. And this is not an isolated case. Russian manufacturing companies and arms suppliers to foreign partners are forced to incur serious losses. At the same time, weapons manufacturers in Russia often rightly do not understand how business has to do with politics.

If you look at this problem from the point of view of the development of the modern market, the bans on the supply of goods are introduced, and the weapon is a product, in its essence is a rough interference of third parties in the partner business. At the same time, arms suppliers are outraged by the fact that prohibitions are imposed not only on the conclusion of future contracts, which they could understand, but also on the implementation of agreements already concluded. In such a situation, it is quite possible to recognize that the world today is in a state where the concluded deals can be blocked by persons or institutions that do not represent any of the parties to these deals. With such an approach, having a lobby in certain circles, it is possible to quite easily eliminate its direct competitors and capture product sales markets under very loud cries for the struggle for disarmament in a single territory.

If we talk about the situation in Libya, then for Russia it becomes obvious that the supply of weapons at the same level to this state will not be conducted. By the way, there are still enough analysts in the world who explain why it was France that at one time decided to take over the reins of NATO's operation under the romantic name Odyssey. Dawn". In the world political backstage, there are persistent rumors that Sarkozy was simply extremely annoyed that Colonel Gaddafi refused to buy French weapons, and began to consider options for concluding contracts with Russia. Along with oil and gas interests, this factor can also be called quite viable.

Today, Russia is under rather powerful pressure with the help of the Western media over the supply of weapons to Syria. Moscow, American and British journalists, and, not always expressing only their point of view, are accused of “sponsoring” the regime of President Al-Assad. And again we get that someone is trying to put pressure not even on the state, but on business. Those Americans like to accuse Russia of excessive pressure on business contacts, but what do they do in this situation? It would be interesting to see how the stars and stripes would react if they suddenly proposed at the UN Security Council to impose an arms embargo on Israel. In this situation, Israel is no different from the same Syria. Israeli troops are constantly bombing Palestinian Palestinian settlements - which is no reason for a ban on the importation of weapons for Tel Aviv. However, in this case, you can imagine the scale of Western hysteria ... By the way, British companies, when they were at the helm of Libya, Colonel Gaddafi did not disdain to supply him with a mode of armament for very impressive amounts. Today, journalists from Foggy Albion are “stigmatizing” Russia, China and other states for similar agreements. Absurd!..

So, Russia's revenues due to the ban on the import of weapons to certain countries only for the past 8 months of the current year fell by several billion dollars. If over the past year, almost 12 billions of “greens” were “harvested” on arms sales abroad, then the results of this year will be less joyful for Russian arms manufacturers.

In this regard, the country's leadership and domestic arms manufacturers need to develop new non-standard approaches for the implementation of the planned programs for the supply of arms abroad. If such measures are not taken in the near future, then the West can simply “remove” our country from the world arms market, using any possible means to do so.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Professor 6 September 2011 09: 24 New
    • -1
    • 0
    If you look at this problem from the point of view of the development of the modern market, then the prohibitions on the supply of goods are introduced, and weapons are goods, in essence - gross interference of third parties in the partner business.

    Not at all like that. In essence, organizations (the UN for example) intervene to which the selling party has obligations. There are of course exceptions, under pressure from Russia (read a third party), many countries have turned down military-technical cooperation with Georgia.
  2. Banshee 6 September 2011 09: 40 New
    • 0
    • 1
    What is, interestingly, a “non-standard approach”?
    As in the old Soviet joke, "seeders, winders and threshers of vertical take-off and landing"?
    As an option, of course. Why not? In the fight for commercial success (backed by politics), all the ways are good.

    Here I watched reports from Libya, to take their rebels ... They got all their equipment in battle? Or did the military side with her on the side of the rebels? Or stolen? The same military ...
    Then it is simply amazing how generally the Gaddafi’s army could hold on for so long. It turns out that they do not just steal from there ...

    Apparently, such an experience of “deliveries” makes sense to adopt. I remember (I was not a witness, I just read or listened), somehow the water towers were brought to Cuba ... Or equipment for sugar factories ... Was it a joke, right?
  3. Crazyzy
    Crazyzy 6 September 2011 10: 04 New
    • 0
    • 0
    Syria is the largest importer of Russian weapons in the Middle East. The value of the Syrian arms market for Moscow is of particular importance in connection with the almost complete loss of the Iranian market due to UN Security Council sanctions (the total loss of profit of the Russian Federation from the loss of the Iranian market is estimated by TsAMTO at 13 billion USD), as well as Libya (about 4,5 billion USD )
    That is, in less than a year, Russia lost two large importers of Russian weapons in the Middle East and North Africa.
    It is extremely difficult to compensate for such significant losses of Russia in the Middle East and North Africa. In this regard, the loss of the Syrian market will mean almost complete displacement of Russia from the Middle East arms market.
  4. jamert
    jamert 6 September 2011 10: 51 New
    • 3
    • 0
    the transfer of which to Iran, Russia was forced to stop in accordance with the imposed embargo on the supply of this arab country of almost all types of weapons

    Iran is already an Arab country. Specialists, damn it ...
    1. Anton S 6 September 2011 16: 02 New
      • 0
      • 0
      Ha! And how do you like it?
      "If until very recently, our" defense industry "received substantial support by financing production from that Yemen, Syria, Iran and other countries ..."

      From what has been written, it can be inferred that the Russian Federation, which supplies equipment to many TENS of countries, has the main margin of these three, two of which are poorly solvent, especially the dwarf Yemen. That is, neither China with two hundred Su-30s, nor India with even more Su, ships, submarines, missile systems, etc. they don’t make the weather, but the “mighty Yemen” is that yeah, the most important player! By the way, and what new things do ours have from Syria? So far, only speculation about the supply of the Bastion has been available (it is either unclear or will be already underway). And so 90% of what they have was delivered back in the last century.
  5. viktor_ui 6 September 2011 16: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    Article dregs and shadows on the wattle fence.
  6. Gonoriy 10 February 2013 23: 52 New
    • 0
    • 0
    What did the author want to say?