Moscow arms sale to Chavez angers US

[highsea]

...The Gor Chernomyrdin Pact was signed in 1995. Now I don't remember all the details of that pact but it limited Russian defense corporations. THERE WAS NO NEED FOR RUSSIA IN THIS AGREEMENT. It was done solely from position of friendship.... The pact was denounced in 2001 when USA pooled out from a threaty prohibiting ballistic missile defense.

Hi Garry. That deal was about limiting new arms contracts to Iran. In exchange, the US was going to buy Moskits from Russia for the SSST program. Russia had existing contracts to 2000 with Iran which were not affected by the agreement. Also, the US had evidence that Russia was not abiding by the deal.

Russia backed out of the Moskit deal and offered to substitute the lesser KH-31 instead. The performance of the KH-31 was well below spec, some of them only went 8 miles on the low trajectory (the requirement was 50 miles). Boeing/McDonnell Douglas had to send engineers to Russia to implement a series of improvements to the missile. Even after that, the performance was not what the deal called for, and Russia wanted a million dollars per missile, easily 3 times what they are worth. We had to convert an F-4 to a drone to launch them, since the range was so poor.

The improvements eventually found their way into the Moskits, which made that missile much more effective.

It was a stupid deal by the Clinton administration all around (that was never put before the Congress). We never ended up using the MA-31, we had an existing target missile in the Talos that was better for the job, and now we have the new Coyote which can emulate the Moskit. And we gave some very important tech away to Russia in the process.

And Russia continued to supply Iran anyway.

Archer- 130 Harpoons is a huge amount???

[Garry]

Hi Highsea! Did not know that Moskits were the reasoning for this agreement. Just wanted to add that Rosvooruzheniye - the arms seller then, has quit from negotiations on delivery of submarines, flankers and SAMs which they had back in 1995. Moreover Rosvooruzheniye delayed delivery of APCs and ATGMs which were already paid by Iran.

So when you say that Russia had sold something you should be aware that it was MANY TIMES less than it wanted, and everything that it did delivery was agreed by that pact.

I actually wonder how many Moskits was planned to deliver at price of 3mln to remunerate for loss of 2-3bn worth of potential contracts. This makes me believe that Moscow went for this agreement for FRIENDSHIP as primary purpose, with Moskit deals being just a sweetner to a bitter pill.

[highsea]

...So when you say that Russia had sold something you should be aware that it was MANY TIMES less than it wanted, and everything that it did delivery was agreed by that pact.

One has to wonder just how much capability Russia actually had to deliver. The Submarines were delayed, not by this agreement, but by the inability to build them out on schedule.

These types of agreements are not even legal in the US. The vice-president does not have the authority to circumvent US law in this way. It was a very shady deal, lol.

The story broke in the New York Times:

From the October 13, 2000 New York Times:

The 1995 agreement allowed Moscow to fulfill existing sales contracts for specified weaponry, including a diesel submarine, torpedoes, anti- ship mines and hundreds of tanks and armored personnel carriers. But no other weapons were to be sold to Iran, and all shipments were to have been completed by last Dec. 31.
In exchange for the Russian promises, the United States pledged not to seek penalties against Russia under a 1992 law that requires sanctions against countries that sell advanced weaponry to countries the State Department classifies as state sponsors of terrorism. Iran is on that list....

The Gore-Chernomyrdin agreement appeared to undercut a 1992 law, the Iran-Iraq Arms Nonproliferation Act, known as Gore-McCain after its principal sponsors, Mr. Gore, then a senator from Tennessee, and Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican. The law was rooted in concerns about Russian sales to Iran of some of the same weapons that the Gore-Chernomyrdin agreement expressly allowed.

Senator McCain said this month that he was unaware of the deal that Mr. Gore struck with Mr. Chernomyrdin, which was codified in a document stamped "Secret" and signed in Moscow on June 30, 1995. Mr. McCain said a 'strong case can be made' that the Russian delivery of arms, especially the submarine, should have triggered sanctions against Moscow under the provisions of the Gore-McCain law.

'If the administration has acquiesced in the sale, then I believe they have violated both the intent and the letter of the law,' he said....

For example, E. Wayne Merry, former director of the political section of the American Embassy in Moscow, said in Congressional hearings earlier this year that the Gore- Chernomyrdin Commission had required hundreds of hours of busywork to pad its list of achievements, racking up piles of 'taxpayer-supplied evidence of American good will regardless of Russian performance, honesty or even desires.'

And the 1995 accord, which essentially exempted Russia from American sanctions on arms deliveries to Iran, emboldened Moscow to ignore other agreements, particularly on sales of missile and nuclear technology to Iran, according to Gordon C. Oehler, who directed the Nonproliferation Center of the Central Intelligence Agency until he retired in 1998.

'It was one more of these strange deals that Gore and Chernomyrdin had that were kept from people,' said Mr. Oehler, now a vice president with the Science Applications International Corporation in La Jolla, Calif. 'If this had been disclosed to Congress, the committees would have gone berserk, absolutely. But the larger problem is, if you have these under-the-table deals that give the Russians permission to do these things, it gives the signal that it's O.K. to do other things.'

...A classified annex specifies the weapons Russia was committed to supply to Iran: one Kilo-class diesel- powered submarine, 160 T-72 tanks, 600 armored personnel carriers, numerous anti-ship mines, cluster bombs and a variety of long-range guided torpedoes and other munitions for the submarine and the tanks. Russia had already provided Iran with fighter aircraft, surface-to- air missiles and other armored vehicles.

The weapons are not the top of the Russian lines, but they are among the best in the region and bolstered a military force in Iran that continues to grow in quality and quantity.

Note the Kilo deal was for 3 subs, and 3 were delivered, but the deal was cut prior to the agreement and 2 had already been delivered by 1992.

Here's some additional info/discussion about the deal:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=20589

http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2000_11/gorechern.asp

http://www.forbes.com/2000/10/31/1031freeman.html

http://www.globalpolitician.com/arti...90&cid=2&sid=4

[Archer]

Archer- 130 Harpoons is a huge amount???

Oh really, it isnt?
What about the rest of the stuff being passed on, then, thats peanuts as well?

[highsea]

Oh really, it isnt?
What about the rest of the stuff being passed on, then, thats peanuts as well?

Never said it was peanuts, but everything on your list except the last line items (which haven't been approved yet) and the F-16's are insignificant in comparison to what India is fielding against Pakistan.

How much overkill do you need to have before you feel secure?

[tphuang]

The improvements eventually found their way into the Moskits, which made that missile much more effective.

Interesting, when the Russians got asked how the range of moskit doubled, they just said better burning material.

[AchtungSpitFire]

How much overkill do you need to have before you feel secure?

Overkill....that doesn't apply to India at all. In every sense Pakistan has the capability to inflict considerable damage to India and the transfer of this arms package will further escalate that potential. Israel would be more appropriate example to use as overkill in aid and armament and how friggin secure are they?

[Dreadnought]

Overkill....that doesn't apply to India at all. In every sense Pakistan has the capability to inflict considerable damage to India and the transfer of this arms package will further escalate that potential. Israel would be more appropriate example to use as overkill in aid and armament and how friggin secure are they?

The question is in the weeks to come How secure will they be. ;)

[highsea]

Overkill....that doesn't apply to India at all. In every sense Pakistan has the capability to inflict considerable damage to India and the transfer of this arms package will further escalate that potential. Israel would be more appropriate example to use as overkill in aid and armament and how friggin secure are they?

There is a parallel. Israel will not be secure until the Palestinian issue is resolved, just as India will not be secure until the Kashmir issue is resolved. And after 50 years of fighting, neither country is any closer to a lasting peace than they were in 1948.

India enjoys overwhelming conventional superiority over Pakistan, and everyone knows that. The sanctions placed on India and Pakistan by the US had a totally deleterious effect on Pakistan's defense capabilities. India did not suffer the same effects, because she armed through Russia, rather than the West.

Pakistan didn't have that option, and the US sanctions extended to Western European suppliers (with the exception of the French, of course, who would sell their own mothers) So for 13 or 14 years, Pakistan's defense capability steadily deteriorated, while India's was strengthened way out of proportion.

The only way Pakistan can inflict considerable damage to India is with nuclear weapons. If Pakistan has the capability to defend itself conventionally, the nuclear option becomes less likely.

Both sides are entitled to the capability to defend themselves, and both need to recognize that any peace will have to be political in nature.

The US recognizes that there are terrorists operating out of Pakistan, but they are not equipped with F-16's, JDAMS, and Harpoon missiles. Those weapons are for the legitimate defense of the country, like it or not.

Good grief, all we hear on this forum day in and day out is how powerful the Indian military is, Brahmos missiles, MKI's, ballistic missiles, etc, etc...Pakistan gets a handful of Harpoons to replace old inventory, and you guys are crying the blues.

[cirrrocco]

There is
Good grief, all we hear on this forum day in and day out is how powerful the Indian military is, Brahmos missiles, MKI's, ballistic missiles, etc, etc...Pakistan gets a handful of Harpoons to replace old inventory, and you guys are crying the blues.

Same way the US SD cried when 100,000 AK were sold to Chavez. these AK's are not going to kill one US soldier and the crying frm SD was pathetic,

these weapon transfers to pakistan have the ability to kill and will be used to kill 1000's of indian nationals. I believe there is no shame in crying!!!..

[highsea]

Same way the US SD cried when 100,000 AK were sold to Chavez. these AK's are not going to kill one US soldier and the crying frm SD was pathetic,

Those AK's will do a lot more damage than you know. They will find their way to gangs, kidnappers, drug dealers, marxist guerillas in Colombia, and who knows who else. They will kill DEA agents, LEO's and civilians, and that is certain. They are many times more deadly than the SU-30's, to innocents caught in the crossfire.

The fact that you characterise the SD's complaints as pathetic speaks volumes about you.

these weapon transfers to pakistan have the ability to kill and will be used to kill 1000's of indian nationals. I believe there is no shame in crying!!!..

You think Pakistan is going to give Harpoon missiles and F-16's to terrorists???

[cirrrocco]

Those AK's will do a lot more damage than you know. They will find their way to gangs, kidnappers, drug dealers, marxist guerillas in Colombia, and who knows who else. They will kill DEA agents, LEO's and civilians, and that is certain. They are many times more deadly than the SU-30's, to innocents caught in the crossfire.

The fact that you characterise the SD's complaints as pathetic speaks volumes about you.
You think Pakistan is going to give Harpoon missiles and F-16's to terrorists???

OMG..are u for real!!..how do you think those indian planes were shot down.POF made anza's and american made stingers.

where do you think the terrorists are getting their frequency hopping radios.POF

so these products are going to increase their comfort level and increase activity in indian states. This is correspondigly ging to increase the number of INNOCENT civilians killed. I know there is no point arguing with you because its not going to change the manipulation and real politik being schemed at the US S.D.

lets take your presumption that DEA agents are going to be killed.thats a concern and you and SD have arued against russia sending shipments:thats acceptable

similarly POF made ordinances have killed upwards of 30000 civilians , they have the gall to do it because they had their sugar daddy and sugar panda backing them..(sugar daddy didnt support them from 1995-2003, but the romance as well as the killing has also begun).

so why is it unacceptable and you categorize them as crying when we protest arms sales to a DICTATOR that is hell bent on castratng india..thin about it..is it because you value indian lives less or do you think like the paksiatnis that 1 american = 10 indians

[highsea]

OMG..are u for real!!..how do you think those indian planes were shot down.POF made anza's and american made stingers....

Those Indian planes...ONE helo shot down in Kashmir, [supposedly] by a Stinger (provided to Afghanistan). The Indian defense ministry said the MI-17 was flying at 17,000-18,000 feet. Stingers have a ceiling of 10,000 feet.

The US also helped India to track down and destroy much of the remaining Taliban weapons in Pakistan after the Afghan war, and instituted a buy-back program for Stingers.

The US is not providing MANPADS to Pakistan, (or any thing else that could be easily transferred to (or stolen by) terrorists). We stopped providing them to Afghanistan in 1987.

The rest of your diatribe about the POF is out of US control. What Pakistan makes is up to Pakistan.

is it because you value indian lives less or do you think like the paksiatnis that 1 american = 10 indians

Yeah, sure. That's it...

[Archer]

Never said it was peanuts, but everything on your list except the last line items (which haven't been approved yet) and the F-16's are insignificant in comparison to what India is fielding against Pakistan.

How much overkill do you need to have before you feel secure?

Highsea, its hardly peanuts compared to what India is fielding vs Pak, given Paks size in comparison and the fact that India will not deploy everything it has against Pak because of the China factor. I can go into more if you wish- but PM me.

[Archer]

Those Indian planes...ONE helo shot down in Kashmir, [supposedly] by a Stinger (provided to Afghanistan). The Indian defense ministry said the MI-17 was flying at 17,000-18,000 feet. Stingers have a ceiling of 10,000 feet.:

The ones who did the firing were not Afghanis but Pak regular troops. The fidayeen/ muj played almost no role in the actual fighting at Kargil bar being porters. They were neither acclimatised or trained for high-alt warfare.
The height differential was pretty low, because the Pak troops were already on peaks and mountains. The average height difference between IAF aircraft and the MANPADS operators went as low as 3- 5k feet at times, allowing for salvo'ed fire. There was no other way for IAF aircraft to use unguided munitions otherwise. After the loss of the Mi-17 & Ajay Ahuja's MiG-21- the IAF switched to PGMs on targets which were not targettable below 15k feet alt differential without breaking this rule.