Chavez vows revenge for Falklands war

The Sunday Times Online (UK) ^ | September 2, 2007 | Martin Arostegui

[Jeff Head]

In a new outburst of antiwestern sabre-rattling, President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela has threatened Britain with “revenge” for the Falklands war of 1982. The belligerent Latin American leftist warned last week that his recent build-up of sophisticated Russian and Iranian weapons would be used to destroy the British fleet if it attempted to return to the South Atlantic.

Speaking on his weekly television show Alo Presidente (Hello, Mr President), Chavez denounced what he described as Britain’s “illegal occupation” of the Falklands and repeated his call for a regional military alliance against Britain and the United States.

“If we had been united in the last war, we could have stopped the old empire,” Chavez said, as he gesticulated to maps showing how Venezuelan aircraft and submarines would intercept British warships. “Today we could sink the British fleet.”

Chavez has often expressed support for Argentina’s claim to the Falklands, but his latest broadside was notable for both its antiBritish vitriol and its unprecedented threats. He declared that British history was “stained with the blood of South America’s indigenous people” and demanded revenge for the “cowardly” sinking of the General Belgrano, the Argentine cruiser.

Western diplomats have long grown used to harangues from Chavez, who announced this weekend that he would negotiate with guerrillas holding dozens of hostages in Colombia, including three US contractors and Ingrid Betancourt, a French-Colombian abducted as she campaigned for president in 2002. But US and British officials have recently become more concerned by his willingness to lavish billions of dollars from Venezuela’s soaring oil income on military capabilities.

[JasonC]

Kilos are quiet. Amurs are quieter still. Clearly Chavez wants the ability to respond to any US blockade by attacking civilian shipping in the Caribbean.

[Arrowhead1952]

Time for your dirt nap Hugh-blower.

[uncbob]

Nobody has mentioned anything about what Argentina’s current military situation is compared to back then

Anybody have any info ?

[Jeff Head]

I think that getting to be just about the size of it...at least in his own mind.

[Jeff Head]

Or, as I mentioned earlier, he could, with Argentina's cooperation, fly them down there to be a part of any attack, or occupation. With the range of the SU-30MK2s and the refueling capability, he could do it.

But the Brits are much better prepared now though with a battallion sized defense force on the Island I believe, with a flight of typhoons based at Stanley, and (in all probability) with a SSN lurking around the area.

An assault force will have a much tougher time getting to the island and then on it this time around.

[Jeff Head]

Exactly...and agreed. Particularly given all the actions he is taking that are directed at us at the same time.

[bill1952]

Its actually a smart move, guys.

First I am going to ask. “What British Fleet?”

Is there anyone here who thinks that the UK could do now what it barely did then?

IMO, there is no “British Fleet” left that is more than a shadow of it’s former strength.
No Navy could operate outside of of the sphere of the projection of power afforded by Uncle Sam.

[Jeff Head]

To be fair, I have been talking about the potential for intercepts...and believe that the Venezuelans would try it. ..Their aerial refueling capability, which they have had for decades, would be what made it possible at those ranges. In fact, I believe Chavez was threatening as much during his bobastic speech.

Anyhow, as you also point out, it will be years before the new carriers are ready. In the mean time, the current Invincible class would be, without better fleet air defense, very hard pressed against these types of aircraft.

[UltraKonservativen]

I’m just a bit worried about the ability of the UK navy...what with the latest display of their “spunk” facing the Iranian rubber dingies....

[Jeff Head]

They still have one Type 42 destroyer I believe but have added four much newer Meko 360 frigates (modern and fairly capable):

They also have six fairly modern and fairly capable corvettes (Meko 140s).

Three older corvettes (A-69s):

They also have three diesel electric submarines.

..and three fast troop transport ships which themselves have some good self-defense capabilities (guns and missiles)

And one large troop transport.

The Meko 360s are the biggest threat outside the subs.

These forces, although lesser in mumber, are actually much more modern and capable (both surface ships and submarines) than what the Argentines had during the Falklands war. But during that war, outside of the initial landings, the Argentine Navy did not figure in much at all to the fighting.

HERE's THE ARGENTINE NAVY SITE

It was the Argentine aircraft that wreaked the most havoc on the UK task force. Thye principally used A-4 skyhawks amd Mirage IIIs that used dumb bombs. But they proved very effective. They also used their Pucarra light attack aircraft

Their Air Force, as much as I can tell, has not been modernized too much since that time. 24 of their Pucarra attack aircraft, 34 or so A-4s and 24 or so Mirage IIIs.

[Jeff Head]

See my post 142, The UK could put to sea, actually a stronger force than what they sent in 1982...but it would tax them to the max and involve virtually their entire available fleet.

[Stop Liberalism]

Why doesn’t someone shoot this fruitcake?

[JasonC]

One, they are friendly and would not fight. They were under a military junta back then, with a large conscript army that dominated domestic Argentine politics. The war discredited that whole manner of politics in Argentina, and led to democracy. The last time the military intervened in domestic Argentine politics was over 15 years ago (a failed coup, stopped by loyal portions of the army).

Two, they now have a much smaller and more professional, volunteer military, which cooperates with NATO abroad, and with Brazil and Chile in regional matters.

Three, the navy currently has 4 modern DDGs, each with 8 exocet and 24 SAM, superior to anything they had back then. No aircraft carrier, as they then had. 6 frigates with 4 exocet each but no modern air defense, and 3 other smaller ones 2 exocet each again without air defense, the latter being dedicated ASW designs. Each of these surface escorts has an ASW helo, torpedos, etc, the usual. There are also 6 larger patrol boats and 2 exocet armed small fast attack boats. And they have 3 quiet, German designed diesel electric submarines.

Four, the air force is much smaller, with many of the planes mothballed. They have 8 Super Etendad naval attack planes with exocet still in service - they had 14 in the 1982 war and they took out 2 ships then. For fighters, they have 20 Mirage V models (13 of them with Israeli upgrades), but all in storage not in service. They have 24 Mirage III models, with half in storage and used as 2 trainers, 10 as actual air defense fighters. They have 34 A-4 Skyraiders, a modernized version of the same old attack plane used back then, with 4 of them used as trainers. That compares to around 90 they had back then.

Overall, the air force is only about a third the size as in the early 80s and the models have not be upgraded at all, really. (The A-4s are M models, sure, but they are still antediluvean airframes). Most of the models in service are 1950s designs, a few are 1960s designs. Using all trainers and taking everything out of storage, they could field 86 jet aircraft, roughly 1/4 interceptor Mirage, 1/4 duel role Mirage improve Mirage, and the rest attack. The air force also has transports, patrol, and counterinsurgency prop planes, but nothing that would be useful in a confrontation with a first world state. (Ok, maybe some use from a dozen maritime patrol planes for ASW).

The one difference technical advance since 1982 is the wider use of exocet by the surface navy, and the presence of a handful of modern diesel electric submarines. Both reflect the lessons of the war. But frankly, the whole force is very much a peacetime one, and its few modern surface vessels are used for joint operations with NATO where needed worldwide, in international "good citizen" fashion.

Argentina is not going to fight Britain. Chavez on the other hand is making whatever trouble he can, playing very much the same reckless role the Argentine junta of that era played.

[Piquaboy]

We should have sent in a hit man to take care of this idiot long ago.

[Chi-townChief]

On the other hand, we could have invoked the Monroe Doctrine and quarantined the British warships in the South Atlantic as well. Conflicting policies.

[Bender2]

Re: But the facts are, as I have indicated from the start, that the SU-30s that Chavez has bought pose a serious threat to the UK task force and that that task force would be in there range and require US help. The Venezuelans have had refueling capability for something like 40 years I believe, and one of the major selling points of the SU30s they bought (among others, including anti-shipping missile capability) is its inflight refueling capability which gives it the range to pose the threat.

Sorry, but "...the facts are, as I have indicated from the start..." did not include air-to-air refueling capability of Hugo's air force. That was brought up later. This began with your 102 post: "If we do not provide that help, then the UK, IMHO, in either case, would not be able to get past Venesuela on the way down to the Falklands."

Had you said instead: "If we do not provide that help, then the UK, IMHO, in either case, would not be able to get past air-to-air refueled Venezuelan SU-30s on the way down to the Falklands." there would not have been any comment by myself.

Matter of fact, "air-to-air refuelling" was not mentioned in the Times article and was first mentioned in this thread by britemp on post 144 in reference to RAF Typhoons flying to Ascension Island.

This will be my final comment on this matter and the last time I shall join any of Jeff Head's threads as he makes it clear you must either telepathically toe his line of thinking or not be in the approved loop...

When all this began, there had not been any mention of the Venezuelan Air Force air-to-air refueling asset. Only the 24 SU-30MK Chavez had purchased and their taking on a hypothetical British Naval Task Force on the way to the Falklands.

My reply was to the extent that any British Task Force would not pass anywhere close enough to Venezuela for the SU-30s to attack unless it was suicide flights.

It was said that the Brits were passing east of Hugoland, so they were in danger. Bringing air-to-air refueling into the conversation at this point makes that in the realm of possibility. Yet it could also be said with air-to-air refueling suddenly in the equation, Hugo’s air force could attack the Brit Task Force while it passed through the Suez Canal! Or as they rounded the Cape of Good Hope! Or even in the Thames as they gear up to leave...

My attempts at googling the following info is not the final authority, but it is the best I have been able to find at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuelan_Air_Force http://www.scramble.nl/ve.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/venezuela/airforce.htm

The best out-and-back range of the SU-30MK I could find was 3,000 km (1,620 nm). The mention of one KC-135 airtanker for Hugo’s air force comes from Jeff Head, my looking only gives mention of one 707 and mention of six C-130 transports and no mention of any of them having an air-to-air refueling ability.

Hypothetically we have a British Task Force leaving the UK and heading down to Ascension Island. Knowing of Hugo’s threat, they keep as close to the cost of Africa as possible to make their distance from Venezuela around 2,900 miles.

The art and ability to send out a bombing force to that range takes a great deal of assets and professionalism even with the USAF who train for this each and every day. To give that capability to Hugo’s air force with a single KC-135 type tanker, only 10 SU-30MK on hand today and 14 more expected in 2008 is a fantasy. No amount of money or hardware can instantly make a formidable force to fly out, attack an opposing naval fleet and expect to do significant damage and return the majority of your attack air craft. It take training over and over again a long time to be proficient in this.

Perhaps in a year or two if Hugo bought more airtankers and trained the devil out of his SU-30s, they may have a chance.

Now, tracking this fleet would fall to Russian spy satellites and the info passed on to Hugo.

So, given all this hypothetical hardware, training and tracking, I will admit it is a slim possibility Hugo’s air force could take on the attack mission and make the Brits turn back as Jeff Head said in his humble opinion.

Yet, as it has been pointed out I clearly do not fathom the geographic situation and do not grasp the military situation, so I say, Jeff, go ahead (pun intended) and be the only one with any grasp of any hypothetical geographic/political/military situation any where, any place, any time...

You have taken one who once considered you a colleague, a friend, and, in short order, have stripped away any and all friendship and collegiality from them...

You, sir, may have floor for eternity and I say good bye and good riddance!

[JasonC]

Methinks you are being more than a little silly here. The route is 3 times the range of the SU-30 and Venezuela doesn't have a prayer of interdicting the entire Atlantic with its tiny and out of range air force.

UK is disarming its navy, that is a story that needs to be understood. Chavez is a troublemaker buying advanced arms, that is a story that needs to be understood. But the UK and Argentina are not remotely going to fight each other - the Argentina of the present hour is Chavez and the threat is to places like Trinidad not the Falklands - and if they did Venezuela would yap like a terrier but not do a thing about it. If they do buy the subs they are talking about, they might acquire some ability, but that isn't what they'd use it for anyway. Don't take the idiot's propaganda at face value. Take it for what it actually is - the incoherent prestige-seeking bluster of a dangerous (but profoundly stupid) man.

[JasonC]

Ah, so someone else was actually arguing the point. Didn't notice, and you are right.

Me, I'm just worried by (1) what Chazev will actually use his new forces for, which doesn't have anything to do with your hypothetical and (2) the lamentable draw-down of the royal navy, which was once a serious force for good in the world - and is now mostly a museum.

[Jeff Head]

Sorry you feel that way. In my mind, you have taken what amounts to a simple misunderstanding and miscommunication and blown it all out of proportion.

As I said earlier, for whatever it is worth, and for whatever part I had in the misunderstanding, I apologize and wish you the best in any case.

[Jeff Head]

With the refueling capability and with the search/recon aircraft that they have, and without US direct support in terms of fleet air defense...or as others on this thread have mentioned without the UK stationing Typhoons along the way...the Venezuelan SU-30MK2s would nonetheless pose a threat.

If they were serious about it and this was anything more than just a blowhard huffing and buffing (which most likely is all that it is), then they would be able to make the attempt and the UK would have to take it seriously...however unlikely they may deem it.

The UK could not afford to ignore such a risk.

But that's just my opinion...and was never meant to be anything more or less.