I'm sorry to dampen the surprise “news” that Russia is to buy at least one French-built Mistral-class helicopter landing dock, but the news took the French as much by surprise as anyone. The news of the purchase was made by Russia's chief of staff, General Nikolai Makarov on August 26. “We are studying the possibility of buying such a ship in France,' he said in Ulan-Bator where he was accompanying Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. “For the time being we're talking about one ship. And we also want to produce at least four or five ships of this type. We do not have a ship of this class,” he said.
The key words in the first statement are “studying the possibility” which has been interpreted by all and sundry as meaning “are going to” which is not the same thing at all. And when he says “we're talking about” he most likely meant “amongst ourselves” because those in France where the ships are built and who should be in the know were there any negotiations thus far advanced, told DTI that for such a deal to take place, negotiations needed to begin! And although some initial contacts may have been made it is far too early to call them “negotiations.” And as for the suggestion that France may sell Russia one of its two existing ships, the Mistral or the Tonnerre, well that just beggars belief.
The Mistral helicopter landing dock. Photo credits: Christina Mackenzie
Russia really needs amphibs as well - all the "near abroad" countries are free independent nations now and most brother communist countries turned capitalist, so Russia needs long range sustainable power projection if it wants to play a role in the world. The kind of sustainable, multi-role, flexible power that can only be provided by amphibious ships.
In turn, these amphibs need to be protected, perhaps another semi-endorsement for that six aircraft carrier fleet...?
"And we also want to produce at least four or five ships of this type."
Can't help but to be curious as to who the 'we' is. We want to 'have' produced for us at least 4 or 5? Or we want to produce under license 4 or 5? (Maybe just grease some palms with the first outright buy)? Hmmm..
Also, perhaps this would be a poor-man's compromise to the 5-6 carrier vision? (Not that Russia should be considered 'poor' or expected to be over the next 10 yrs).
While Kremlin command might want / need this type ship, IMHO NATO should be asking if they need an invigorated anti-NATO/anti-US Moscow govt buying/deploying this ship? Will it be used as ASW ship hunting NATO subs in the Med or north sea? Kinda crazy, once you get past the initial euphoria of a quick-cash money deal.
Instead, perhaps EU/NATO could propose France to Lease the strategic ship for an initial 5 yr trial period, plus use maximal leverage as well as part of a major EU-member defense sale to help demilitarize sometimes antagonistic, anti-NATO intentions and limit actual strategic-based air/sea patrols in proximity of Euro theatre?
I mean, considering such a significant transaction, couldn't there be some extra strategic bonus exploited maximizing the situation's benefits beyond mere money?
Would Russia be receptive for something like that? How 'much' would an LHD buy? While I'm at it, how much would the cancellation of the Polish GBI-site yield? Or Israeli UAVs?
If - and that's still a very big if - that Mistral is bought there will be considerable technology transfers involved and deeper industrial/shipyard links established. With France having often travelled their own 'middle road' they are in a good position not to be seen as 'hard-core' NATO and may be acceptable for the pure 'Buy Russian' crowd. Especially if the Mistral will provide the basis for a domestic variant, I think they may be more interested in the blueprints (and NATO mods) than the actual ship itself.
But ask the Italians about the M-346/Yak-130 project and they'll tell you that Russians tend to be a bit headstrong, and cooperation with the various Russian (defense) industries have challenges of their own.
LHDs like the Mistral-class will be extremely useful in the first half of the 21st Century. Most expect the next several decades will be dominated by local, relatively low-intensity conflicts, by asymmetric warfare against non-state actors, and by climate change-linked natural disasters that all have the potential of seriously disrupting our globalized economy.
In this context, containment, de-escalation and consequence management are crucial. The LHD brings to the scene: helicopters (attack and support) and hospital; embarked commando force and C4I; logistic supplies and local air control through powerful radars; UUVs, USVs and UAVs... at a fraction of the cost of a full-blown CV(N).
So it seems to be the right platform for sustained offshore presence, power projection ashore, disaster relief and humanitarian aid operations -- in any littoral zone around the world.
No wonder that the LHD (and its slightly less capable cousin, the LPD) is the backbone of many medium-sized and smaller navies already... the fact that Russia wants to follow in their wake shouldn't be such a surprise.
Heard nothing of it anymore, so I guess they are more interested in a LHD or the french design in general.
Thanks for info, I didn't hear that. That's some serious strategic chess-playing right there. Total driver seat. (precisely what I meant about French exploiting some additional, greater strategic capital out of such a negotiated deal and not just quick cash for themselves).
While the impression is that Poor Russia is in compassionate need of western Euro technological assistance.
Yes, and yes. Exploit a greater strategic capital out of this chess move, or merely throw your pieces away for cheap.
Free advice. Respects~