Saturday, 24 August 2019
logo
Up-to-the-minute perspectives on defence, security and peace
issues from and for policy makers and opinion leaders.
        



dv-header-dday
     |      View our Twitter page at twitter.com/defenceredbox     |     

By Adam Dempsey, Research Associate in Residence, UK Defence Forum

Russia's search an alternative buyer for S-300 air-defence missile batteries originally earmarked for Iran appears to have been hastily resolved. On 18th October Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez announced to journalists in Kiev, Ukraine, that his country intends to purchase five S-300s. The deal is expected to cost Venezuela $800 million. Russia's compliance with United Nations Resolution 1929 vindicates international consensus that Iran would use the S-300s to protect nuclear facilities. As it is highly unlikely that Venezuela has a similar nuclear programme the sale of the S-300s to Caracas should be comparatively easy. Yet why would Venezuela need to make such a purchase?

An overview of the S-300 suggests that Venezuela will be purchasing one of the most formidable air-defence systems currently available. The S-300 is capable of engaging six incoming targets simultaneously at ranges of up to 300km. According to the Federation of American Scientists the S-300 is also able to counter intensive air raids at low-to-high altitudes. The system can also be used to target low altitude objects such as cruise missiles and possibly to intercept strategic ballistic missiles.

Should Iran have completed the purchase of the S-300s the dynamics of the Middle East security environment would also have changed. As Iran's outdated air defences remain in place both the United States and Israel can retain the option of a pre-emptive strike on Tehran's nuclear facilities. Whilst the deployment of S-300s would do little to deter a larger-scale American bombardment it is likely that Tel Aviv would reassess its options. Yet this makes Chavez's decision to purchase the S-300s all the more mystifying.


Not only is it blindingly obvious that Chavez faces little in the way external security challenges, relations with his fiercest local rival have recently improved. Caracas's diplomatic ties with Bogota improved almost as quickly as they were severed after the then-President Alvaro Uribe's declaration to the Organisation of American States that Venezuela was harbouring terrorists. By mid-August full relations had been restored and on the 3rd November Chavez signed trade agreements with his counterpart Juan Manuel Santos.

Colombia's position as Venezuela's second largest trading partner was a likely determinant of restored diplomatic relations. Of even greater significance are suggestions that Colombia may not ratify a military accord with the United States. Signed in October 2009, the accord built upon existing cooperation to allow the US military access to specific Colombian facilities. Chavez's response was that the accord permitted the United States to increase its regional military presence and carry out covert activities against countries politically at odds with Washington.

What Chavez overlooked was that the accord actually granted the US access to facilities to undertake mutually agreed activities with Colombia. Further, the accord did not alter the personnel ceiling of 800 military and 600 civilian staff allowed to use the facilities. Yet Chavez appeared quick to label Santos's decision not to process the accord as a victory for 'rationality, common sense and responsibility.' Whilst improved diplomatic relations may have played a part, it is likely that a High Court decision requiring the accord to be ratified by Congress was more influential.

Whilst any kind of attack on Venezuela remains inconceivable, the question still remains: why does Chavez need to make as bold a purchase as the S-300? Should the deal be completed Venezuela will be consolidating ever closer military ties with Russia. In September 2009, for example, Russia granted Venezuela a $2.2 billion loan for the purchase of military equipment. The deal includes 92 T-72 main battle tanks and 12 9K58 Smerch multiple rocket systems. It is speculated that Venezuela has also purchased 12 Tor-1 air-defence systems with Russian loans. Whilst the Tor-1 is less formidable than the S-300, the purchase of the latter seems extreme considering Venezuela does not need such an extensive air-defence capability.

Instead, Chavez's proposed purchase of the S-300s should be regarded as a rather expensive addition to his anti-Washington rhetoric. From the outset of his presidency Chavez has presented himself as a talisman for those who accuse the United States of neglecting its own backyard. In the case of Venezuela, Chavez has used the excesses of the corrupt oil industry to embark upon social and economic programmes that challenge the influence of Washington over his country. Closer military ties with Russia also serve this purpose. Whilst joint Russian-Venezuelan naval exercises in the Caribbean in 2008 can be viewed as Moscow's response to Washington's support for Georgia, the opportunity to annoy the United States would not have been lost on Chavez. Purchasing weapons originally meant for Iran merely adds to that!

What the sale of the S-300s to Venezuela means for Russia will be the subject of further analysis coming soon.

Comments 

 
0 #5 Robert Crowcroft 2010-11-11 15:03
Good points Adam: as I said, I'm a bit stumped too! Could be as simple as some official receiving a greasing for recommending a particular system!
Quote
 
 
0 #4 Adam Dempsey 2010-11-10 16:14
I think a Venezuelan nuke programme will remain the stuff of rumours for a long time. Argentina/Brazil worked hard to end their respective programmes, and I dont think they would tolerate Venezuela leading the way in developing a Latin American bomb.
Also as the United States continues to account for around 30% of Venezuelan trade, any programme would need to factor in the effect of US-led sanctions on Caracas's economy. True other countries may fill the gap, but would Chavez want to feel so regionally isolated as a result of a nuke programme? Bolivia and Cuba don't seem such reliable allies when the weight of the Western Hemisphere is probably coming down on you.
Quote
 
 
0 #3 Robert Crowcroft 2010-11-09 19:00
Not sure if I agree with this, but could it be a prelim to a nuke programme? There have often been rumours. An American attack is unthinkable (unless Chavez's flirtation with Hezbollah backfired on him and facilitated an attack inside the US), but he could see it as making himself secure from an airstrike (bear in mind the system can't detect the F22 or B2; maybe the F35 too; so his logic is wobbly).
Quote
 
 
0 #2 Adam Dempsey 2010-11-09 17:05
It certainly is plausible Robert. However as it's not nearly as 'hands on' as Chavez's Bolivarian militia/'weekend warriors' - or indeed as game changing as a nuke - I very much doubt that the S-300 will become a talismanic symbol of the struggle against the yankees. It's tempting to say that this is slightly more subtle. But then again when has Chavez been that!
Quote
 
 
0 #1 Robert Crowcroft 2010-11-09 11:22
Adam - might it be plausible that given the way in which Chavez has talked up a non-existent foreign threat to Venezuela [i.e. from the Americans], that this is just another means to demonstrate the gravity of the threat to the country, and by extension the imperative for him to lead/save it? If memory serves, he established a 100,000 strong militia of some kind (I forget the details) a year or two ago to ward of the 'Yankees'...
Quote
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh

Cookies
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on the Defence Viewpoints website. However, if you would like to, you can modify your browser so that it notifies you when cookies are sent to it or you can refuse cookies altogether. You can also delete cookies that have already been set. You may wish to visit www.aboutcookies.org which contains comprehensive information on how to do this on a wide variety of desktop browsers. Please note that you will lose some features and functionality on this website if you choose to disable cookies. For example, you may not be able to link into our Twitter feed, which gives up to the minute perspectives on defence and security matters.