Uganda does not need the sophisticated Russian jets

Apr 13, 2010

UGANDA'S plan to buy six sophisticated Russian-made Sukhoi Su-30MK2 fighter jets, first reported by Russian business publication, Vedomosti, and confirmed by the Ministry of Defence, makes absolutely no strategic sense.

Opiyo Oloya

UGANDA'S plan to buy six sophisticated Russian-made Sukhoi Su-30MK2 fighter jets, first reported by Russian business publication, Vedomosti, and confirmed by the Ministry of Defence, makes absolutely no strategic sense. All it does is shore our ego by giving us the bragging rights as having the most powerful airforce in the Great Lakes region, but does not add to Uganda’s security.

Here is wh it doesn’t make sense. Right off the start, it is important to understand what the Su-30MK2 is built to do. It is a newer, more advanced version of the Su-27 Flanker fighter jet which is a nimble and highly manouverable aircraft in air-to-air dogfight, mainly to counter American F-15 fighter jets.

The development of the Su-30MK2 which began in early 2002 specifically enhanced the aircraft’s capabilities for air-to-surface missions while retaining the advanced air-to-air features introduced in the earlier versions. The two-person fighter jet sports enhanced precision-attack capability fitted with what is known as the C4ISTAR. In pedestrian language, the jet is able to acquire information about a target, say a ship lurking in darkness, determine its precise location, its intentions and with the push of a button, send guided missiles to destroy the target. This makes the Su-30MK2 especially useful as part of a larger airforce fleet in a tough neighbourhood where everyone has the latest in airforce technology.

India, for instance, has acquired several hundreds of the Su-30 jets to respond to Pakistan’s fleet of American F-16, French Mirage III and Mirage 5 fighter jets, and China’s Chengdu/Shenyang J series attack jets.

Meanwhile, the Su-30MK2 has anti-ship missiles capability which makes it useful for patrolling maritime coastlines. Vietnam has bought a number of the aircraft for just such a job. But this is not what Uganda needs to create an effective defence against potential enemies in the neighbourhood. I say neighbourhood because in a war against a super-power like America or Russia, Uganda does not stand a chance against the enemy’s firepower from the air and on the ground. So, we have to look at who in the Great Lakes neighbourhood could cause problems for Uganda.

First of all, Uganda’s potential enemies especially those it has clashed with in the past including Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Tanzania, and Sudan, have no significant airforce against which Uganda could deploy the Su-30MK2 fighter jets. Sudan has a dozen or so ageing American F-5E Tiger II attack jets and one or two operational Su-25 ground attack jets it bought second-hand from Belarus. Meanwhile, the DRC has no attack jets to speak of.

Rwanda has a few Mi-8 Russian-made attack helicopters. Kenya has a dozen or so ageing F-5E Tiger II attack jets. Tanzania has a smattering of Chinese-made Chengdu and Shenyang aircraft. In other words, although buying the sophisticated spanking new Su-30MK2 jets sounds exciting, Uganda could not put them to much use anyway.

Sure, the jets could be used to drop some bombs, for example, on the remnants of the LRM/A in the Garamba, but that won’t do much good in winning the ground war itself. Already we know that the LRM/A was pushed to the brink not by bombs falling from the sky, but by UPDF foot soldiers painstakingly trudging in the bushes, sometimes without as much as gumboots to protect their sore feet. In fact, Uganda only has to look no further than the current American wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Both wars have shown that winning air superiority means diddly squat in winning the war itself.

Time and again, the Americans have dropped bombs from the sky, and despite the fact that America totally controls Iraqi and Afghani airspaces with their sophisticated patrol aircraft, they still have to get down and fight in the trenches against Iraqi resistance and the Taliban.

Secondly, as a potential battleground, the Great Lakes region is relatively low-tech, but troop-rich. If Uganda is actually attacked by a neighbouring nation, say, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the enemy will likely launch foot soldiers to do the grunt work, not aircraft flying into Uganda to drop bombs, say, on Kampala and Jinja. This means that, strategically, it is useless for Uganda to buy the super-expensive high-flying lethal Su-30MK2 birds.

Rather, it makes sense for Uganda to improve the responsive and kill capability of the ground troops by arming its infantry with the best modern weapons and most reliable transport vehicles that can swiftly take them to the battlefront while protecting them from landmines and enemy bullets. In this context, it makes more sense for Uganda to purchase more battle-tanks and combat troop carriers like the Canada developed LAV-3 or its US counterpart the Stryker. Both are practical troop carriers that use Caterpillar diesel engine, travel for 400 kilometres before being refuelled, and quite effective in combat.

The M1126 Stryker ICV with all the bells and whistles goes for about $2.5m. This is not to mention that Uganda’s troops could use a big boost in living standard, better pension and improved general welfare. They are the heart and soul of what keeps the country safe, not some high-flying sky dancer that is able to twist and turn and leave a lot of smoke. We don’t need the air show, we need serious defence of the country. As well, I will not repeat my regular song about better hospitals for our impoverished population, public library in every sub-county, and better roads.

The half-billion dollars slated to purchase the Su-30MK2 could go a long way in meeting some of these very basic needs. My final thoughts? At a lofty sum of $54m apiece totaling a whooping $324m, buying the Su-30MK2 would be akin to selling the family inheritance to buy a Mercedes Benz limousine, only to park it in front of the leaking grass-thatched hut in the village; it provides a feature attraction for the curious villagers, but is inoperable because there is no petrol to run it, and no roads to run it on. It is sleek, new, and trimmed with all the leather, but it is JOA (Junk on Arrival)!
Opiyo.oloya@sympatico.ca

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});