The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Muhaha]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

These comments of yours are so stupid on so many levels that I will not waste time on them. You are bordering on either hallucination or total ignorance. I'm not sure which one it is yet. Perhaps other members here might want to entertain you instead.

Okay.

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Where did I say we should lapdogs, the one thing I want is a free and strong Armenia and we can't to that with the help of the West.

Young comrade, being a so-called "lapdog" in politics is nothing shameful, as a matter of fact it's natural to politics and quite essential for survival. Let's look around us for a moment. Much of the western world, as well as parts of the Middle East and Asia, is the lapdog of the American Empire. Some say Great Britain today is America's lapdog. Others say America is Israel's lapdog. We all know Belarus is Russia's lapdog. We know that Turkey is NATO's lapdog. And so on... Nonetheless, the use of 'street' terms like Lapdog, or Slave, or Bitch, etc., are specifically meant to elicit a negative response in average people.

It's similar to making statements like:

How can we Armenians allow drunk Russians to tell us what to do?

Russian soldiers in Armenia will fuck our women...

Armenians are no body's slaves or bitches...

Russians are the real enemy because they are killing Armenians in Russia...

Russians screwed us in the past they will do it again...

Fuck Russia, fuck everybody, if we unite we can do it all by ourselves...

This kind of stupid talk is dangerous and it belongs on the street. The point is: All nations, especially developing nations, are more-or-less dependent on larger more powerful nations - without exception. In the case of Armenia: Russia is our only choice. And I am glad we have Russia in the region to be dependent on. The geopolitical formula for us Armenians in the Caucasus is simple: No Russia - No Armenia. As I keep saying, without a powerful Russian presence in the region, not even a million Armenian freedom fighters can save Armenia.

And all Armenia is doing is looking after itself, that's what nations do. Armenia is working with Nato, is sending soldiers to Kosovo, Iraq and maybe will send to Afghanistan. And that's not in the interest of Russia but Armenia will do that, and they haven't acknowledged the independence of South-Ossetia and Abkhazia because it isn't in their best interest.

The fact is Moscow also cooperates with NATO and it also has peacekeepers in Kosovo. Much to their credit, official Yerevan has been playing a good diplomatic game by giving lip service to western powers while establishing a close strategic partnership with Moscow. However, Armenia had no business in participating in the illegal/criminal occupation of Iraq and Armenia has no business in Afghanistan either. Nonetheless, let's not fool ourselves, in final analysis, Armenia is limited in what it does politically by Moscow. With the expulsion of western forces from the Caucasus region, watch Yerevan become less-and-less cooperative in its dealings with the West.

Nevertheless, within the globe's foreseeable geopolitical climate Armenia will continue serving the national interests of Russia for the foreseeable future. Thus, as a result of its alliance with the Russian Federation, the Armenian Republic will continue having political clout in the region. What's more, as most sane people realize, Armenia's one and only real lifeline - economically, politically and militarily - is the Russian state. Armenia has existed for the past one hundred years or so because of a geopolitical climate only made possible by the presence of a powerful Russia within the greater Caucasus region. So, let me say it again - I, as an Armenian nationalist, am proud that our tiny, impoverished, landlocked, blockaded, threatened nation surrounded by enemies is actually a "lapdog" or an "outpost" of a major superpower in the region. I thank God that Moscow's regional interests ensures the survival of the Armenian Republic by keeping Turkish and Azeri forces on their side of the border...

I asked this question to another forum member a few days ago, I'll ask it again:

Try to picture the political climate of the Caucasus without a Russian presence... Try it. Just imagine the Caucasus without an effective Russian presence. If that thought does not scare the shit out of you as an Armenian, I don't know what will.

[SoyElTurco]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

The point is: All nations, especially developing nations, are more-or-less dependent on larger more powerful nations - without exception. In the case of Armenia: Russia is our only choice. And I am glad we have Russia in the region to be dependent on. The geopolitical formula for us Armenians in the Caucasus is simple: No Russia - No Armenia. As I keep saying, without a powerful Russian presence in the region, not even a million Armenian freedom fighters can save Armenia.

Sounds like you're familiar with Brzezinsky's "The Choice" or "The Grand Chessboard."

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Sounds like you're familiar with Brzezinsky's "The Choice" or "The Grand Chessboard."

I have both books, I have read both books. But none of what I have been saying here is inspired by Brzezinski or derived by any of his rhetoric. What about my statements led you to think that I was familiar with his works?

[SoyElTurco]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

I have both books, I have read both books. But none of what I have been saying here is inspired by Brzezinski or derived by any of his rhetoric. What about my statements led you to think that I was familiar with his works?

Your rhetoric shows which clique of academics you should be familiar with in order to talk like that.

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Medvedev sums up 2008

Medvedev sums up 2008 - Full version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myE8d5jFJhQ

How strong and efficient could relations between Russia and the US be? What's to be done about the global financial meltdown? What are the main goals of modern Russia? President Medvedev answered these and many other questions in his interview with Russia’s top TV channels.

Q: Thank you, Mr. President, for this opportunity to ask you some questions on the results of the past year. What do you think about 2008? From your point of view, was it mostly positive or negative?

Dmitry Medvedev: Many different things happened this year. Of course, each year is different. On the one hand, this year brought us some happy occasions, some victories - in sports, first and foremost; in arts… There were some significant achievements in the economy and in the social sphere. From this point of view, this year was a normal one; it was the way we expected it to be. But on the other hand, this year brought us some dramatic events as well. Of course, I mean primarily what happened in the Caucasus - Georgia’s aggression against South Ossetia. Also, I must say that throughout the last part of the year we have been doing our best to overcome the consequences of the global financial crisis. Thus, this year had both many positive things and big problems… serious trials for our country.

Q: Mr. President, let’s go back to one of the main subjects you mentioned: the war in the Caucasus. My colleagues have prepared a short video as a reminder about the events of August 2008. Let’s take a look. Can you recall how the events unfolded? How did you find out that Georgia had attacked Tskhinval? And how did you make the decision? Did it take you long? Or maybe, on the contrary, it was a quick decision.

Dmitry Medvedev: This picture will stay with me for the rest of my life. Things like this produce such a deep impression that they stay with you forever. To me, this was perhaps one of the most difficult days of my life. I can recall minute by minute what happened on that day. At about 1 a.m., Defence Minister Serdyukov called me. He said that according to the information they had, Georgia had declared war on South Ossetia. But there was no troop movement at the time. I told him to monitor the situation, to follow the events, and report to me on a regular basis, which is what he did for several hours. Every thirty minutes, he called me and told me what was going on: when the tanks first appeared, when other military vehicles transporting Georgian troops moved in, and so on. For some time, we still hoped this was a provocation and that Georgia wouldn’t follow through. But once missile launchers and tanks opened fire, and I was told there were casualties among Russian nationals, including our peacekeepers, I didn’t hesitate a single minute and I gave orders to return fire and destroy the attacking forces. Naturally, when making such a decision, one has to consider all the consequences, including the irreversible nature of the orders. Until you reach a certain point, it is still possible for you to turn back; but once the decision is made, it is impossible to go back to the way things were before. Of course, I realised this. And I hoped that common sense would prevail. Unfortunately, this did not happen. The Georgian leadership started a full-blown, bloody war against its neighbour. We took all the necessary measures and, on the whole, I believe the military campaign, which lasted only five days, demonstrated the effectiveness of our response, the strength of the Russian Army, and the fighting spirit of our troops. They were able to inflict extensive and, basically, irreparable damage on Georgia’s military without suffering major losses themselves. As a result of these actions, peace was restored in the Caucasus, and, most importantly, tens of thousands of people who were on the verge of extermination were protected. Thus, that was a very difficult day for me, but I think we had no other option and the events that followed confirm that we made the right decision.

Q: Mr. President, you’ve just mentioned that it was difficult for you to make the decision to send our troops into action. Were you absolutely certain the operation would be successful?

Dmitry Medvedev: You know, of course, we did suspect that our neighbour was not fully sound mentally, although we did not think it was that bad. But we knew about their preparations. I have said this before: at some point, I realised that our Georgian partner had simply ceased to talk to the Russian Federation. In the past, he used to suggest that we meet someplace, in Sochi or somewhere else, and discuss things. But at some point he stopped talking to us. It was at this point that I began to suspect he might resort to force. So naturally, we took some steps to be prepared. And this preparation made it possible for us to minimize our losses. The Russian Army destroyed Georgia’s military infrastructure, but at the same time it avoided inhumane actions. But, of course, I could only hope that our Army and our peacekeeping force would fight valiantly. Their training, their morale and courage proved excellent. They were worthy of the Russian Army’s glorious past. And this, of course, is precious.

Q: By the way, while you were still running for president, as you were preparing to become the president of the largest country in the world, did you ever consider that maybe you, Dmitry Medvedev, personally, as the Supreme Commander in Chief, would at some point have to make a decision which would transfer Russia from peace to a state of war? And, in fact, is it possible to foresee such things?

Dmitry Medvedev: That’s a good question. Anybody making a responsible decision to run for the highest office in the country - the office which makes one the Supreme Commander in Chief - must not rule out such a possibility. This is why the President is both the Guarantor of the Constitution and the Supreme Commander in Chief. Of course, it is very, very difficult for anyone, including myself, to make such a decision. It is one thing to have certain functions defined under the Constitution and other laws as an abstract possibility in case of an armed conflict - and quite another to make an actual decision when a real armed conflict unfolds… when you realize it is enough to say a word and you’ll never be able to go back to the way things were before. This is a genuine ordeal for anyone. I think that under such conditions a responsible leader should think soberly, consider all the pros and cons, and make a balanced decision.

Q: It sounds like you made the decision to send troops to South Ossetia rather quickly. But how do you usually make decisions? And which ones, aside from the decision on South Ossetia, were the most difficult to make?

Dmitry Medvedev: Some decisions really have to be made quickly. Moreover, in some situations, like the decision with regard to South Ossetia, there is no one I can consult. I just have to make a decision, period. Other decisions are also difficult, but they are not so urgent. I mean, you have time to consider all the pros and cons. I often have to make such decisions, but I can tell you frankly they are nowhere near the decisions like those that involve using the Russian Army to protect law and order, to protect Russian citizens. Some decisions involving the economy are also not easy to make. These include the decisions we make regarding the financial crisis the entire world is battling today. In this case, you have time to consider everything: how the situation is evolving in other countries, what has been done in other countries, both now as well as in the past. Such decisions are made as a result of “brainstorming.” It’s not like you have to decide right then and there. But I repeat, for me, these decisions are easier to make, even though their consequences may be very, very significant as well.

Q: Let’s go back to March. I’m sure you remember the presidential race and its overwhelming outcome. On television, it was rather bright, too. Still, we have entered a period, by the will of the world events, in which some things do not work, and some things works different than they should. In such moments many may be tempted to act ‘differently,’ too. For instance, local authorities may try to dodge their duties or employers may be tempted to lay off their employees, considering the labour force as mere dead wood, while honest citizens may also be tempted to position themselves above the law. Also, criminals may be tempted to decide their time has come. How will the state react to this? Have you any approach to such things? Or do you rely on improvisation?

Dmitry Medvedev: In such a situation, the state should react wisely but strictly. You mentioned honest people. Well, their distinction from others is that even when there are temptations, their brains work appropriately, and they do not commit crimes. This concerns the overwhelming majority of our citizens. As for hardships, they may indeed be there, including an increase in unemployment which is now about six percent of the economically active population. But this is not a high figure. It’s less than in the U.S. and Europe. However, during the crisis, employers may also face problems. Normal and responsible employers should simply behave according to the law, which means that they should try and continue to pay wages or allowances. At the end of the day, what we succeeded in doing in recent years is that we managed to create huge human potential. There used to be much discussion about the lack of a labour force, overproduction of, say, lawyers and managers whereas qualified labour was in short supply. Rural areas have received considerable investment. The reason I am saying all this is that any sensible employer - either the government or private – should, in this situation, do their best to preserve basic labour force potential for the future because if we consider current developments on the world markets, clearly the crisis is not a pleasant thing, but it will pass eventually, as in the rest of the world. And in time, growth will follow. So, a sensible employer should have the necessary capacity to restore production in order to switch on the conveyor belt that was stopped earlier. It is very delicate work, and it’s up to all of us, the state and businesses, as well as society in general. If it is a question of certain infringements, as I have mentioned - the reaction should be prompt. If the labour code is violated, if wages are not paid, if someone is fired unlawfully, the prosecutor’s office should immediately respond and instigate administrative proceedings or, a criminal prosecution, if necessary. Otherwise, these things won’t be suppressed. And it’s up to all - not only federal officials, but also heads of regions and municipalities. In this situation, nobody will be able to sit on the sidelines - one will have to get involved or let someone else do the job.

Q: Dmitriy Anatolyevich, could you please elaborate on the future in terms of the crisis, as we have countless forecasts of possible scenarios for the future, so different from each other that it’s something close to wild guesses. Do you think the “bottom,” as economists put it, will be reached? When will Russia come out of this hard situation? And, very importantly, what country will Russia be when it is over?

Dmitry Medvedev: I am not an analyst or fortune-teller, so I am not going to present any forecasts which would be irresponsible on my part. At the same time, I can say that, first of all, this crisis has patterns which are not quite clear. And there are some hopes that since it started so unexpectedly, it may, with a consolidated stance by the states outlining a new financial architecture, end even quicker than we hope. But, I repeat, it depends on future research on this subject. As to what country Russia will be when it comes out of the crisis, this is indeed very important. It is crucial that Russia becomes not weaker but stronger. The crisis is not only about irritating problems like less money, smaller investments and discontinuation of some production, but also about new opportunities. Our economy is not ideal. And in this situation, we must try and make it more efficient by optimising it, creating new jobs. It is essential to raise productivity, understand what professions may be required. We do have unemployment, but at the same time we have many vacancies, which means unemployment is always peculiar. We need to fill vacancies that are crucial for the development of our country, and continue to create infrastructure and strengthen the non-financial sector of the economy. It is our immediate task, just as we must reinforce our financial sector. We have to admit that our banking system belongs to an economy in transition. We need banks that are more powerful and more prepared to address domestic problems and, at the same time, the ones that receive state subsidies should be more helpful in resolving problems. This does not mean the problem is insurmountable. We must monitor the situation and, in some cases, help some banks. At the moment, the government is preparing a list of several hundred companies which will receive state support. We were not going to do so six months ago, but now we have no other choice. We have to directly finance areas which are strategic for our country. We have enterprises in the country which are city-forming. We’re not alone in this. Other countries do the same. This is our current challenge and it is very important. So, our task is to come out of this crisis with minimal losses and, hopefully, with improved manufacturing capabilities, by diversifying the economy through innovation and thus decreasing the dependency on exported raw materials, the latter being admittedly one of our drawbacks. Those countries that are export-oriented lose more. Despite rapid development they are now facing problems. It’s not only about us but our neighbours as well. Therefore we must create an economy that is more balanced and diversified, represented both by high-tech industries and new jobs, with properly developed infrastructure. This is something we have to address.

[...]

Source: http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/35211

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Russian army faced critics, but did well in Ossetia war

The Russo-Georgian War in August of this year demonstrated a basic truth about the Russian army: it is a sledgehammer, not a rapier, and a fairly effective sledgehammer at that. The five-day conflict left few doubts that, when it came to high tech and training, Russia's fighting men are behind modern armed forces. Western experts routinely pointed out during the conflict how antiquated some parts of the Russian military are. However, the well-orchestrated, lightning invasion also made clear that the Kremlin's soldiers are more than capable of using ingenuity and overwhelming numbers to crush an opponent like the Georgian military. Even as experts in Brussels and Washington were repeating conventional wisdom about Russian military weaknesses, rapidly- advancing armoured forces like Russia's 58th Army were lancing into Georgia, and in high spirits as they systematically demolished Georgia's US-trained army. 'Join us, we have plenty to eat!' an ethnic Ingush trooper from Russia's 503rd Motor Rifle Regiment told a dpa reporter visiting a strongpoint without invitation: 'Rice, vegetables, and plenty of meat.'

A drab green ZiL lorry hauling hot food and bottles of greenish fizzy water rumbled through the sector, held by a Russian armoured reconnaissance company. Two tanker lorries followed, one with diesel for BMP fighting vehicles, the second with water, which was going fast in the 35-degree August heat. That scene of a combat unit supplying itself with little fuss jarred with reports from the Pentagon and US news agencies. According to the Western narrative, Moscow's armed forces were massive but shoddy, with vehicles breaking down repeatedly. Other purported problems included obsolete weapons, sloppy field commanders, primitive communications, and pilots incapable of low-level flight. But on a rise overlooking the highway to Tbilisi, under a Caucasian midday sun, Russian infantry hacked away at the rocky ground with picks and shovels. They were digging in, in positions well chosen to command the highway. Sentries were posted, tanks were camouflaged, junior officers were on the move, and anti-tank rockets were cached at 500- metre intervals by the blacktop.

Despite an absence of GPS, or even topographical maps for anyone but the commanding captain, the reconnaissance company of 503rd Motor Rifle Regiment gave no appearance of the incompetence highlighted by the pundits back in the NATO countries. Nonetheless, even after the war ended, criticism of the Russian army's performance came thick and fast. A spokesman from Janes Defence International Weekly, a leading arms publication, pointing out to the Wall Street Journal that the Russian tanks operating in South Ossetia lacked modern steel lattice armor. Additionally, the publication noted, some of the tanks were more than twenty years' old. Such analysis failed to impress the Russian rank-and-file. 'She (our tank) got us here from Chechnya, we love her, and she's going to get us home too,' boasted a sergeant commanding a T-62 tank, according to him one of the oldest tanks in all of 19th Motor Rifle Division. 'She's good enough to fight Georgians ... and in any case, there is more to war than equipment.'

The Russian army also displayed a dangerous weakness in communications, with a general resorting to use of a journalist's satellite phone in an attempt to locate his troops, in an incident widely reported in Russian and Western media. However, Russian troopers and junior officers appeared unfazed by communications problems, employing captured Georgian mobile telephones and military radios. And, just like their Red Army forefathers, they sent important messages by motorcycle or jeep courier. Perhaps the worst problem experienced by the Russians in the war was Georgia's surprisingly effective air defence, which knocked down between four and 16 Russian planes, depending on which side one believes. But the Grakali railroad bridge - a key transport link between Georgia's capital and the coast - is good proof the Russians weren't stymied. Forced to pull back their air force, and still wanting to knock down the bridge, the Russians sent a platoon of combat engineers, who dropped the span with high explosives.

The Russians dealt with a critical Georgian air defence radar, located on a mountain overlooking the Tbilisi airport, using similarly rough-and-ready means. Confounded in repeated attempts to hit the radar with a daytime surgical strike, the Russian air force unloaded a single massive bomb in the middle of the night, leveling the radar and a substantial portion of the hilltop. Critics of the Russian military also have been mostly silent on a whole host of skillful moves by the Kremlin, which made the five-day war a hands-down Russian success. Among those moves was a complicated surprise amphibious landing on Georgia's sea coast that went off without a hitch and the lightning capture of the strategically critical Kodori Gorge by heliborne infantry deep in Georgia's mountains.

Russian electronic jamming forced Georgia's officers to abandon their radios and issue orders by mobile phone, which were then intercepted by Russian intelligence. In a striking psychological move, Russia sent Chechen mercenaries - feared for ruthlessness throughout the Caucasus - as shock troops against Georgian positions. Georgian morale crumbled, and in some cases Georgian troops literally ran rather than face the Chechens. 'We are here to teach people a lesson,' a xxxxy Russian motor rifle lieutenant said. 'Russia is no longer on her knees.'

Source: http://www.monstersandcritics.com/ne...in_Ossetia_war

Russia accuses foreign nationals in Georgia war

Russian investigators on Tuesday charged that volunteers from the United States and a number of other countries fought on the side of Georgia in its war against Russia. Russian news agencies reported that Aleksandr Bastrykin, chairman of an investigative committee with the Russian prosecutor's office, said the mercenaries included nationals of the U.S., Ukraine, the Czech Republic and Turkey. Russian officials have previously accused the U.S. and Ukraine of sending servicemen to take part in the fighting in August — claims both countries have denied. The war over the separatist province of South Ossetia devastated Georgia, crippled its military, destroyed much of the key infrastructure and uprooted more than 160,000 people.

The Kremlin recognized South Ossetia and another rebel region, Abkhazia, as independent, drawing strong condemnation from the West. Representatives of Georgia's Defense Ministry were not immediately available to comment on the accusations that they recruited foreign volunteers during the fighting. The U.S. Embassy in Moscow declined immediate comment. A spokesman for Ukraine's Defense Ministry was not immediately available and UNA-UNSO, the Ukrainian nationalist organization whose members Bastrykin accused of taking part in the fighting, did not respond to an e-mail request for comment. In Prague, Czech Defense Ministry spokesman Jan Pejsek said that no member of the Czech national army took part in the fighting and that authorities were not aware of any volunteers participating either. Authorities in Turkey could not be immediately reached for comment.

Bastrykin also released what he said were final figures for civilian deaths in the breakaway region of South Ossetia, saying that 162 residents were killed and more than 5,000 people were considered to be "victims" of the war; he did not elaborate on the concept. Previously Bastrykin's committee had said 133 civilians were killed. The U.S.-based group Human Rights Watch said in September that fewer than 100 civilians were killed. Bastrykin also said 48 Russian servicemen, including 10 peacekeepers, were killed in the fighting, reducing the death toll from the previously announced figure of 64. Bastrykin also renewed accusations that the Georgian military had committed acts of genocide against South Ossetians in the war.

Both sides have accused each other of that crime, and Georgian authorities were quick to respond. "The Russians should themselves answer for the ethnic cleansing they've committed, which is a proven fact," said Georgian Interior Ministry spokesman Shota Utiashvili. Human Rights Watch and the Georgian government have said Ossetian militias were involved in systematic persecution of ethnic Georgian civilians in South Ossetia following the war. Russia says it invaded South Ossetia and then moved deep into Georgia proper to protect Russian passport-holders and peacekeepers after Tbilisi launched an assault on the South Ossetian capital Tskhinvali. Georgia blames Russia for the war, saying it was forced to act by growing Russian support for South Ossetia and a buildup of troops around the region.

Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...zGkkAD958EFHO0

[ZORAVAR]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Russian Helicopter Industry is seing a revival. A few years ago, Russian minister Sergei Ivanov was tasked to reform and rejuvenate the helicopter industry. A new company was creates encompassing all the Russian helicopter designers and makers - Vertolety Rossii: "Russian Helicopters" (Oboronprom). The results are showing.

ZORAVAR
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mi-28N "Night Hunter" Combat Strike Helicopter State Tests End

Tests were successfull. The impressive Mi-28N combat helicopter will enter service in the armed forces. There is also an order for 12 such helicopters from an unknown country (probably Venezuela).

Source: 24.12.08, OAO Vertolety Rossii

Series Production of Ka-52 "Alligator" Helicopters underway

Production is underway at the Arseneev plant in the Far East. While the tandem seat Mi-28N is the all around combat helicopter with an emphasis on night fighting, the side by side Ka-52 is for "special" missions.

Large export orders for various versions of the Mi-17

Nearly 50 Mi Helicopters to Near and Middle East. A recently signed 80 choper to India et. etc.

Sources: Gazeta, Royfc, Novosti

First ANSAT light helicopter enters service

Built at Kazan, this new type of helicopter is used for light transport and training.

Source: Pilot.strizhi.info

China Buying One More Heavy Mi-26 Helicopter from Russia

For fighting forest fires in the northeast. China intends to buy several additional Mi-26TS heavy helicopters. To date, 310 Mi-26 helicopters have been built. The Mi-26 is the world's largets helicopter.

Source: Novosti

Brazil signs air force deal for Mi-35 attack helicopters

The Brazilian government has used a visit by Russian president Dmitri Medvedev to confirm that it signed a contract with Moscow's Rosoboronexport arms agency in late October for 12 Mil Mi-35M attack helicopters.

Worth around $300 million and also including a sizeable spares package, weapons and training services, the deal represents the Brazilian air force's first purchase of a Russian aircraft.

The air force earlier this year shortlisted AgustaWestland's AW129 and the Mi-35M as candidates for its attack helicopter requirement.

Source: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...licopters.html

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Russia selling surface-to-air missiles to Libya, Syria: report

Russia has begun to fulfil a 250-million-dollar contract to deliver surface-to-air missiles to seven countries including Libya, Syria and Venezuela, the Vedomosti business daily reported Friday. Russia will also deliver the S-125 Pechora-2M missile batteries to Egypt, Myanmar, Vietnam and Turkmenistan under the contract, the newspaper said, citing a source in the state-owned Russian Technologies corporation. Contacted by AFP, a spokeswoman for the company declined to comment. Russian Technologies includes arms exporter Rosoboronexport among its holdings. The paper did not say which parties had signed the contract. The Pechora-2M -- known as the SA-3A Goa in NATO parlance -- is an upgraded version of a surface-to-air missile originally developed in the 1960s that was widely shared with the Soviet Union's allies around the world. Under the contract, 200 missiles are to be delivered including 70 for Egypt, an unnamed manager at a Russian defence-industry factory told Vedomosti. He added that most would be built at the Obukhov factory in Saint Petersburg. "It is a simple but effective system, like the Kalashnikov assault rifle," he said of the Pechora.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081226...nezueladefence

[Federate]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Russia selling surface-to-air missiles to Libya, Syria: report

Unfortunately, Syria won't be needing them since it is on the verge of selling out to Israel and the USI.