On Tuesday, at a meeting of the commission on military-technical cooperation in Nizhny Novgorod, Russian President Vladimir Putin named the country's revenues from the export of arms and military equipment. Last year, the business in this segment of the market traded more than $ 14 billion. The order book in 2015 was replenished by $ 26 billion and exceeded $ 56 billion. This volume has been achieved for the first time in the post-Soviet period.
Syrian campaign effect
These figures are also impressive because over the past quarter century, Russia has largely lost the arms market in Central and Eastern Europe. The countries formerly belonging to the Soviet system have now entered the North Atlantic Alliance and, under the requirement to bring their weapons to NATO standard, began to purchase weapons and equipment from alliance partners, mainly in the United States.
Nevertheless, Russia in the new century began to restore its positions. In the 2000s, due to attractive conditions for the supply of their weapons (competitive prices, after-sales and warranty services, location of production in customer countries, etc.), the volume of exports of products of defense industry enterprises grew at a rate of 10-15 percent per year and reached in 2006 year 6, 7 billion dollars. As you can see from the public statement of the President, over the next ten years, the income from the export of arms even doubled.
According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), which published a report on trends in global arms exports in February, Russia is now supplying arms to 50 countries. India remains the largest buyer of Russian weapons and equipment. It accounts for 39 percent of our exports. Next come Vietnam and China - 11 percent each. Azerbaijan stands out among the European partners. Its share in the export of Russian arms approached five percent.
During the sanctions years (2014-2015), the volume of sales of our weapons fell slightly and turned out to be lower than in 2011-2013. However, Russia today accounts for 25 percent of world arms exports. A large market share (33%) is occupied only by the United States, which remains the main exporter of arms. Places from third to fifth among the largest exporters went to China, France and Germany.
The operation of the Russian Aerospace Forces in Syria has further raised the world's interest in Russian weapons. Potential buyers were once again convinced of the combat capabilities of military equipment and weapons manufactured by Russian defense industry enterprises. As Kommersant Dengi magazine notes, referring to its sources in the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation (FSMTC), Algeria, Indonesia, Vietnam, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia have shown interest in Russian military equipment.
Algeria, for example, in December 2015 sent an application for the purchase of 12 Su-32 bombers (export version of the Su-34). Experts estimate the cost of the contract at $ 600 million. In the future, an option for another 6-12 bombers is not excluded. In addition, Algeria has already signed an agreement on the purchase of 40 Mi-28NE combat helicopters and is negotiating on other types of equipment.
A large consignment of helicopters (46 units) Ka-52 "Alligator" is being bought by Egypt. He has already signed a contract with Rosoboronexport. Deliveries on it will begin in 2017. Indonesia, Vietnam and Pakistan are interested in Su-35 fighters. In addition to aircraft, the supply of armored vehicles, air defense systems, missile and artillery systems is being discussed with customers. FSMTC specialists have estimated potential contracts at $ 6-7 billion. This is an order of magnitude higher than Russia's spending on the Syrian campaign. Vladimir Putin named the costs for it - 33 billion rubles.
Strength-based strategy
The exporters' success is due to the growing global demand for weapons and military equipment. The international arms market has been growing steadily for nearly fifteen years. Weapons are purchased mainly by solvent countries. However, this bears little resemblance to the whims of the nouveau riche, who are preoccupied with acquiring an arsenal to satisfy inflated ambitions. The beginning of the current growth in the arms market coincides with the American invasion of Iraq.
Geopolitical tension has arisen in the world, which has been maintained since then by color revolutions, the destruction of ruling regimes and entire countries. The number of armed conflicts and territorial disputes has increased. There is a war in Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya.
It is in these regions that states are being equipped with new weapons. For example, if in 2006-2010 Saudi Arabia acquired weapons within 2.1% of the world's export volumes, then by now it takes 7% of the weapons offered on the international market to its arsenals. The United Arab Emirates also increased defense spending and increased its share in world purchases from 3.9% to 4.6%. Turkey grew from 2.5% to 3.4%.
These examples can be multiplied, because the costs have increased large and small countries. And not only in the Middle East. For example, Vietnam, which was affected by disputes with China over the ownership of the Spratly archipelago and the Paracel Islands in the South China Sea. Over the five-year period, Hanoi increased its arms purchases from 0.4% to 2.9% in world exports.
The last illustration shows how arming a country gives it a stronger competitive position in the global marketplace. Indeed, according to expert estimates, significant reserves of oil and mineral raw materials are concentrated on the shelf of the disputed islands. At first glance, these are fairly straightforward actions. However, they are copied from the practice of modern interstate relations. Here in the center of the composition is the most "exceptional country of our time" - the United States of America.
Last year, the United States adopted a revised version of its National Security Strategy. In the document, aimed "at the most effective promotion of American interests abroad at the regional and global level," powerful and combat-ready armed forces are considered as the main guarantee of the preservation of US influence in the world.
True, the authors of the "strategy" stipulate that "the use of force is not the only effective way to counter challenges or a means of ensuring US involvement in world affairs," but nevertheless called it "the main one." As for diplomacy, it should be based on "economic power and the Armed Forces, which are unmatched in the whole world."
Such is the "strategy". Looking at her, the world is arming. Even the closest allies of the Americans, who are no longer confident in the reliability and loyalty of their leader, do this. The arms business only thrives on this. The arsenals of countries are replenishing, but they are unlikely to make them more secure. The example of Iraq and Syria, which at one time had modern and well-equipped armies, is another confirmation of this.
In the meantime, there is a demand for weapons in the world, you can do business with it, and also a reputation. As it happened during the Syrian campaign, when the world saw Russian weapons in action and appreciated them not only as a desirable commodity, but also capable of really ensuring victory. And this is its main price.
