Cuba, Venezuela May Host Russian Bombers: Report

MOSCOW — A Russian air force chief said Saturday that the country could base some strategic bombers in Cuba or on an island offered by Venezuela, the Interfax news agency reported, but a Kremlin official quickly said the military had been speaking only hypothetically.

The U.S. and Russia have been trying to reset their relationship, severely strained over U.S. plans to position missile defense elements in Poland and the Czech Republic and by Russia's invasion of U.S. ally Georgia last year.

Russia has nothing to gain strategically from basing long-range craft within relatively short range of U.S. shores, independent military analyst Alexander Golts said, calling the military statement a retaliatory gesture aimed at hitting back after U.S. ships patrolled Black Sea waters near Georgia.

The chief of staff of Russia's long range aviation, Maj. Gen. Anatoly Zhikharev, was quoted by Interfax as saying Saturday that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez had offered "a whole island with an airdrome, which we can use as a temporary base for strategic bombers."

"If there is a corresponding political decision, then the use of the island ... by the Russian Air Force is possible," Zhikharev was quoted as saying.

Interfax reported he said earlier that Cuba has air bases with four or five runways long enough for the huge bombers and could be used to host the long-range planes.

But Alexei Pavlov, a Kremlin official, told The Associated Press that "the military is speaking about technical possibilities, that's all. If there will be a development of the situation, then we can comment," he said.

Mike Hammer, spokesman for President Barack Obama's National Security Council, said, "We do not comment on hypotheticals."

Story continues below

advertisement

Officials at both Venezuela's presidential administration and Defense Ministry refused immediate comment and Cuban officials could not be reached for comment.

Venezuela and Cuba, traditionally fierce U.S. foes, have close political and energy relations with Russia, which has been working to reassert itself as a military force. Russia resumed long-range bomber patrols in 2007 after a 15-year hiatus.

Venezuela hosted two Russian Tu-160 bombers in September for training flights and later joined Russian warships for exercises in the Caribbean.

Cuba has never permanently hosted Russian or Soviet aircraft, though Soviet short-range bombers often made stopovers there during the Cold War.

In the October 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, Soviet nuclear missiles stationed in Cuba pushed the world to the brink of nuclear conflict after U.S. President John F. Kennedy announced their presence to the world. After a tense week of diplomacy, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev removed the missiles.

The military analyst Golts said basing Russian bombers in Venezuela or Cuba "has no military sense. The bombers don't need any base."

He said the bombers are considered strategic because they are capable of reaching an attacking range of the United States from Russia without the need for stopovers.

"This is just a retaliatory gesture," he said, adding that Russia wanted to hit back after U.S. ships patrolled Black Sea waters.

Moscow and the new Obama administration have appeared to want to mend their relations,

U.S. plans initiated under former President George W. Bush to put elements of a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic had particularly irked Russia, although the United States insists they are intended to counter potential future threats from Iran.

Russia has welcomed Obama's apparently more cautious approach to the divisive issue.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Geneva earlier this month to push a symbolic red "reset" button, another sign of the desire for a clean slate.

Cuban authorities made no comment last summer when a Moscow newspaper reported that Russia could send nuclear bombers to the island. While neither confirming nor denying the report, ailing former President Fidel Castro at the time praised his brother President Raul Castro for maintaining a "dignified silence" on the report and said that Cuba was not obligated to offer the United States an explanation.

___

Associated Press Writers Anita Snow in Havana, Cuba, and Rachel Jones in Caracas, Venezuela, contributed to this report.

Comments

[SurrealPumpkin]

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2009/03/15/8759436-ap.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25196455-36235,00.html

In the above articles it sounds more like Chavez doing some chain jerking then anything else.

[newshawk14]

I think the Russians have their heads planted, where the sun doesn't shine on this one, and will
quickly realize this upon seeing sunshine. Bad move, and will only allow a couple of Latin American
dictators to pull their chains, whenever opportunity presents itself.

[TJCole]

More Chess it never ends we put missiles in the Czech Republic and Poland they park bombers in the Caribbean and Gulf region ...

Nice play good move...

Hey Condi heck of a job you did girl..

[Layman23]

LOL !

[negotiatethis]

We've been trying a policy in Cuba for 50 years. It hasn't worked and won't work. Let's try something new before Cuba is a Russian military base. http://talkingcuba.wordpress.com/

[madHenry]

Why did the Soviets finally abandon Cuba. They simply could not afford it. How will they afford to keep working facilites in this hemisphere now. They might for a short while as a propaganda (see how macho Putin and Medvedev are?) ploy. But unless the price of oil rises really significantly in the short term, this is ludicrous. Another subargument for energy independence and spreading renewable and sustainable technologies as far south of the border as we can. The thing that makes it a little scary is how incompetent Soviet (err..., excuse me) Russian military technicians and technicians in general are. Submarines burning and crashing, planes dropping, erratic satelltes. Will Chavez and Castro consider this in their decision-making? For the sake of those living near any russian nuclear presence you hope the answer is "yes."

[JXJASON]

Who cares what they do in Cuba or Venezuela. These two countries do not pose any threat to the US.

[SurrealPumpkin]

Who cares about Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia or or or, those countries pose no threat to us.

How quickly we forget.

[RedBlue7]

VOTE: 2 things which made America a prosperous nation until 2001...
http://www.e-paperview.com/epaper-poll-1.html/

[TovSquirrel]

404

[Doofus]

The matter of Russia sending cruise-missile equipped bombers touring along
the US coastline, heading down to Rio, as it were, is PRESUMABLY intended
to be about as provocative to a fresh new US president, as putting missiles
into Cuba was to another fresh new US president about fifty years ago.

Obviously, meant to be destabilizing. Maybe if we ignore them, they'll go away.

That or, back off encroaching on Russian interests over in their own backyard.

[MajorKong]

We don't know for a fact that these would be missile carriers. They also have a recce version of that aircraft.

[Doofus]

No doubt. Perhaps close monitoring can sort that out.
However, it must be intended to provoke, no doubt
in a somewhat subtle way. Maybe no one worries
so much about (old fashioned, slow) bombers
any more, but air-launched cruise missiles
present a different problem entirely.

[Okieborn]

Thank God Bush Is "OUT" and President Obama is "IN" !!!!!!

[whosyourdaddy]

Or perhaps we ought to ask, why did they wait to do this until Obama took office?

[Gasparilla]

They didn't. Read the story. They sent bombers to Venezuela "last year".

[SurrealPumpkin]

They didn't, Chavez did. The Venezuelan people don't seem as happy about it as he thought, so now it's basically an offer of emergency refuel and service. At least, that's what he's saying.

[S1m0n]

Bull. File this one under "Bullsh!t, hype and misinformation."

The Russian guy is making it up or teasing the reporter. Venezuela might decide to host a russian base if the oil biz crashes, but if that happens, Russian can't afford whatever the payoff would have been.

Cuba *might* dangle that as a carrot, if only to create something that could be traded for a US pull out of GTMO, but have zero interest in actually doing anything like it, and nothing to gain if they did.

[1differentdrummer]

Bush meddled in their backyard so they meddle in ours. Isn't that it? Thanks, George.

[waugust]

"Backyard"?

In case you hadn't noticed differentdrummer, we live in an age of intercontinental ballistic missiles. Russia doesn't need bombers in the west to hit us; they can do it from Russia and/or their subs cruising off both coasts. This announcement was just for show.

And your point about Bush is . . . what? "Meddled"? What exactly do you mean? Possibly asked Russia what was and was not acceptable to them prior to doing what he thought was right?

You're obviously welcome to your oppinions but it would help if you clearly said what they are rather than using vague innuendos.

[yellowdogminnesotan]

Why doesn't Russia check out if Columbia has a Naval base for Russia's armored row boats. Maybe they could join forces and build a sling shot factory. Both of which are as scary as that Red Barron style bomber they got. Who'd they get to fly that thing, Moses.

[MagisterLudi]

MiG-35

http://media.izvestia.ru/army/article809/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIhjkSVMAKg&feature=related

[MagisterLudi]

SU-37
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7W5kK6p85o&feature=related

[jsarets]

We have 3-D vectored thrust variants of the F-15 Eagle (ACTIVE), F-16 Fighting Falcon (MATV), and the F/A-18 Hornet (HARV). The stock F-22 Raptor has 2-D pitch vectored thrust.

What they have in common is too much added weight for the added maneuverability and increased cost of procurement and maintenance.

Furthermore, these vehicles are simply too expensive to risk engaging in close-range air-to-air combat. The F-16 was largely passed up by the Navy because it was too light for ground attacks and too slow to be an interceptor. We had little interest in a dogfight specialist.

Vectored thrust has better applications in strategic bombers and unmanned hunter-killers, where it can eliminate the need for vertical tail surfaces, thereby permitting low-observable airframe designs. But then again, the B-2 Spirit and X-47B Pegasus use split ailerons as drag rudders to control yaw without vertical surfaces or vectored thrust.

[metropixie]

Guys, guys, hold your water guns and the military rhetoric. This is just grandstanding by Chavez who likes to piss of American presidents, and who's getting some help from Russian generals entertaining the (absurd) idea.
What's also absurd is that the US under Bush has maintained the "In Someone Else's Backyard" strategy of littering the world with US bases, ballistic weaponry, and personnel.
If you think that's such a great idea, then accept that it can work the other way around as well. Under Bush America has remained to be regarded abroad as an expansionist, colonialist, empire-building, and therefore hostile nation. Without this misguided US ideology perhaps there wouldn't even be Muslim extremism today...

[JoeBlough]

In a world of free-market globaliztion, anything is possible.

[SurrealPumpkin]

Hush, don't interrupt our fantasies with reality :)

[cardineau]

I read all of these comments about this plane and that ... and how "we" could "take them out". The US has over 700 bases around the world ... not to be anyone's friend, but to make sure that US power is unchallenged. Has any US citizen ever thought of just trying to be a friend to the rest of the Planet? Is it any wonder that the US is the most warlike nation on earth.

[sarabono]

I beg to differ. We did not start WW1. We did not start WW2. We did not start Korea. We did not start Nam. We did not start the Caucuses. We did not start Congo, Darfur or anything in Africa that I know of. We did not start the Afgan conflict.

We did start Iraq, for reasons I am sure you would reject.

To say are bases are not present to be someones friend is also not correct. Our bases are in England because the Brits want us there. The same for Europe. (Remember the shock of complaints from Europe when Bush wanted to cut our forces based there by half?).
Why are we in Korea -- because the South Koreans want us. How about south Asia? Japan, Tiawan. They want us there. How about Italy and Turkey. They want us there. What about Saudi Arabia or the UAE. They pleaded with us to stay after the first Gulf war.

Each year the USA gives away more of it's wealth, food, medicine etc. than any other country on earth and that is just at the Gov. level. Private donations by our citizens more than triples the amount given by our Government.

I say we have been very good friends to the world.

[michiganman2]

we actually somewhat started the afghan conflict by supplying mujahideen fighters with billions upon billions of dollars in weapons. not to mention the stinger ground to air missiles that basically turned the war in the mujahideen's favor.

[guajiro]

You confuse the wishes of the political leaders of the countries you say want the U.S. military presence there with that of their citizens.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/05/defence-weaponstechnology
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/43130
Those "leaders" of the countries you mention want U.S. military presence to protect them from their own people while they plunder the wealth of their own countries. When you say the U.S. did not "start" any wars you miss the forest for the trees. The U.S. is well known for it's tactic of supplying foreign para-military, and in many cases, military groups with weaponry, logistics, and surveillance assistance in order to destabalize any government it deems economically unsuitable for economic rape by this country's wealthy. To say that those tactics, as part of a larger strategy to eventually invade the country with multi-national corporations, is not starting a war is to be deceitful.

[MajorKong]

"We did not start Nam."

Cough, Gulf of Tonkin cough cough.

[Tiberious]

This will really get the Neo_Cons excited and get their wedgies even tighter. The thought of another War , WOW. to them every War is a Good War!!