What's new

Argentina, China Could Jointly Develop Fighters

good for China. But nothing for Argentina. As UK will have 2 new AC with F35 on them. Which is specifically designed to fight beyond visual range warfare . If anyone who are blind to this prospective are either juvenile or don't want to have reality check.

Chinese gain are less in economy wise as again it's like soft loans but gains support of Argentina. They already have .

Let's see what pans out of it in 4-5 years . Many be access to their ports will be Chinese aim. With unclesam at their doorstep it's nothing but be a dream. China always targeting a failed state so they can dump their cheap goods and keep their workers out of protesting .

J-10 fits their bill quite well, and perhaps can take on EFT if deployed in numbers.

In what world UK will sell EFT to kill them self ?
 
. .
Chinese are looking at politics not finance. The 20 fighters won't even make a blip in Chinese economy. China is looking to counter USA. Like the US has its "yes man" in SEA the Chinese are propping up their own satellite states in south America which was considered an exclusive US zone especially after the Monroe doctrine.

The Chinese would have given the weapons for free, but that would ring alarm bells in Washington. Hence the veil of trade is implied, the level of Chinese influence in South America is more important for China than the money for Chinese weapons.

England will be the proverbial sacrificial goat. It is a matter of time before England loses out on the Falklands. The real fight will start between China and USA.


Do not agree with that especially the last part. As far as realpolitik is concerned the Americas and the British could well be a single entity. China muddying waters in latin America would be act as a catalyst for the big brother to step in and handle matters if push came to shove. There will never be a Falklands ver. 2 conflict in the region, especially if the Chinese have a finger in the pie.

The concerned civilians have thumpingly rejected Argentinian governance. The best Argentina can hope for at this stage would be to wait it out and continue a process of dialogue with the Brits and eventually extract an amicable outcome.

sure

What Indian view about China selling fighters to Argentina?

Makes for sound business and political sense for China. Though it does give Argentina a greater military edge in the region, I however don't really see how it would help them arrive to a solution for the Falklands issue. A military solution is not viable or conceivable anymore.
 
.
sure

What Indian view about China selling fighters to Argentina?

I support that. The colonial attitude of the english have gone far enough. Time to end them one way or the other.

Do not agree with that especially the last part. As far as realpolitik is concerned the Americas and the British could well be a single entity. China muddying waters in latin America would be act as a catalyst for the big brother to step in and handle matters if push came to shove. There will never be a Falklands ver. 2 conflict in the region, especially if the Chinese have a finger in the pie.

The concerned civilians have thumpingly rejected Argentinian governance. The best Argentina can hope for at this stage would be to wait it out and continue a process of dialogue with the Brits and eventually extract an amicable outcome

USA won't go to war against China for the sake of England just like USA did not go to war against Russia for the sake of Ukraine. A country will NEVER risk war for the sake of another.

USA in its current economic state cannot spar against China. The Chinese have supplied only aircraft and APC not some serious offensive weapons. USA will make some noise and complaints but that is all they will do. They already have too much to handle including a possible nuclear Iran. They won't be fighting for some colonial relic for the sake of UK.

The "concerned civilians" are all English who have no right to be there in the first place. One way or another England will lose on Falklands and it is a good thing.
 
.
USA won't go to war against China for the sake of England just like USA did not go to war against Russia for the sake of Ukraine. A country will NEVER risk war for the sake of another.

USA in its current economic state cannot spar against China. The Chinese have supplied only aircraft and APC not some serious offensive weapons. USA will make some noise and complaints but that is all they will do. They already have too much to handle including a possible nuclear Iran. They won't be fighting for some colonial relic for the sake of UK.

The "concerned civilians" are all English who have no right to be there in the first place. One way or another England will lose on Falklands and it is a good thing.

I understand that is your personal opinion and I respect that. However I am talking about the realpolitiks here. Ukraine is not England and Argentina is in Americas own backyard.

And we all know what happens when America perceives a threat matrix evolving within its area of influence ....

Hint - CUBA
 
.
I understand that is your personal opinion and I respect that. However I am talking about the realpolitiks here. Ukraine is not England and Argentina is in Americas own backyard.

And we all know what happens when America perceives a threat matrix evolving within its area of influence ....

Hint - CUBA

USA has more to lose in eastern Europe than in South America. What do you expect US will do, mobilise its navy in support for UK and jeopardise its economy which is heavily dependent on China? For what, an insignificant island?

Cuba was during the heights of cold war when USSR stationed nuclear capable ballistic missiles. Cuba is within shouting distance of USA. Argentina is far off and APCs and FC-1 aircraft don't threaten USA.

China with its economy is more valuable to US than UK with its colonial baggage. Who is going to manufacture US goods at dirt cheap prices if US declares war on China for the sake of UK?

It is REALPOLITIK that dictates US turn a blind eye on Argentina. Ukraine crisis and a possible Iranian flare-up doubled by present economic instability in US means USA will NEVER go to war against China at least in the foreseeable future.

Refer to the Suez canal crisis, USA happily abandoned both France and UK when it suited her interests. There are no permanent allies or enemies in politics.
 
.
USA has more to lose in eastern Europe than in South America. What do you expect US will do, mobilise its navy in support for UK and jeopardise its economy which is heavily dependent on China? For what, an insignificant island?

Cuba was during the heights of cold war when USSR stationed nuclear capable ballistic missiles. Cuba is within shouting distance of USA. Argentina is far off and APCs and FC-1 aircraft don't threaten USA.

China with its economy is more valuable to US than UK with its colonial baggage. Who is going to manufacture US goods at dirt cheap prices if US declares war on China for the sake of UK?

It is REALPOLITIK that dictates US turn a blind eye on Argentina. Ukraine crisis and a possible Iranian flare-up doubled by present economic instability in US means USA will NEVER go to war against China at least in the foreseeable future.

Let me break it down for us so that it becomes easier for us.

I am sure we both agree that overt conflict (that discounts the guerrilla covert operations that Russia that is waging in Ukraine), involving the armed forces of two countries is a thing of the past. The last Indo-Pak conflict was a covert operation by Pakistan. You don't declare war on each other anymore in this time and age. Argentina is a major non-Nato ally, the largest trading partner and is an important cog in the wheel ensuring America's energy security.

So we can safely conclude that there will be no war. We can also safely conclude from the above that America will not allow Argentina to fall under the Sino-influence and create a precedence for other latin american countries to follow suit.

Britain on the other hand possibly shares the strongest bonds with America. They have similar security economic and realpolitik worldview as far as China or far that matter the rest of the world is concerned.

The key issue we are talking about here is influence. America is yet in its diminished form able to prevent a major conflict in the region and force both England and Argentina to approach the issue via diplomatic means. This is also in Americas favor as this approach effectively nullifies the military approach that the Chinese would bring into Argentina as baggage.
 
.
Let me break it down for us so that it becomes easier for us.

I am sure we both agree that overt conflict (that discounts the guerrilla covert operations that Russia that is waging in Ukraine), involving the armed forces of two countries is a thing of the past. The last Indo-Pak conflict was a covert operation by Pakistan. You don't declare war on each other anymore in this time and age. Argentina is a major non-Nato ally, the largest trading partner and is an important cog in the wheel ensuring America's energy security.

So we can safely conclude that there will be no war. We can also safely conclude from the above that America will not allow Argentina to fall under the Sino-influence and create a precedence for other latin american countries to follow suit.

Britain on the other hand possibly shares the strongest bonds with America. They have similar security economic and realpolitik worldview as far as China or far that matter the rest of the world is concerned.

The key issue we are talking about here is influence. America is yet in its diminished form able to prevent a major conflict in the region and force both England and Argentina to approach the issue via diplomatic means. This is also in Americas favor as this approach effectively nullifies the military approach that the Chinese would bring into Argentina as baggage.

You are making your own assumptions and believing in them.

The conflict in Ukraine is far from over, if things go on like this for another year (very likely) then Ukraine itself will be over. There is a difference between attacking states like iraq which has no military and a country like China. Wars are not declared and fought at the drop of the hat.

For Argentina the malvinas is as crucial to them as Kashmir. They may or may not go for war but the active Chinese backing will surely give them a voice at international forums. Why will Argentina ditch that support for US? And Argentina is whose largest trading partner?

England is a relic of the past. They don't have the economic strength or the military might to enforce their decisions like USA does. During Falklands war also UK had to seek permission from US.

Let me make it even more simple for you. South Korea is a very important ally for USA. The main enemy of south korea is north korea, and everybody including US knows China is actively supporting NK regime, has US declared war or sanctions against China? NK has threatened SK, Japan and USA. What has US done against China?

Only thing USA will do is hold talks and it is unlikely that China will back off because nobody likes giving up gains. In that case UK, can do nothing and USA will do nothing. USA is not the bodyguard of England.
 
.
You are making your own assumptions and believing in them.

The conflict in Ukraine is far from over, if things go on like this for another year (very likely) then Ukraine itself will be over. There is a difference between attacking states like iraq which has no military and a country like China. Wars are not declared and fought at the drop of the hat.

For Argentina the malvinas is as crucial to them as Kashmir. They may or may not go for war but the active Chinese backing will surely give them a voice at international forums. Why will Argentina ditch that support for US? And Argentina is whose largest trading partner?

England is a relic of the past. They don't have the economic strength or the military might to enforce their decisions like USA does. During Falklands war also UK had to seek permission from US.

Let me make it even more simple for you. South Korea is a very important ally for USA. The main enemy of south korea is north korea, and everybody including US knows China is actively supporting NK regime, has US declared war or sanctions against China? NK has threatened SK, Japan and USA. What has US done against China?

Only thing USA will do is hold talks and it is unlikely that China will back off because nobody likes giving up gains. In that case UK, can do nothing and USA will do nothing. USA is not the bodyguard of England.

Well in a nutshell, what i wanted to say was this. There is no question of war. Period.

Argentina is very important for America in the Latin american context. America will do everything in its power to prevent Argentina from falling under the Sino-influence, barring actual conflict with China.

At the same time however, without Chinese/Soviet help with equipment and support, war with Britain would not be be an option for Argentina.

Let me give you an example, our example to put it simply.

China is firmly in the Pakistani camp. Does it support Pakistan it times of war over Kashmir? (Read 1971, Kargil ..)
Nope, it influences both the governments to approach the matter diplomatically. America favors us but does the same.

Great powers do not go to war with each other anymore. They however fight with each other economically, diplomatically and otherwise to gain maximum leverage with other countries to undermine the interests of their rivals.

That is precisely why America will (again diplomatically and otherwise) prevent any activity that might remove Argentina from its influence and into a rival camp.
 
.
Well in a nutshell, what i wanted to say was this. There is no question of war. Period.

Argentina is very important for America in the Latin american context. America will do everything in its power to prevent Argentina from falling under the Sino-influence, barring actual conflict with China.

At the same time however, without Chinese/Soviet help with equipment and support, war with Britain would not be be an option for Argentina.

Let me give you an example, our example to put it simply.

China is firmly in the Pakistani camp. Does it support Pakistan it times of war over Kashmir? (Read 1971, Kargil ..)
Nope, it influences both the governments to approach the matter diplomatically. America favors us but does the same.

Great powers do not go to war with each other anymore. They however fight with each other economically, diplomatically and otherwise to gain maximum leverage with other countries to undermine the interests of their rivals.

That is precisely why America will (again diplomatically and otherwise) prevent any activity that might remove Argentina from its influence and into a rival camp.

There won't be any war by China or USA. Argentina is something else.

Who told you China will fight on behalf of Argentina? Chinese will sit back, relax and watch the fun. They will not involve themselves in the war unless for some very persuasive compulsions. China is arming Pakistan with tanks, planes, nukes, submarines, ships, missiles to make Pakistan able to fight wars. Is China fighting for Pakistan? No.

If Argentina goes to war it is Argentina's responsibility, nobody will blame China. In Falklands war Argentina had French excocet missile, did anybody accuse France?

You have missed the entire point here.

China wants a base in South America. They zero in on Argentina and sensing Argentina's pride they supply her with arms and promise of political support. Things Argentina loves to hear. War or no war is not Chinese problem. Secondly using Argentina as a base they will expand into south America and hence no amount of US pressure will make them move out.

With Chinese backing Argentina will grow more vocal about malvinas and that is problem enough for UK.
 
.
There won't be any war by China or USA. Argentina is something else.

Who told you China will fight on behalf of Argentina? Chinese will sit back, relax and watch the fun. They will not involve themselves in the war unless for some very persuasive compulsions. China is arming Pakistan with tanks, planes, nukes, submarines, ships, missiles to make Pakistan able to fight wars. Is China fighting for Pakistan? No.

If Argentina goes to war it is Argentina's responsibility, nobody will blame China. In Falklands war Argentina had French excocet missile, did anybody accuse France?

You have missed the entire point here.

China wants a base in South America. They zero in on Argentina and sensing Argentina's pride they supply her with arms and promise of political support. Things Argentina loves to hear. War or no war is not Chinese problem. Secondly using Argentina as a base they will expand into south America and hence no amount of US pressure will make them move out.

With Chinese backing Argentina will grow more vocal about malvinas and that is problem enough for UK.

Exactly, agreed with all of the above and that's precisely what I was to trying to convey.

My contention however is that America will try its utmost to prevent China from interfering in Latin American politics because of the ramifications you have so lucidly pointed out above.

I personally believe that they (America) will succeed in keeping our Chinese friends out they would be compelled to do so, simply because the import of having Chinese influence in this region would cause a serious upset in their perceived threat matrix.
 
.
Exactly, agreed with all of the above and that's precisely what I was to trying to convey.

My contention however is that America will try its utmost to prevent China from interfering in Latin American politics because of the ramifications you have so lucidly pointed out above.

I personally believe that they (America) will succeed in keeping our Chinese friends out they would be compelled to do so, simply because the import of having Chinese influence in this region would cause a serious upset in their perceived threat matrix.

In its present condition America can do nothing. I hope chinese succeed in latin America. The Americans have a resurgent Russia getting aggressive in eastern Europe and a strong China who is already overtaking US economy and industry. Europe is an artifact now with no single European country having a strong military or economy (excluding nukes).

America will need allies and here India will benefit. America cannot fight China and Russia at the same time. They will have to prop up India.
 
.
Careful what you say :mad:.....................it was Argentina who were the aggressors and invaded the Falklands.

Anyway, the reality of the situation is that Argentina is so broke, that there is virtually no budget for their military.

From an Argentinian point of view, the Chinese fighters would be I think the best option for them, rather than either the Swedish or Russian fighters they have already considered................but would the Chinese who are cautious, sensible business people, do a deal with a regime who has a history of not paying its customers?
IDK the history of the Falklands War and frankly I don't care. :S Fact and my point is Britain successfully stopped a deal between Swedish company Saab and Argentina in buying the Gripen fighters. Britain interfered in a deal that they have no authority in. If Britain stopped a deal of Eurofighter that would be acceptable since it's a joint dev of UK. So Argentina retaliated. As a western country you don't want another western country's cordial relationship with China specially considering China's global domineering policy and Argentina's depressing economy. A complete lack of right there.
 
.
London's successful blocking of the Gripen fighter sale to Argentina appears to have done little to stop Buenos Aires' determination to replace its aging attack and fighter fleet. Nor has it halted its threats to use force to "liberate" the Malvinas (Falkland) Islands from British control.

In October, Argentina's Defense Minister Agustin Rossi announced plans to procure 14 Saab Gripen fighters to replace its single-engine Dassault Mirage III/5, which saw combat during the 1982 Falklands War.

However, London quickly killed the deal. When that was nixed, Argentine's President Cristina Kirchner traveled to Beijing, Feb. 2-5, and announced Argentina and China were creating a working group to facilitate the transfer of a variety of military equipment, including fighters. To further sweeten the pot, China takes Argentina's position on the Falkland Islands and has compared the dispute to China's sovereignty claims over disputed islands in the East and South China Seas.

Two types of Chinese fighters are candidates: The FC-1/JF-17 and the J-10, both built by Chengdu Aircraft Corporation (CAC).

The JF-17 is the Pakistan-built variant of the FC-1. Both fighters have their advantages and disadvantages, said Doug Barrie, the senior air analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. The Chengdu FC-1 represents the cheaper and less-capable combat aircraft, he said. Argentina could purchase significantly more FC-1s, "although in capability terms this would not represent as great an increment in overall performance compared to the J-10," he said.

The Argentinean Air Force could face difficulties acclimating to non-Western equipment, but "we should understand that such a sale will have a special political importance for the Chinese. It brings prestige and opens doors to new combat aircraft sales to the region," said Vasily Kashin, a China military specialist at Moscow's Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies. "They will likely provide good financing conditions and will probably pay special attention to subsequent maintenance and training work."

Logistics and follow-on support is still a question, and China's reputation with past fighter exports is dubious, said Roger Cliff, nonresident senior fellow, Asia Security Initiative, Atlantic Council. He said Argentina might have no choice in the matter since London will no doubt block any Western fighter sale. Russia could also be a contender, but also has a poor history in fighter support, Cliff said.

However, China's JF-17 fighter program in Pakistan has proven a reasonably successful test bed for joint fighter production programs. The Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) and CAC developed the JF-17 and CAC's FC-1 in a joint program begun in 1995. Like Argentina, the Pakistan JF-17 replaced its Mirage III/5 fighters.

Richard Fisher, a senior fellow with the US-based International Assessment and Strategy Center, said that in 2013 CAC was in discussions with the Argentine aerospace company Fabrica Argentina de Aviones to co-build the FC-1 in a similar fashion as the CAC/PAC deal. Fabrica did not respond to requests for information on the issue.

China has been working hard to placate Buenos Aires. In 2011, Fabrica and the Aviation Industry Corp. of China (AVIC) signed a co-production deal for the CZ-11 single-engine light multi-purpose helicopter.

Future cooperation could cover co-production with China's Norinco for 100 eight-wheeled VN1 eight-wheeled armored personnel carriers, and joint development with China's Shipbuilding Corp. for five corvettes modeled after the P18 (to be dubbed the Malvinas-class after the Falklands dispute).

These agreements could complicate London's ability to protect the Falklands from another invasion.

Fisher said that with aerial refueling, which will be available from Argentina's new Embraer KC390s, "the FC-1 is able to carry two CM400AKG-derived hypersonic anti-ship missiles out to a reasonable strike range." With the element of surprise and a minimum of 20 fighters, "there is the potential they could launch up to 40 of these missiles at the likely single aircraft carrier that Britain would send to defend the Falklands from a second attack."

London does not have an aircraft carrier that can operate fixed-wing aircraft. The famed AV-8 Harrier jump jetss that made their name during the Falklands War were retired in 2010. However, two 70,000-ton Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers are under construction, with the first to be completed in 2017 with an air wing operational in 2020, Cliff said. The carriers will be equipped with short take-off and vertical landing F-35B joint strike fighters. "So the UK might be especially vulnerable at the moment, but that situation will not last long."

Fisher said the issue is more complicated today than it was during the war.

The other new element is that Argentina and China are now partners in space cooperation. China is building a strategic Southern Hemisphere tracking and control facility, and Argentina could get access to China's growing surveillance satellite network.

The scenarios Fisher paints are dark. "What if Venezuela gave Argentine aircraft base access to mount an early strike against a British task force? This could become a realistic option with Chinese ISR. This Chinese-Argentine military relationship is just beginning to blossom. Anti-ship ballistic missiles, over-the-horizon radar, and submarines could quickly join the list of possible Chinese exports.

"Look, there does not have to be a second war," Fisher continued. "If China sells Argentina enough weapons, a future British government could opt for a lengthy face-saving Hong Kong-like transfer. But in Latin America, such a 'surrender' would be viewed as much a Chinese as an Argentine victory."

The political and economic consequences for Argentina of making another grab for the Falklands would be severe, and even threatening to do so would not be in the country's interest. But that does not mean it could not happen, "as people in the country are still passionate about the issue", Cliff said.

"Argentina made things pretty dicey for the UK back in 1982 and probably could do so again, especially if they prepared carefully for it."

Argentina, China Could Jointly Develop Fighters


ultimately China got a partner with same technological competence like we have Russia and US now. Best luck to both the countries to build fighter jets. The new Jet shall be as great as the fighters of J series.
 
. .

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom