От Чингизид
К All
Дата 19.12.2000 21:48:13
Рубрики Прочее; Современность; Локальные конфликты;

Военно-технический дайджест интересующимся израильтянам

Приветствую !

Israeli Importers -- France, Germany Stop Arms Sales to Israel Since Intifadah

GMP20001217000064 Tel Aviv Ha'aretz (Internet Version-WWW) in English 17 Dec 00

Reference: France Won't Sell Tear Gas to Israel; 20 Countries Refuse To Sell Anti-Riot Gear GMP20001211000086 Jerusalem Middle East Newsline E-mail-Text English 11 Dec 00 FRANCE

[Report by Nicole Krau: "France and Germany Stop Arms Sales to Israel"]

[FBIS Transcribed Excerpt]

Since the outbreak of violence in the territories, in late September, France and Germany have initiated an undeclared embargo on Israel, refusing to export defense equipment and materials.

Tomer Avnon, the CEO of TAR Ideal Concept, a company which imports defense materials for Israel's security forces, says that attempts to acquire a new smoke-grenade, made by the German firm, Buck, met with refusal. Buck, which is represented by TAR in Israel, sent a notice saying that at this time it is impossible to gain an export license from the German government permitting the sale of defense equipment and materials to Israel.

Avnon had already experienced a similar problem, at the onset of the Intifada, with a French company called Nobel Securite, from which he sought to purchase tear-gas grenades for the Israeli police. [passage omitted]

Avnon told Ha'aretz that his company sought the assistance of MKs and the defense attache based in Paris; however, the efforts met with no response.

[Description of Source: Tel Aviv Ha'aretz (Internet Version-WWW) in English -- Independent, liberal, intellectual; root URL on filing date: http://www3.haaretz.co.il/eng/htmls]

C u
От Чингизид
К Чингизид (19.12.2000 21:48:13)
Дата 21.12.2000 19:29:00

Re: ВТС дайджест - блэк маркет

Приветствую !

Еще новость на "фронте борьбы с нелегаль. ВТС"

UK Times

20:34 WEDNESDAY DECEMBER 20 2000

African arms courier named by UN

FROM JAMES BONE IN NEW YORK

A suspected former KGB officer with at least five aliases and numerous
passports was identified by the UN yesterday as the mastermind behind
international arms traffickers who supply rebels in Angola and Sierra Leone.

The Tajikistan-born Victor Bout, 33, who is based in the United Arab
Emirates
and is the son-in-law of a former senior KGB official, was said to use his
Air Cess airlines to ferry arms to Unita rebels in Angola and to the
Liberian
allies of Sierra Leone's Revolutionary United Front, in breach of UN
sanctions.

Details of Mr Bout's alleged operations are contained in two UN reports on
the illicit trade in arms and diamonds in Angola and Sierra Leone.

According to the UN, Mr Bout's Air Cess first appeared in 1996, registered
in
Liberia. In December 1996, it moved to Ostend, Belgium, and in 1997 to the
United Arab Emirates, using Sharjah airport for planes registered elsewhere.


Many of Mr Bout's 50 or so aircraft use the lax Liberian aviation registry,
as well as those in Equatorial Guinea and the Central African Republic.

A Sharjah-based Ilyushin 76 first registered in Liberia, then in the Central

African Republic and Congo-Brazzaville, made four arms deliveries from
Eastern Europe to Liberia after the flare-up in fighting in Sierra Leone
this
summer.

The cargo included military helicopters, anti-tank and anti-aircraft
systems,
missiles and armoured vehicles. UN investigators recommended that the
placing
of monitors at airports in West Africa and beyond to track suspect aircraft.


The UN identified a Briton, Michael Harridine, as an "associate" of Mr Bout,

who held authority to conduct business in Britain on behalf of the Liberian
aircraft register. "Harridine told the panel he is no longer involved with
the registration of Liberian aircraft," the UN reported. He said "that
irregular activities in the registration of Liberian aircraft were taking
place".

Copyright 2000 Times Newspapers Ltd.


C u
От ash
К Чингизид (19.12.2000 21:48:13)
Дата 21.12.2000 09:23:04

Re: французские штучки

>Приветствую !

>Israeli Importers -- France, Germany Stop Arms Sales to Israel Since Intifadah

>GMP20001217000064 Tel Aviv Ha'aretz (Internet Version-WWW) in English 17 Dec 00

>Reference: France Won't Sell Tear Gas to Israel; 20 Countries Refuse To Sell Anti-Riot Gear GMP20001211000086 Jerusalem Middle East Newsline E-mail-Text English 11 Dec 00 FRANCE

>[Report by Nicole Krau: "France and Germany Stop Arms Sales to Israel"]

>[FBIS Transcribed Excerpt]

>Since the outbreak of violence in the territories, in late September, France and Germany have initiated an undeclared embargo on Israel, refusing to export defense equipment and materials.

>Tomer Avnon, the CEO of TAR Ideal Concept, a company which imports defense materials for Israel's security forces, says that attempts to acquire a new smoke-grenade, made by the German firm, Buck, met with refusal. Buck, which is represented by TAR in Israel, sent a notice saying that at this time it is impossible to gain an export license from the German government permitting the sale of defense equipment and materials to Israel.

>Avnon had already experienced a similar problem, at the onset of the Intifada, with a French company called Nobel Securite, from which he sought to purchase tear-gas grenades for the Israeli police. [passage omitted]

>Avnon told Ha'aretz that his company sought the assistance of MKs and the defense attache based in Paris; however, the efforts met with no response.

>[Description of Source: Tel Aviv Ha'aretz (Internet Version-WWW) in English -- Independent, liberal, intellectual; root URL on filing date: http://www3.haaretz.co.il/eng/htmls]

>C u
 Приветствую!
Спокойно -эти самые хранцузы периодически
пытаются поиграться в великую державу. И
в этом случае, отказа поставки газовых
гранат, они идут по протоптанной дорожке.
Нам то от этого вреда нет, а вот их дружкам-арабам придется за это расплачиваться не соплями и слезами, а огнестрельными ранами.
Вообще Франция,скажем так, периодически
пытается влезть в калашный ряд свинячьим
рылом -т.е. еще разок доказать арабам, что
она какой-никакой, а их лучший друг и за-
щитник. Главный фокус она проделала в 1967
году, когда обьявила эмбарго на поставку
оружия Израилю. А дело было как раз в
шестидневную войну. Впрочем, французкое
эмбарго только стимулировало развитие изра
ильской военной промышленности.
С уважением,
ash
От RS116
К ash (21.12.2000 09:23:04)
Дата 22.12.2000 04:42:48

Re: французские штучки

> Приветствую!
> Спокойно -эти самые хранцузы периодически
>пытаются поиграться в великую державу. И
>в этом случае, отказа поставки газовых
>гранат, они идут по протоптанной дорожке.
> Нам то от этого вреда нет, а вот их дружкам-арабам придется за это расплачиваться не соплями и слезами, а огнестрельными ранами.
***************************************
А зачем?
Лучше у России купить.
Даже ИМХО дешевле будет.
А ежели окажется, что в отличие от хранцузского газа русский слезоточивый газ обладает так сказать побочными эффектами, так ещще лучше.
Ну кто ж виноват что франки поставлять отказались :-))
От Чингизид
К ash (21.12.2000 09:23:04)
Дата 21.12.2000 19:41:32

Англо-арабские штучки

Приветствую !

Вот нашел по теме и сабжу:

UK's CAABU Chairman Asks British Government To Ban EU Arms Exports To Israel

London Al-Hayah 09 Dec 00 p 9

[Article by Sir Cyril Townsend, Chairman of the Council for the Advancement
of Arab-British Understanding, CAABU: "What Britain Is Required To Do." ]

Since 28 September 2000, the unfortunate day of Ari'el Sharon's visit to the
Al-Haram al-Sharif [Jerusalem sanctuary enclosing Al-Aqsa Mosque] under the
protection of around 1,000 policemen, one has not been able to read the
newspapers without shock and disgust at the increasing violence and the
Israeli army's use of excessive and disproportionate violence in the
occupied Palestinian territories.

Israel continues to use tanks and fire missiles from helicopters, as well as
live ammunition and rubber bullets against the Palestinian civilians of the
intifadah and the armed members that have emerged among them with the
increasing violence. This violence led to the death of over 250
Palestinians, 60 of whom were children, while almost 7,000 people were
wounded too.

The Israeli snipers open fire on the demonstrators with guns fitted with
silencers, targeting even children. The instructions the snipers have are to
target the upper part of the body. Reports say that 30 percent of the
wounded will be handicapped for the rest of their lives. Just imagine their
painful futures.

This organized violence imposed on the region for over two months comes
against a well-known backdrop. It happens, first and foremost, against the
continuous expropriation of Palestinian territories in the West Bank to
build and expand the illegal settlements, as well as to open the circular
roads [around the settlements] and set up military positions. Israel
continues to impose a ban on trade and movement of the Palestinians among
their towns and cities, and when crossing the borders. In addition, the
shelling of Palestinian homes continues. We must also not forget that 1,600
Palestinians are still being tortured in Israeli prisons without trial.

The confirmation of these events has not been restricted to journalists who
provided a lot of incontrovertible evidence about Israel's human rights'
violations. Organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch,
and Law and Justice have also done the same thing. In addition, a number of
consuls in East Jerusalem submitted reports about this matter, including the
British Consul General in Jerusalem Robin Kelly. Kelly leads a group of
professional diplomats who are conducting supervision missions in parts of
the Palestinian areas and working in coordination with the other diplomatic
teams.

The clear reality is that the Palestinian territories are witnessing
tremendous violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949. The United
Kingdom was right when it supported Security Council Resolution 1322, which
calls on Israel, the occupying power, to show strict adherence to its duties
and responsibilities according to the Fourth Geneva Convention regarding the
protection of civilians during war.

Israel has ignored these duties and responsibilities both before and after
the Resolution was issued. In the United Kingdom's capacity as a major
signatory of the Geneva Convention, it is its legal responsibility to do
something to protect these civilians. If Britain does not carry out this
duty, then this will diminish the status of the charter. The question is:
How ugly must the violations be before Britain and others make any move? And
will other countries be allowed to carry out such practices [and
violations]?

Dr. Nabil Sha'th, member of the Palestinian Authority, is trying to apply
pressure on the British Government to deploy UN and multinational forces in
the Palestinian territories. It is a reasonable request, but it is difficult
to imagine that there is a government that would willingly deploy its forces
between Palestinians and Israelis. We can only point out with great regret
the ineffectiveness of the Scandinavian monitors that were deployed in
Hebron after the Ibrahimi Mosque massacre in 1994.

The friends of the Arabs in Britain are asking the Department of Foreign
Affairs to exert efforts to impose a ban on the export of weapons and
military equipment from the European Union and the Commonwealth countries to
Israel. The main source of weapons for Israel is the United States.
Nevertheless, the ban directs a clear message, just as the withdrawal of the
Egyptian Ambassador in Israel sent a strong message, albeit rather late, to
Israel and its supporters.

Irrespective of all that is said about such steps lacking any practical
significance, they remain, to say the least, better than standing back with
arms crossed. As for the Palestinians, they are facing a de facto arms
embargo because Israel controls the borders.

The Middle East Council asked the three major parties in the House of
Commons to suspend the trade agreement between the EU and Israel based on
article two of the agreement, one of its main articles stipulating abidance
to the human rights regulations, while the violation of these rights was,
even before 28 September, the rule not the exception in Israel's behavior.
There is a similar text on which the British Foreign Affairs Department
focuses on in the trade agreement between the EU and Syria.

It is likely that the Palestinian crisis will escalate during the coming few
months. There is also a great possibility that Israel will try to retrieve
certain regions in the West Bank it had handed over to the PA in accordance
with the Oslo Agreement. So far, Israel does not seem to understand that
there is no military solution to this intifadah, which is supported by the
vast majority of the people.

[Description of Source: London Al-Hayah in Arabic -- Influential Saudi-owned
London daily providing independent coverage of Arab and international
issues; commentaries occasionally critical of US policy.]


C u
От Чингизид
К ash (21.12.2000 09:23:04)
Дата 21.12.2000 19:34:03

Re: французские штучки

Приветствую !

> Приветствую!
> Спокойно -эти самые хранцузы периодически
>пытаются поиграться в великую державу.

а тут не только французы - тут "общемировая тенденция" намечается - взять под контроль (в очередной раз :) торговлю ВВТ и мунициями...

>в этом случае, отказа поставки газовых
>гранат, они идут по протоптанной дорожке.
> Нам то от этого вреда нет,

от газа конкретно может быть и нет, а вот дальше будет сложнее - если эта вышеописанная тенденция получит реальные обоснования...

>а вот их дружкам-арабам придется за это расплачиваться не соплями и слезами, а огнестрельными ранами.

Не думаю, что применение/не применение/ огнестрельного оружия зависит от французов - это скорее от Вас зависит (от арабов тоже)...

> Вообще Франция,скажем так, периодически
>пытается влезть в калашный ряд свинячьим
>рылом -т.е. еще разок доказать арабам, что
>она какой-никакой, а их лучший друг и за-
>щитник. Главный фокус она проделала в 1967
>году, когда обьявила эмбарго на поставку
>оружия Израилю. А дело было как раз в
>шестидневную войну. Впрочем, французкое
>эмбарго только стимулировало развитие изра
>ильской военной промышленности.

Пример ЮАР таков же...

C u
От Чингизид
К Чингизид (19.12.2000 21:48:13)
Дата 19.12.2000 21:49:44

...россиянам и КНРофилам :)

Russia Resumes Military-Technical Cooperation With Iran

CEP20001213000342 Moscow Ekspert in Russian 04 Dec 00 P 70

[Article by Oleg Leonov: "Expert Politics--Double Strike. Arms Exports to Iran Will Help Moscow Deal With Paris Club"]

[FBIS Translated Text]

Effective 1 December Russia has resumed full-scale military-technical cooperation (VTS) with Iran. The new Russian government has decided to annul the five-year-old agreement concluded within the framework of the activity of the Gore-Chernomyrdin intergovernmental commission. Under this agreement Russia promised to limit deliveries of conventional weapons to Iran under Soviet contracts from 1989-1991 and not to conclude new agreements.

Vice Premier Ilya Klebanov has already announced that Russia is prepared to deliver the entire range of conventional weapons to Iran. Possibly before the end of the year Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev will travel to Tehran. In response Washington has already threatened to impose economic sanctions against Moscow.

From all appearances, the painful reaction from Bill Clinton's administration is explained by the fact that with Russian arms Iran will be able to reinforce its control over the routes for transporting Near Eastern oil to the United States and Europe and thus will indirectly affect world oil prices. And for Russia exporting arms to Iran is advantageous in that it will help make it easier to live through the "peak situation" in the payment of the foreign debt expected to come in 2001.

Achilles' Heel

At first glance it is quite impossible to understand how the scandal between Moscow and Washington actually flared up. The Gore-Chernomyrdin agreement, in the words of the director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Policies (Tsentr AST), Ruslan Pukhov, has no legal force and is a kind of "gentlemen's agreement." When one of the parties decides that the agreement is no longer in its interests, it has the right to withdraw unilaterally.

Moreover, the American statement that "the growing Iranian military power presents a threat to its neighbors in the region," is completely unfounded. After the eight-year-long Iranian-Iraqi war Iran had been deprived of 60 percent of its modern weapons systems, which had either been destroyed or were out of commission as a result of natural wear and tear. The Iranian Air Force, according to information from the Tsentr AST, now has only 30 fourth-generation aircraft that are capable of striking remote enemy territories. The situation is no better in the Navy. Iran has at its disposal five large submarines of American and British production purchased before the 1979 revolution. On the whole arms deliveries from Russia are a "drop in the bucket" and cannot sharply impact the Iranian army's combat readiness.

The problem for the Americans, however, is that certain models of Russian military equipment could change the status quo that exists in the Persian Gulf region. Iran could well purchase Russian antiship systems such as the Moskit and Yakhont. At the same time, according to information from Tsentr AST, Tehran definitely intends to acquire various antiaircraft defense means--from mobile types like the Igla and Dzhigit to the S-300 PMU. And the last is capable of providing a reliable "cover" for antiship systems. Some of the systems they have inquired about could easily cover the entire Strait of Ormuz, through which the most of the Near Eastern oil for export passes (for example, the range of the Moskit complex is 120 kilometers and the Yakhont--300 kilometers). The existence of these missiles in the Iranian arsenal is an effective and fantastically inexpensive means of reducing the significance of the American fleet, which is permanently present in the Persian Gulf. By taking advantage of this circumstance Iran will probably be able to exert pressure on the world oil market, which very attentively keeps track of the geopolitical situation in the Persian Gulf.

Debt Bonus

And so this is a matter not only of the $300 million (approximately 10 percent of Russia's arms exports this year) that, according to Tsentr AST estimates, Russia could receive from military and technical cooperation with Iran each year. Even modest amounts of deliveries could make it easier for Russia to service its foreign debt next year. After all, most likely it will still be necessary to pay the 5 billion in debts to Paris Club of creditors, which were not "planned for" in the 2001 budget. The modern Russian missiles Iran has placed at the exit from the Persian Gulf will probably be an additional risk factor for oil traders, which will keep oil prices at an "elevated" level. Speaking hypothetically, five "extra" dollars per barrel multiplied by the volume of Russian oil exports would produce a total of $5 billion. Nor should one forget about natural gas prices either, which are linked to oil market indicators. This year, for example, the rise in oil prices made it possible for Gazprom to increase its revenues in Europe by $4 billion. The situation with the high cost of hydrocarbons will be advantageous not just in Russia but also in Iran itself, where oil exports account for up to 70 percent of all budget revenues. Tehran's desire to update its army's weapons promises other strategic advantages for Russia as well. In Ruslan Pukhov's opinion, winning the modest Iranian arms market could significantly improve our positions in negotiations with the main importers of Russian weapons--India and China.

As concerns sanctions imposed by the United States, theoretically they could cause a certain amount of economic harm. The United States is Russia's third largest trading partner and, more important, has a decisive influence on such international organizations as the WTO [World Trade Organization], the IMF [International Monetary Fund], and that same Paris Club of creditors. Here, possibly, it would not be a bad idea to gain the support of the Europeans--Germany, France, and Italy--which are now also trying to consolidate their position in the Persian Gulf at the expense of their "American allies."

[Description of Source: Moscow Ekspert in Russian -- Weekly business magazine known for its reporting and analysis of financial-industrial groups and their political interests, partly owned by Vladimir Potanin.]


Singapore Straits Times
December 16, 2000

China Buys 28 Soviet Fighters

By Agence France-Presse

MOSCOW - Russia will sell 28 Su-27UBK jet fighter training planes to China over the next three years, the Itar-Tass news agency reported quoting military sources.

Eight of the planes will be delivered to China this month, with 10 more delivered over the next two years, the source said, adding that the deal was within the framework of the 1999 Sino-Russian inter-governmental accord.

Russian air force chief Anatoly Kornukov is due in China on Monday for a four-day visit, the RIA-Novosti news agency said.

The two sides will discuss delivery of Su-30 planes and Su-30MK multi-functional jet fighters, which the Chinese have ordered, the agency reported, quoting a source in Russia's aviation and space service.

The delegation will also negotiate sale of up to four Russian A-50 radar planes to China.

China opted for the Russian jets after Israel, under pressure from Washington, withdrew in July from a sale to Beijing of one of its Falcon radar planes, which are equipped with the Awacs early warning system.
От Чингизид
К Чингизид (19.12.2000 21:49:44)
Дата 19.12.2000 21:50:31

...американам и КНРфобам :)

December 18, 2000
From: James N. Markels, Assistant Director of Public Affairs Phone: 202-789-5256 Fax: 202-842-0779

How the incoming Bush administration deals with the high-risk issue of China's relationship with Taiwan-especially given America's ongoing "commitment" to help defend Taiwan in the event of military attack-will be a top foreign policy task of President-elect George W. Bush and his designated secretary of state, Colin Powell.

Maintaining the status quo of a "security guarantee" for Taiwan is not in America's interests, argues Cato defense scholar Ted Galen Carpenter in the following op-ed. The prudent option for America is to allow Taiwan to purchase more (and newer) weapons to defend itself.

Although this article is being distributed to newspaper editorial pages as an op-ed piece, we thought it might be of interest to you as well. Feel free to use quotes from it. If you'd like to discuss the topic further with Carpenter, be sure to call him directly at (202) 789-5235. You may also be interested in the Cato book "China's Future: Constructive Partner or Emerging Threat?" that Carpenter was the coeditor of; call me for a review copy. And if you'd like to schedule an interview, please give me a call.

INCREASE ARMS SALES TO TAIWAN

by Ted Galen Carpenter

As tensions continue to simmer between the People's Republic of China and Taiwan, the Bush administration will come under increasing pressure to provide Taiwan with a firm security guarantee. That could be dangerous and put the United States directly at risk. Instead, the United States should increase arms sales to Taiwan and encourage other countries to do the same.

One of Beijing's top priorities is to cut off Taiwan's access to sophisticated military hardware. It's working. As late as 1991, some 20 countries supplied Taiwan with arms. Today, the United States is virtually the only supplier. Israel was once a leading supplier but stopped in 1992 when it opened diplomatic relations with the PRC. Israel today is an important supplier of cutting-edge military equipment and technology ... to China. Germany agreed to stop arms sales to Taiwan in 1993. France, which had sold 60 Mirage fighters to Taiwan, stopped in 1998.

Chinese officials make it clear to countries with arms industries that "good" relations and lucrative economic ties with the PRC depend upon those countries' willingness to end military sales to Taiwan. Few governments contemplate defying Beijing's wishes.

Even the United States has bowed to the pressure. Although the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act obligates Washington to provide Taiwan with defensive weapons, Washington's performance has been erratic. Indeed, in the August 1982 U.S.-PRC communique, the Reagan administration promised to decrease and ultimately eliminate arms sales to Taiwan. American officials have insisted that the pledge was contingent on Beijing's commitment to avoid using force to resolve the Taiwan issue. Chinese leaders interpret the communique provision as an ironclad, unconditional U.S. pledge to phase out arms shipments.

Washington today is wary of Taipei's arms purchase requests for fear of angering Beijing. The Clinton administration's decision this year reflected the timidity. Washington agreed to sell Taiwan a long- range early warning radar system, advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles (AMRAAMs), Javelin anti-tank missiles, and Maverick air-to-surface missiles. But Taiwan didn't get most of these items, including the centerpiece of its request, the Arleigh Burke-class Aegis destroyers, as well as diesel submarines and P-3 Orion patrol aircraft. Indeed, among the top six items on Taipei's list only one-Maverick missiles-was approved. Washington did sell AMRAAMs to Taiwan. But the fine print in the deal says that the missiles stay in America unless Washington releases them in response to an emergency. In other words: After you're attacked we'll let you have a weapon to defend yourself.

Such timidity plays into Beijing's strategy to isolate, weaken and ultimately strangle Taiwan. If Taipei is to deter the PRC from using coercion on the issue of reunification, Taiwan must be able to purchase modern armaments, now and in the future.

Beijing claims that if Taiwan agrees to reunification, the Taiwanese will be able to retain their government, economic system and military for an extended period. But this last pledge is meaningless unless Taiwan has access to modern weapons. Otherwise, the Taiwanese will be in the same position as Poland in 1939, which had the best horse cavalry in Europe. That did little good against Nazi Panzer tanks.

This does not mean that Washington should approve every request. Taipei's desire for diesel submarines, for instance, seems ill advised and a waste of money. (Taiwan's military would be better off increasing the number of P-3 aircraft for anti-submarine missions in its next request.) But U.S. officials should approve most weapons systems Taiwan seeks and stop worrying about whether such actions will annoy Beijing. As far as the PRC is concerned, any arms sale to Taiwan is unacceptable.

In its own self interest, Washington should be more open to Taiwan's arms requests. A well-armed Taiwan is better able to deter Beijing from contemplating the use of force to achieve reunification. Conversely, a Taiwan armed only with obsolete weaponry may prove an irresistible temptation to hardliners in Beijing. An effective Taiwanese deterrent makes it less likely that the United States will ever be called on to rescue Taiwan. That is definitely in America's best interest.

# #

#Ted Galen Carpenter is vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute. His latest book, with James A. Dorn, is "China's Future: Constructive Partner or Emerging Threat?"