A friend of mine just argued that the Tu-160 has become more of a display model, a status symbol, if you will, for the Russians than a real piece of combat equipment with a real role in the RuAF. I’ve noticed that some posters on this forum are of the same opinion. For those posters, as for my friend, I have one question:

If the Tu-160 is indeed a status symbol, paraded around in order to make the Russian Airforce seem powerful, would it not be more logical for the Russians simply to give them all a nice paint job rather than going for the complicated and expensive upgrade?

While the issue of nuclear vs conventional weapons or Russian RCS reduction may be nominally on-topic, maybe our friends would prefer if we discussed this question elsewhere. Do you have a favourite thread on this topic already?

-SK

Feel free to send me a private message if you’d prefer – I don’t think it necessary to start a new thread on this.

Well, this is a philosophical study for the political scientist. Nuclear weapons ensure self-preservation, but are good for nothing else. Conventional arms can additionally project power, but to do this they need to be a credible threat. It is not necessary to actually enter a shooting conventional war against the US, but buying new weapons that consititute a threat to the US will pay dividends in US concessions (e.g., not expanding NATO or bombing Yugoslavia or invading Iraq), buying new weapons that do not constitute a threat, just for the sake of buying new weapons, gets you nothing.
-SK

Swingkid,

If you could please describe to me which weapons Russia could have purchased in order to prevent the US bombing Yugoslavia I would be most grateful. The fact is that power projection has nothing to do with Russia’s inability to intervene in the US’s intervention wars, particularly this one. Had Russia been able and willing to send fighters and SAMs and troops etc to Yugoslavia and actually undertaken these measures it would have been unspeakably stupid. That kind of action could only escalate the situation grossly leading to a very undesirable confrontation between Russia and NATO. There was no military solution to Russia’s dilema and even had there been Russia’s inability to access Serbia except through the airspace of Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria would have prevented it being implemented (as was the case with the airborne forces at the end of the conflict).

Basically Russia is only able to project conventional power to the former Soviet states, not because of inadequacies in military equipment but because anything else would lead to a major conflict with either NATO or China. Something none of us, I’m sure, would like to see.

Starfury – definitely my favourite star-fighter from any sci-fi show. It just looks so good. Also, I loved the destroyers with spinning sections in Babylon 5. All in all I think that the writters created a pretty good, pretty realistic (somehow), universe. Although they kind of started getting too weird at the end of the second and in the third seasons.

PS The Starfury development with wings for atmosphere flight looked a bit cr@p.

Serbia, since the 2000 “revolution” has to a large degree lost its outsider status. It will, however, not be allowed into the EU for perhaps a decade if not longer mostly on account of the Kosovo issue. Obviously the EU cannot make it obvious that Kosovo is the biggest hurdle to Serbia’s induction into the union as it is essentially a hurdle with “Made in the European Union” stamped onto it. So, economic reform and cooperation with the Hague are used as sticks with which to beat Serbia out of the union for the time being. It is, however, very much in the interests of the EU to make Serbia as strong as possible in security terms (as well as economically to an extent) while keeping her out of the union. Serbia is not only a vital land link (that would be complicated and expensive to circumnavigate via Romania and Bulgaria) to the southern EU – i.e. Greece and Turkey. Furthermore, Serbia, if sufficiently stable and secure, can perform an ideal buffer role for the EU to halt or slow the drug/people/crime trafficing from Kosovo and Albania and to an extent from central Asia. To this end, the EU will not block the strengthening of Serbia’s security apparatus as long as it is relevant to the security needs of the union but will not aid Serbia in any strengthening of Serbia’s armed services which relate to her defense of her own soverenity.

Therefore, Serbia does not need advanced multi-role tactical aircraft or advanced tanks or air-defense equipment and will not, thusly, be able to procure them.

Talk of a new combat jet is pointless speculation for the time being. Only if and when Serbia begins to stand on her own two feet economically will she be able to procure advanced military equipment with her own money. That day is a long way off. Serbia’s best bet (only bet perhaps) is to concentrate of the professionalisation of the armed forces and the maintainence of an effective land army and Ministry of the Interior security forces.

There is, however, light at the end of the tunnel. Serbia’s economy has been growing steadily for the last year or two and her national budget has undergone a discrete increase that has gone almost unnoticed at home or abroad. This increase will be eventually spent on the economic infrastructure of the country and will therefore lead to further gains for the federal and republican budgets. If this trend continues then perhaps the military budget will also benefit – although it is worth mentioning that this possibility is still a long way off.

I have a question that is a little bit off topic:

“Russian President Vladimir Putin is tentatively due to visit Brazil next month and Brazil’s Vice President Jose Alencer traveled to Russia last week.”

How the hell can you be “tentatively” due to visit somewhere?

While we’re on this topic could somebody please remind me of the projected timeline for the PAK-FA project? I’m just curious about when we might see some real clues to its final shape.

PS I can’t bloody wait!