That's not a risk in the China-Russia relationship.
Chinese military exports to other countries
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
Either buy from the Chinese or have no AWAC at all or have ones with much lower performance.
In the 2000s, or more specifically late 2000s, IIRC, Russia canceled and delayed sales and deliveries of turbofans from the AL-31 family to China, nominally in protest of alleged violations of Russian intellectual property rights, in particular of the Su-27 and its various subsystems.
Though from the Chinese perspective, the Russians were trying to pressure China into abandoning or neglecting domestic defense programs — that were allegedly built upon reverse engineering Russian defense systems and supposedly violating their intellectual property rights — so China will keep on buying Russian arms.
Instead of caving, the Chinese increased investments into domestic defense programs like the WS-10.
If Russia has played such games with China in the past, Russian policymakers or at least some of them inevitably operate under the assumption that their Chinese counterparts may "return the favor" one day.
China isn't petty. It's in its interest that the Russian military industrial complex operate smoothly and pose a credible threat to NATO. There would certainly be restrictions like Chinese components like advanced T/R modules only being used in domestic Russian systems and not exported (like Russia forbids China from exporting Flanker-derived aircraft) along with perhaps intrusive verification mechanisms.
It would be best if Russia just imported whole systems like the J-35A and KJ-500 from China, but that's not an option given Russian self-conception as a great power.
Russia is not Italy or the UK, it is the largest country on earth with its own established fighter design school that is only too happy to receive and execute orders. What it certainly doesn't need is an obsolete airframe that stupidly cloned US soapbox designs from the 90's thinking them advanced.
The journalist quack you cite is neither respected nor an expert, least of all on military matters.
Brookings, CFR, RUSI and their Yeltsinite wannabe ilk in Russia are not academic institutions, though they take great pains to pose as such. These are lobbyist dens of ill repute where particularly verminous charlatants converge to bray familiar refrains and aggressively advance minoritarian interests like the fifth column they are.
The Su-57 is in production already and will form the basis of an entire family of platforms as the successful Su-27 was before it. It was intended from the outset that it would be navalized if the need arises. It is the pursuit of a carrier fleet that is an open question for Russia, not naval fighters per se.
For JF-35 exports which you seem so eager to push regardless of domestic needs, try India and Djibouti maybe. It is adequate for their level.
There is also Palau.
P.S. After a cursory search my suspicions were confirmed. Think tanks worldwide do not exactly attract the best and brightest.
Any talk of Russia downgrading to JF-35 is his own humanities fantasy. Case closed.
Hi,
is there a option for Russian navy to build or get Chinese help to build somewhat
like a landing deck air craft ship instead of full fledge ACC to house these J35 Naval
variants in coming years
thank you
is there a option for Russian navy to build or get Chinese help to build somewhat
like a landing deck air craft ship instead of full fledge ACC to house these J35 Naval
variants in coming years
thank you
You're correct that China isn't petty, and moreover, there's a great deal of strategic alignment between China and Russia at the moment and for the foreseeable future.
Thing is defense exports aren't just determined by natsec priorities, but also by financial considerations.
Before the WS-10 entered service, where else besides Russia could China go to purchase militarily sustainable quantities of AL-31 class turbofans? As the only available vendor, what do you think Saturn's margins looked like?
The dispute between China and Russia over Su-27 and related IPR didn't get out of hand because reasonable people on both sides prevailed. However, the two de facto allies could've been pushed apart if the interests of a competing set of domestic stakeholders were prioritized on either end, and perhaps had Russia refrained from annexing Crimea in 2014.
Moscow isn't wrong to want to mitigate risks, especially in the defense industrial space, that may impede their strategic independence. Beijing has after all operated with near identical priorities for decades: "what is good for the goose is good for the gander."
You raise a good point with regard to how the proliferation of Chinese weapons systems and technologies could expose them to hostile actors.
Guessing you're thinking of India!
Funny thing is that Chinese made Flanker components have already made their way into Su-30MKI fighters assembled by HAL.
Agree with you that the Russians won't be importing the J-35A or KJ-500 anytime soon.
Though I remain uncertain they'll want to locally assemble a J-35A derivative, given domestic political and industrial policy considerations, even if it is the natural path of least resistance.
OTOH, the J-35 is an interesting, if not exceptional case as the Russian Navy may want to save themselves the trouble and expense of navalizing a domestic alternative, especially if they're only going to operate one or two carriers, in an arguably symbolic capacity, like the British or French.
As China continues to reach parity, if not surpass the US in key defense production and technology verticals, the Russians will inevitably have no choice but to grow increasingly dependent on China, assuming they want to remain militarily competitive against their principal de facto enemies, namely Britain.
Most, if not all of that will manifest, at least this decade, by way of dependency on Chinese supply chains, which won't be as visible as importing big ticket toys.
Ironically, the Kremlin may ultimately find itself in the same boat as its archenemy domiciled on the British isles, where it's broadly dependent on its "senior partner" in the defense industrial space, but retain enough leadership or sufficient parity in one or two key verticals, maybe even a handful or more, as Moscow remain far more serious about industrial capacity than London.
This will in turn enable Russia to continue weaponizing defense exports in service to broader foreign policy objectives, plus it could be financially lucrative for certain stakeholders.
Don't know if we've crossed paths before. You don't sound like it.
Regardless, honored that you went out of your way to register an account just to respond to something I posted after imbibing in excess!
We disagree on a host of topics, but I do appreciate our shared cynicism for certain species commonly found in foreign policy and national security circles.
Will post a more substantial reply when bandwidth permits.
In the mean time, I do have an inquiry if you'll indulge us . . .
Why do you refer to the J-35 as the "JF-35?" Where is that nomenclature from?
Chinese electronics and radar technology are way more advanced than anything Russia can produce. Can Russia even manufacture a large area LCD screen? Or a ultra high resolution CMOS sensor? GaN on SiC or GaN on Diamond radar elements?
As for the airframe it does its job. I wouldn't be surprised if the J-35 had a lower empty weight than other aircraft in its class as well. Because China can make huge machined parts. The J-35 is made of huge single pieces unlike other fighter aircraft which are still being riveted.
The PL-15 AAM also will have no equivalent in the Russian arsenal either until R-77M is mass produced.
I already mentioned this, the Su-57K. It was seen in display models of the Storm carrier. There were also other carrier models, representing smaller carriers, with some sort of navalized Su-75.
The talk about smaller drone carriers being better like I read on IZ.RU sounds a lot like sour grapes to me. Drones have issues with communications interference which have not been solved yet. Maybe with something like Starlink it could be done but Russia does not have that yet either. AI is still a bust for that kind of use. What one can argue is that right now there aren't the escorts to bother with having carriers yet.
Russia needed to crank up 22350 production like yesterday. And lay down more 885Ms instead of dragging their feet with it. They haven't laid down a new nuclear sub in like five years.
The carriers are necessary for power projection, scouting, and fleet air defense. If the other side has air launched missiles with 1000km range you aren't going to stop their launch by shooting down aircraft with Redut. And Zircon won't shoot down the carrier that is a further 800km+ away either.
The submarines are highly vulnerable to US ASW aircraft as well and Russia lacks its own ASW in adequate numbers to counter opposing subs. French submarines will at least launch the MICA while submerged but Russian subs cannot even do that. The best you can do is surface to launch a much more short range Igla or something. Air cover would fix that.
India doesn't even want Chinese trains let alone weapons. Because of their stupid ring theory of strategy they think all neighbors are enemies. They insist on antagonizing China and because of this and their colonial house slave mentality they continue to fall ever further into the US orbit.
I doubt Russia would get Chinese fighters as well. But radar aircraft or drones would be more likely I think. Had Russia got either before 2022 they would be having a less hard time at things now.
Last edited:
This year or next, Russia will likely still be at war in Ukraine. How can they even consider a major naval buildup, given the state of the Army and Air Force?