“Russian Deputy Defense Minister Vladimir Popovkin said on September 19 that Russia is seeking technology to boost its shipbuilding industry by buying the Mistral ship, according to Ria Novosti news agency.” Wihtout knowing much about military technology, still I fail to see how purchasing a ship built according to a proprietary science and technology of a foreign country , which cannot be copied by Russia without the permission of France, can somehow be thought of a technology transfer from France to Russia! What happened to Russia great scientists? Why they cannot discover new technology that can create real jobs for local shipbuilders whilst providing a last security for Russia’s national security?

Russia taking a leaf out of Chinas book? Good on them. Why spend a decade or two in research and development, plus years building when they can buy it in. Whilst the product is being used it can be studied and reverse engineered for a 'home grown' version - just the Chinese do so successfully. This would be a very sensible and astute move by Russia, but I can't see it going through as the US will object and throw up obstacles to prevent, or at least delay, Russia gaining access to advanced western weapon platforms / systems. Good luck anyway.

The whole idea is stupid and a pure waste of money. Please send me 500 millions €, then I shall send to you a nice little paper ship which will have about as much usefulness at that Mistral ship. Thirty years ago russian (soviet) engineers, when designing nuclear submarines and most other warships were excellent. What happened since that time ! Beside; it may be time to stop wasting billions € in armaments when we face so many challenges, just to allow mankind not ot be soon a specie near extinction. Sorry Future Generations ! Sincerely. Jean-Claude Meslin

In better days when the Tsar was in power, the Russian navy benefited from buying some of its warships from abroad. Examples include the cruiser Admiral Kornilov (1887) and the battleship Tsesarevich (1900) built in France, the battleship Retvizan (1900) built in America, and the armoured cruiser Rurik (1906) built in England.

Very simply put if Russia is serious about being a world power then it needs a decent Navy. Without a navy Russia can be strong but it can't be a global power. The US wouldn't have been the superpower it became without one, and before them the UK would never have had the global influence without their navy. The point is that you don't dominate the world and then build a navy to control it, you build a navy and you get the global power from that global reach. It is not about taking over the world. It is about being able to have a presence globally so that you can have a say in what happens. Right now if the Russians want to trade in central and south America if the US wanted to stop them then a naval blockade would be their best option. Russia simply doesn't have that option if the roles were reversed. If Russia wants to trade with anyone and everyone then they will need a naval force to make sure they can. I am not suggesting recreating the Soviet Fleet, it will be much smaller than that, but if you want useful naval groups you need aircraft. It was clear from the results of WWII that the aircraft carrier has replaced the battleship as the main capital ship. No ship can match the sight or the reach of an aircraft. Aircraft must be part of the solution.

Of course Russia can design a helicopter carrier like this, but the point is that it would take a decade to design and build several new ship designs from scratch right now and test them and decide upon a winning design to move forward with. The cost of the design and development would make it more expensive than buying an existing design off the shelf (ie Mistral). The Mistral design is a proven modern design that is ready to be built. The ship they will get from the french will be basically a shell with Russia needing to adapt the design to their sensors, weapons, aircraft, vehicles and systems. The 3-4 further vessels that the Russian shipyards will be building will create work in the naval yards and the redesign will create work for their ship designers. There will be much less risk because it is a known modern proven design. The technology transfer will be minimal because they wont be getting the latest French radars and NATO communications and electronic support measures. What they will be getting is mobility for their rather large body of forces called Marines who are a very professional force currently largely tied to Russia through lack of naval transport vessels. They have armour but have little means to move their forces very far at all. The Mistral would also allow the Russians to deploy around the world in the event of a natural disaster. An example of where that might have been useful was in the natural disaster that occured in Myanmar a while back. Equally if there is a problem elsewhere where the west is not so welcome but the Russians have good relations such vessels would be most useful as well. Russia and the Soviets actually have a long history of licence production of foreign weapons that end up in production in Russia/Soviet Union. From the DC-3 through various trucks and car designs before the start of the cold war in 1945 not to mention the purchase of British jet engines at the end of WWII..