What's next?, next war Romanians could be part of

"Adevarul" newspaper quotes "The Voice of Russia" with this analysis (unfortunatelly only in Romanian - I couldn't find the original version on the broadcaster website). It seems to confirm Radub stance (and partially mine, also) on the feebleness of the Romanian military of the day and of the serious errors of the Romanian national defence endowment policy. A Romanian evaluation of the situation, made on a defence blog (driven by a totally different agenda) ended with simlilar conclusions. It appears that the military procurement contracts from 1990 onwards (regardless the political colour of the government) represented sources for bribes and for internal/external policical "qvid pro qvuo"s.

http://adevarul.ro/international/europa/vo...395/index.html#

Victor, with the Lancer upgrade we now have a fleet of 20 upgraded 1960s generation interceptors (20 Lancers in the C version - http://www.aripi-argintii.ro/aparatdezbor.php?p=131). By modernizing instead our 20 Mig 29s (and purchasing the Moldavians - another 20+ - and perhaps some of the Hungarian ones), we could have had 36-48 upgraded 1980s generation multirole fighters. See the Slovakian, the Bulgarian and (in top of them all) the Polish case. Poland has today 36 serviceable Mig 29s (the A version, with minor upgrades of the communication systems), aquired from the Czech Republic, Germany and inherited from the former "Polish Popular/Socialist Airforce", and considers them worthy enough to soldier together with the block 52 F 16s. In late '90 - early 2000s, the Sniper program (and the possible continuation of it) draw the attention of (at least) the Bulgarian military, and could have been extended to some of the above mentioned countries. The majority of the oppinions of the fighter pilots from that period seems to concure on that. What we completelly lacked was ANY sort of vison and any sort of unbiased and public-driven interest from the military and political decisional actors. But this is hardly something new for Romania, in the field of the army and (especially) of the aviation.
In what the Romanian Navy is concerned, the situation of "Delfinul" Kilo class sub is another striking case. For a minor power, an underdog of the Black Sea if you want (together with, for example, Bulgaria, and unlike Turkey or Russia) having a submarine branch of its fleet is a pure matter of naval strategy and tactics, not one of mere technicality. But even talking about technicalities, trading a ship of a still respectable class in need of repairs (which could have been done with a decent amount of money, and NOT necesarilly in Russia) and with a trained crew for two garbage-bin recovered and unarmed surface ships is dubious, military and economically wise. The only advantage of the two frigates decomissioned by the Brittish and bought by us is represented by their radar systems.

May God (and NATO) help us, if it'll be the case!

This post has been edited by Agarici on May 04, 2014 05:31 pm

That's not an analysis, it's cheap propaganda like pretty much everything the Voice of Russia publishes. The only aggressor with the theoretical possibility to implement a limited version of such a scenario is the Russian Federaion, although a number of important factors are not taken into account in the article. Its purpose it's to further undermine the already low will to resist of some people.

However, the Romanian armed forces are indeed in dire need of money to upgrade the existing arsenal in order to further decrease our dependency on NATO allies, especially for air defense. The military spending was decreased in the past 10 or so years to levels that could barely sustain the armament programs. The current crisis seems to have forced the government (or maybe NATO forced us, who knows) to increase the budget allocated for the military. The upgrade of existing Hawk and SA-6 missles systems is a must, as is the renewed procurement of new short range and long range air to ground misssles.

Regarding the MiG-29 upgrade, it was just an avionics upgrade. It was still the same old engine, which seriously limited the aircraft's range and resource. We wouldn't have 36-48 serviceable upgraded MiG-29s. We would be lucky to have 10, taking into account the acquisition of MiG-29s from others, and we would have to service them in Poland, because Aerostar wouldn't be able to do it, like in the case of the MiG-21s. As I already said, the upgrade of the MiG-21 was a good decision in my opinion for the following reasons:
- the aircraft were already available in large numbers (110 were upgraded IIRC)
- the aircraft were serviceable in Romania
- the price per aircraft was pretty low
- it was cheaper to operate than the MiG-29

I think that the best outcome of this crisis is that it rang a "wake up call" for the authorities.
What we should have done some time ago is irrelevant. All that matters is what we do from now on.
Hopefully we will get some useful and useable gear.
Radu

This post has been edited by Radub on May 04, 2014 08:49 pm

What that Russian radio channel is doing is mean and impolite.
Is the same thing as when you would start the talk with an ugly woman with: "You are ugly."

The Russian analysis was correct though. Romania's defence is hopelessly inadequate. The fact that Russia already knows it should scream "desteapta-te romane" in the ears of our "brave leaders".
I blame the "NATO will fight our fights" attitude prevalent in Romania (and among some on this forum).
Radu

What that Russian radio channel is doing is mean and impolite.
Is the same thing as when you would start the talk with an ugly woman with: "You are ugly."

Let's not be childish about this. It's a manipulation campaign with clear goals and it's what Voice of Russia usually does.

Read this:
http://www.biziday.ro/2014/04/30/folositi-...vate-decat-par/

and watch the beginning of the show on 30 April, also on the same subject
http://www.biziday.ro/2014/05/01/biziday-m...0-aprilie-2014/

And the Russian analysis is not entirely correct. The fact that Romania is part of NATO was not taken into account and neither was the actual capability of the VVS to deliver such a scenario in the current conditions. The number of missile batteries is also misleading.

Regarding NATO, I don't believe it is a mistake to take advantage from the benefits it provides. So far Romania has paid a price for its NATO membership by deploying troops in Afghanistan and Irak. We should be getting something back for our investment. How much we should rely on them is another issue, but the idea in itself is not something that I would condemn. It's an asset we have, we should use it.

I agree that NATO is an asset. As you already indicated, NATO is a "partnership" and Romania had to play its role as a partner in overseas deployments. But My point was that to some, NATO is just a "rescue service" or "insurance policy" and that was why the endowment of the armed forces was ignored.
Radu

Let's hope there will not be a war between Russia and the West. Sincerely and honestly.

The Head of State made it clear in public interviews we won't be helping out Moldova militarily in case it is in trouble, and we will act only in close coordination with the NATO allies.

It is true that Ponta is preparing to meet with Putin ?
What the ? ! ?


This post has been edited by Florin on May 09, 2014 06:16 pm

I didn't hear anything about it.

I doubt such a visit would take place now; but even if it does, so what?

This post has been edited by Imperialist on May 09, 2014 07:25 pm

I doubt it. Probably a disinformation as we are in political campaign. More noteworthy is the declaration of russian vice p.m. after being denied airspace that he will return on board of a bomber

Is this story directly linked to Romania ?

PS: Please delete this post. I am starting to get aware about it:
http://news.yahoo.com/romania-queries-mosc...91--sector.html


This post has been edited by Florin on May 11, 2014 01:46 am

I don't know if it was debated here the scenario presented by Vocea Rusiei, that Romanian Army would be finished in 30 minutes. It was another one a few years earlier that conclude Romanians would be defeated in four hours.
Here is an answer to the first one, that about four hours:

http://www.cristiannegrea.ro/geopolitica/2...i-in-patru-ore/

I jumped directly to conclusions because it was a waste of time to read the whole article and I wasn't disappointed:

"Se va termina cu o defilare a trupelor ruse prin Bucureşti. Da, e adevărat, vor defila câteva sute de ruşi prin Bucureşti. Atâta doar că vor fi dezarmaţi, cu mâinile pe cap, şi vor defila ca prizonieri încadraţi între baionetele româneşti. "