Brazil did not short list the SU-35 twice.. the first time when Sukhoi made a special SU-35UB just for Brazil.. and the second time with the newer SU-35.

Everyone knows that FX-2 is a political farce from the start, not even Su-35 licensed to Embraer would make it.

Rafale and F-18 are intended to be leverage tools for Brazilian politicians when trading with US or EU. For Brazil projecting an image of friendship and modernity to the population of those countries through a multibillion deal is more important than going on a buying spree to Russia and being called names.

are you…

…this
Off Topic ended, now bak to Argentinian struggle for modernization.

Are you serious? Neighbouring countries won’t co-operate with piracy or war – and effective harassment would be one or the other. As for banning Spanish firms from doing business, or fining them arbitrarily, have you ever heard the expression “cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face”? Behaviour like that would harm Argentina more than Spain. Argentina needs to sell its primary products abroad at the best possible price. Trade wars with customers (especially customers in the biggest trading block in the world, & biggest importer of the products Argentina sells, a much bigger trade partner than China or the USA) would cost Argentina more in lost trade & lower export prices (because it would be a distressed seller) than it would cost Spain.

Lately Buenos Aires is becoming the new Madrid with the steady flock of unemployed Spaniards even tightening immigration control a bit would harm Spain more than Argentina. Spain lost face with YPF last year as no one was willing to go against Kristina on behalf of Spain, losing face again for some symbolic measures like prohibiting wool from the islands. Since UK presence down there is not generally welcomed in South America and getting Chile and Brazil on board, two of Argentina’s three main trade partners, is not difficult as long as Argentina doesn’t plan to harm physically islanders, and since the use of force is apparently not on the agenda, trying to make their lives more difficult would hardly be a reason to hamper relations with other countries.

As for that harassment: how long do you think Argentina could keep buying & fitting out fishing vessels? They’d be rounded up & confiscated (& then sold on, to defray our costs), & sunk if they tried to fight. What about crews? No doubt we’d repatriate them eventually, via a third country (together with humiliating TV coverage), but how many could Argentina recruit?

Get real, the Royal Navy is not going to harm, much less try to confiscate or sink anything that belongs to the Argentinian Navy over international waters for stopping and searching civilian vessels on the suspicion of carrying counterfeit goods, drug trafficking or any other legitimate concern that is used everyday around the world to exercise that right.

Argentina can harass the islands with a pocket change navy of converted fishing vessels with the connivance of neighboring countries, something not so far fetched given the sad state of Argentinian Navy and Coast Guard.

Spain is a softer target than UK at the moment and since it’s the main trade partner for the islands measures like banning Spanish firms involved in wool trade from doing business in Argentina or just fine them repeatedly.

I guess the talk of potential threats in medium/long term is unimaginative because of assumption that NATO will continue to exist in the future.

Looking how half EU is going downhill and finger pointing is becoming the national sport all around the place is not very difficult to imagine new recipes for disaster.

NATO guarantees defence but it also limits action. Any offensive action against a neutral country could cause the offending party to be booted out of NATO, have sanctions placed on it and sabotage important economic links.

And also guarantees impunity to some extent as long as the offender can be portrayed as the victim by the media.

Obviously investment is required for the future, especially as Serbia isn’t part of NATO.

Mantaining capabilities is more important right now than planning future scenarios.

After new purchases new cuts, and instead of trimming some fat they’re going to reap bone because it’s easier, faster and gives votes, old F-18A/Bs are the perfect target for future once new EA-18Gs start being delivered, specially if Chinese economy slows down more than expected and US deficit continue falling.

The only realistic option for Serbia is MiG-29, other aircraft is just a waste of money.

As i understand it a Soviet fighter pilot would fly something like 100-120 hours a year on average, would that be accurate?

As accurate as comparing hours of flight from the moment landing gear is retracted with hours of flight since the engine is started, it depends on how hours are measured.