Russia to Buy French Helicopter Carrier

[RF]

I think Kyler is right. And Chavez is no Allende. And the CIA initiated getting rid of him, so Chavez isn't going to win out.....

[Kyler]

Well the complaining has officially started. Georgia's President Mikheil Saakashvili has recently criticized France's proposed sail of 4 Mistral to Russia.
Say that is would make it too easy for Russia to invade former Soviet States. Now that one has complained, I wonder how long it will take for the rest?

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4504110&c=EUR&s=SEA

[RF]

I think we are now at the stage that if Russia invades Georgia and Georgia resists then we have a very serious situation that NATO and Obama couldn't possibly ignore.

[Bgile]

I think we are now at the stage that if Russia invades Georgia and Georgia resists then we have a very serious situation that NATO and Obama couldn't possibly ignore.

We already went through this. Georgia resisted to the best of their ability the last time. If Russia wants to invade Georgia there is absolutely nothing NATO can do about it. The Russians can bring absolutely overwhelming force to bear. If they had decided to stay in Georgia the last time they would probably still be there.

What would you suggest?

[Kyler]

If Russia invaded all of Georgia, there is nothing NATO could do about it in the short term. By the time NATO could respond Russia would completely occupy the entire country. My guess the most likely military response would be airstrikes against the occupying forces. Though that would probably lead to all out war with Russia which NATO is not prepared for.

[RF]

As I say it would be a very serious, and dangerous situation.

As I recall Bgile, the first time you mention only part of the country was occupied, not all of it; yes Russia can deploy overwhelming force but would it be 100% effective or would a guerilla war ensue - remember that the USSR tried overwhelming force in Afghanistan, and it ultimately ended in failure and ignominous withdrawal. What could NATO do - well, make the situation very uncomfortable for the Russians, not by offering direct military opposition, but by economic sanctions, other diplomatic pressure and encouraging/arming Georgian resistance. But it would be a very dangerous situation - particulary if Ukraine was drawn into the conflict in support of Georgia.

[Bgile]

The first time it was obvious the Russians could have taken over the whole of Georgia, and Ukraine didn't come anywhere close to being involved. The Ukrainians wouldn't have wanted to be invaded either. In the event the Russians just stopped and thumbed their noses at the helpless remnants of the Georgian army, with the latter's capital wide open.

Afghanistan is of course quite a different country, with very difficult terrain and a population of people many of whom have no real ties to the central government. They present a much more difficult situation with respect to guerilla warfare than Georgia. Also, the Russians had pretty much defeated the Afghan guerillas with their scorched earth campaign (Karl's ideal) and only left when Gorbachev decided it wasn't the kind of thing he wanted to be involved in. Too expensive and not worth the trouble. At the time it was heralded as a western victory, but it really didn't look that way on the ground.

[Kyler]

So here is the latest news on this ongoing saga of debate.

Russia now wants to purchase only complete ships, this includes weapons systems. This is quite different then initial plans which the ship in a basic configuration would be produced minus communications and weapons. Either this a pitch to get a hold of modern Western technology or Russia has no faith in their current equipment or ones in development to do the job. In reality it is probably a bit of both.

I doubt French will sell a fully equipped ship to Russia. It has never been in the deal to do so, probably not to make the already upset Baltic Members more angry.

[RF]

The Russians buying complete ships makes sense, as Kyler says. A strong Russian Navy probably won't affect the Baltic states too much as they have land borders with Russia, their concern is more likely to be the fact that as the French are selling weapons to Russia they could sell equipment for their army.... or air force.
As for the French, they will look after their own economic interests, as they are well used to doing within the context of the European Union.

[AngloSaxonVangaurd]

It will do little to Russia's global naval power as it still lacks modern escorts to protect their new helicopter carriers. Russia's navy has ~25 dated escorts split between 5 fleets. The largest of which is its northern Fleet and even then its only the size of a small European navy (i.e Norwegian or Dutch navy). Given that these new Heli carriers will boost Russian amphibious capabilities when fighting another Georgian type war (i.e Russia policing post soviet states).

However its a bad idea that the french are handing over such valuable western tech. The modern design of these Heli carriers will surely lead to Russia's understanding of how to build a larger modern Aircraft carrier.

[Bgile]

I have the impression the French will sell almost anything to almost anyone. I think they sold military equipment to Saddam Hussein right up to the final invasion of Iraq.,

[AngloSaxonVangaurd]

Great, so instead of Russia re-building its own ability to produce large, modern high-tech warships they will instead buy 3-4 from France (with two of those built in Russian ship yards). That means 30 years from now Russia will be in the exact same position and will need replacements. It’s a short-term solution to a long-term problem. The money would be better-spent re-building Russia’s long dead rural infrastructure.

I wonder how Russia will protect these highly vulnerable ships?

Russia's concept for a new gen of Aircraft carrier should be complete by the end of the year. A better option would be for Russia to build 4 x 40,000 - 60,000 ton Aircraft/Helicopter carrier assualt ships.

[yellowtail3]

I say, let's sell the Russians a couple of our old CVs.