Russia vs US arms sales Abroad

By Charlie

No, that title is not breaking news from 1984. Over at Popular Mechanics, they outline 6 "hot spots" where US/Russia weapons are still pointed at each other. PM explains:

...equipment designed by the two nations remains on opposite sides of 21st-century battlefields. This isn't surprising: America is the top vendor of major conventional weapons, and Russia ranks number two. Both countries share a legacy of making military equipment to counter the other's capabilities and a long history of parlaying arms sales into geopolitical influence. These deals, sanctioned by both national governments, are extensions of foreign policy. A resurgent Russia wants cash and international influence, while the United States hopes to link its defense industries with foreign customers and simultaneously offer perks to allies.

I'll comment on the situations they outline:

1. Colombia vs Venezuela: We are supplying UH-60 helicopters to our allies in Colombia, while Russia is providing HINDs to Chavez. The air mobility that medium lift helicopters provide in the dense jungle is certainly an advantage against local threats like the FARC. HINDs are certainly a fearsome system if properly employed, and also have limited transport capability. It is difficult to say which side benefits most by these deals.

2. Chile vs Peru: We supplied the AMRAAM to Chile, Russia supplied the A12 ADDER to Peru. I'd call this one a draw, as a conflict between these two Andean powers would likely remain below the radar screen.

3. Israel vs Syria: AH-64D Apaches by us to Israel vs SA-19 ADA systems to Syria. We are all familiar with the successes Israel has had against Syria ADA, so these mobile systems may be nothing more than mobile pop up targets in any future conflict. Also, attack aviation may be more useful to Israel over its Gaza and Lebanese borders, vice Syria, as peace talks may at least stave off any future Israel/Syria open conflict.

4. Israel vs Iran: Israel also received "bunker busters" from the US, and Iran the "TOR" ADA system. given Israel's past success against IADS, it is tough to make a call on who benefits from this sale. Add to that the sheer distance that pilots would have to fly to hit the Iranian reactors, and this sale registers a draw.

5. Pakistan vs India: We have sold Pakistan Orion aircraft, which can perform ISR over the Pakistani coast, and Russia has sold ballistic missile subs to India, which give it a second strike capability against nuclear Pakistan. However, given the current government priorities of Pakistan (northwest frontier and Kashmir) and India (the economy) it is unclear if these sales will significantly alter the strategic balance.

6. Taiwan vs China: Its destroyers vs subs in this standoff, but it is unlikely that this fight will ever materialize, with the new China-friendly government in Taiwan.

Overall, these sales to nation-states by the US and Russia do not seem to significantly alter the strategic balance in any of these 6 cases, with Israel and Colombia being two net beneficiaries. As far as "value added" to the defense of foreign nations, I would speculate that training and equipping foreign ground, air, and maritime forces for internal defense and COIN missions may be of more use to the majority of world nations rather than marketing high-end defense items that are only useful in an unlikely conventional conflict -for either Russia or the US.

June 3, 2008 04:11 PM Russia ~ Tech