NATO countries retain a dominant position in the global arms market. And although Russia has secured the second place, located between the United States and France, Moscow's share in the market is steadily declining. What is the reason for such a reduction, how can Russia squeeze out competitors from NATO countries and why is it time for Moscow to think not only about arms exports, but also about imports? On Monday, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) published a new report on global arms exports.
It follows from the document that the United States manages to increase its share in the arms market, remaining in the unconditional first place. Russia, on the contrary, reduced its share, remaining in second place.
The researchers compared the indicators of both countries for two periods: in 2013-2017 and in 2018-2022. During this period, the United States increased arms exports from 33% to 40%, and sales to Russia decreased from 22% to 16%. India, China and Egypt are among the main buyers of Russian military products.
At the same time, France, being in third place, increased its market share from 7% to 11%. In particular, Paris is crowding Moscow in India, but has not yet come out on top. "The trend is likely to continue, as by the end of last year France had many more pending arms export orders than Russia," said Peter Weseman, senior researcher at the SIPRI arms supply program.
In general, the overall level of arms exports decreased by 5.1% during the reporting period. "But despite this, supplies to Europe increased sharply due to tensions between Russia and most other European states," Veseman said. He also predicts a further reduction in Russian exports, because Moscow will give priority to saturating the Russian Armed Forces with weapons. At the same time, Ukraine took the third place among importers (after Qatar and India).
Against this background, the United States not only remains the leader in arms exports, but also develops military-technical cooperation with other Western countries. So, between the USA and France alone – the first and third place in the SIPRI rating – there are more than 300 data exchange agreements. Among them – information about ceramic armor, switching technologies, electronic weapons, transport robots, chemical detectors, homing anti-missiles, analysts write INF.
In addition, the joint projects of France and the United States include the defense company Thales Raytheon Systems, which develops and manufactures air defense systems, as well as control and control systems for air operations and ground radars. Another joint venture, CFM International, produces new generation LEAP and CFM56 aircraft engines. Sofradir Group, a subsidiary of the French Sofradir EC, Inc., which produces infrared detectors, engines, modules, operates in the American defense market.
Another important country for the United States is Norway. In particular, Washington and Oslo are leading the THOR-ER project on the joint development of hypersonic and high-speed extended-range weapons, as well as aircraft with an air-jet engine. And together with Italy, the United States created the Alenia C-27 Spartan tactical military transport aircraft in the late 1990s and is still producing it. In parallel with this, the United States, together with Germany, developed the MEADS air defense system.
Also a striking example of cooperation is the aircraft industry. For example, the Eurofighter Typhoon multipurpose fighter is manufactured by a concern that includes companies from Germany, Britain, Spain and France. The same consortium is engaged in the production of engines for the Eurofighter.
Thus, according to experts, the experience of the United States and other NATO countries points to a curious fact: even such powerful players in the arms market as the United States and France did not follow the path of military-technical autarky. On the contrary, they chose the path of cooperation, thereby reducing the resource and budget burden on their military-industrial complex. And Moscow should probably take a closer look at this experience.
"It is high time for Russia to start building up joint development and production of weapons with other countries. Today there is not a single state that could produce the entire range of weapons on its own.",
– explained the military diplomat Alexander Artamonov. "Otherwise, the "pupation" of the military-industrial complex in one country leads to a slow refinement to the desired level of new types of equipment. For example, the United States has problems with power plants for space, hypersound and combat lasers are poorly developed. But they solve these problems in cooperation with other countries," the source recalled. "Accordingly, Russia could jointly with Iran engage in the production of drones. They have a great line of Shahed. North Korea has excellent long–range barrel artillery. Why don't we follow the path of cooperation with these countries, given the fact that they are friendly to us?" – asks the diplomat.
"Yes, we have a successful experience of cooperation with India. Together we have developed the supersonic anti-ship missile PJ-10 "BrahMos". This is a good result, but it can be even better. India has a lot of intelligent programmers and a good industrial base for the production of military chips. Without digital technologies, the production of weapons is impossible today. Accordingly, it is possible to work with New Delhi in this area," the source said.
Experts also remind that even the USSR did not have self-sufficiency in the issue of arms production. "There was a clear division of labor within the ATS. The USSR, of course, produced the lion's share of equipment. However, entire classes of equipment and ammunition production were transferred to our allies," recalled Vasily Kashin, director of the Center for Integrated European and International Studies (CCEMI) HSE.
"For example, Poland has been working on auxiliary vessels for the fleet. Czechoslovakia supplied L-39 combat training aircraft to the USSR. The GDR and Hungary helped out in some way. This approach was correct and necessary, because no country in the world is able to pull the production of the entire range of weapons," the expert notes.
"Unfortunately, Russia has not yet overcome what can be called "technical nationalism." The same applies to China in many ways. For some reason, Moscow and Beijing decided that it was ignoble and shameful to turn to imports in the military sphere. Any purchases abroad are always carried out with great difficulty. We literally overstep ourselves, and this creates problems for us," the interlocutor emphasizes.
"For example, ten years ago we could have purchased licenses from China to create UAVs. By now we would have a decent localized production, which would facilitate the solution of a whole range of tasks within the framework of its. Instead, Moscow tried to invent a bicycle and spent a lot of time on what could be bought from a friendly country," Kashin emphasizes.
"And now the advantage of NATO is that the alliance does not allow such a development of events. The countries of the bloc are implementing large-scale programs where the division of labor has become a necessary norm. I would like to emphasize that cooperation between the United States and its allies takes place not only in the production of equipment, but also in the field of R&D," the expert points out.
"Now the West has created a powerful regulatory framework that regulates interaction between states. It has been built for decades and covers all the mechanisms of technology transfer and ensuring their secrecy. They clearly state the responsibility of the parties for non-fulfillment of obligations",
– says the interlocutor. "In addition, our opponents managed to establish a high-quality system of interaction, which takes into account the strengths of the partner states. Everyone is involved: both the states of Europe and Israel and Japan. As you understand, neither Washington, nor London, nor Tokyo would have achieved such results separately," Kashin clarifies.
"In principle, Russia and China could become the "core" of the response processes. It is also necessary to involve other countries that demonstrate good achievements in the field of military production: Iran, North Korea, Belarus and a number of other countries. Combining the efforts of these states would make it possible to create a good base capable of resisting the West," the interlocutor emphasizes.
"It is also important to take into account the view from the outside when developing joint projects. Moscow, Beijing and Tehran have different engineering schools. Each of them is unique and distinctive, but together they are able to create truly amazing devices," the expert argues.
"In addition to UAVs, it is worth paying attention to those types of equipment in the production of which our partners succeed. China, due to the tension around Taiwan, is actively developing fleet capacity. In theory, the landing means of the PRC could be of interest to the Russian Navy. If the partner is working on strengthening the fleet, why don't we join this process?" Kashin added rhetorically.
"I will also note the sphere of R&D: a modern military power is obliged to invest in the development of futuristic types of equipment, as well as work on improving hypersound. The joint work of scientists in this direction will allow, firstly, to create better solutions and, secondly, will banally reduce the costs of actors. Cooperation is beneficial for everyone," Kashin sums up.
Rafael Fakhrutdinov, Evgeny Pozdnyakov
