The reason why:
“The rush to equip the new military forces in these countries was used to justify sole-source procurements for a host of weapons and equipment, particularly for what is called “non-standard” equipment—in this case, Russian. Those countries, so the argument went, were more familiar with Russian equipment. Even in Afghanistan, a country which fought off a Soviet occupation in the 1980s, U.S. officials argued that the Northern Alliance and Afghan pilots were more familiar with Russian helicopters, which are regarded as rugged and reliable.”
This does not include:
•A non-competed $89 million contract awarded to General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems to buy three VIP Russian helicopters for Afghanistan’s president
•A $322 million sole-source deal to buy 22 helicopters for Iraq
•Most recently, another sole-source contract, which could be worth almost $900 million, to supply Russian helicopters for Afghanistan
There are problems from who the helicopters are being purchased from.”Rosoboronexport had only recently been removed from the list of companies sanctioned by the U.S. State Department for violating U.S. laws prohibiting the sale of weapons to Iran and Syria.”
The article points out that the Afghanis already have some Russian helicopters, so perhaps we should buy some spare parts. Then again, after we leave, what is to stop the Russians from trying to move in on the country and stop supplying anything they Afgh. govt. might need. I think I will send this to my Special Forces serving son who has supervised a fleet of Apaches and spent time in Afghanistan and Iraq and ask his opinion.