MOSCOW, April 24 (RIA Novosti)
- Russian Arms Sales to Syria to Comply with UN Rules
- Largest Arms Sales List Includes 11 Russian Firms
- Russia fighting to save arms sales to the Middle East
- Russia imposes sanctions on arms sales to Libya (Update 1)
- Russia hopes to make $9.5 bln in 2011 arms sales (Update 1)
- Russian Arms Sales to Middle East, Method or Madness?
Libya and Iraq continue to show interest in buying Russian-made weaponry despite regime changes in these countries, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said on Tuesday.
“The Libyan military leadership and the Iraqi government have shown serious interest [in Russian weaponry],” Rogozin, who oversees the Russian defense industry, told reporters in Moscow.
After the fall of Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq and Muammar Gaddafi’s regime in Libya, many experts had suggested Russia lost both lucrative arms markets.
Russia reportedly lost around $4 billion in arms sales to Libya in the aftermath of the civil war in 2011. The new Libyan authorities have repeatedly said they were not interested in buying Russian weaponry.
Rogozin said, though, that Libya had a “very specific interest” in defensive weaponry.
“We are certain that the Libyan military leadership trusts this weaponry, which proved to be very reliable,” he said.
“That is why they are interested in restoring military-technical cooperation with Russia, and we welcome it,” Rogozin said, adding Russia would continue insisting on the revival of contracts concluded with the deposed Gaddafi regime.
Rogozin also said that Iraq had shown interest in buying Russian weaponry and equipment for antiterrorism operations.
He said Iraqi Defense Minister Sadoun al-Dulaimi had recently visited Russia and discussed the current state of bilateral military-technical cooperation with the Russian officials.
Add to blog
You may place this material on your blog by copying the link.
Image Galleries: Russia Celebrates Navy Day
Infographics: World War I, 1914-1918
The Brest-Litovsk peace treaty that ended Russia’s part in the war has been the subject of heated debate from the moment it was signed in March 1918. To this day, scholars offer differing interpretations of the circumstances that led to the treaty and its domestic and foreign policy importance.