In the past, it was rumored that in the 90s of the last century, China took a fancy to the Tu-160 strategic bomber of the Ukrainian Air Force and intended to buy it. However, the United States and Russia have joined forces to oppose it, triggering a strategic game. In fact, at that time, both the United States and Russia were eyeing these bombers.
In the 90s of the last century, Ukraine, under pressure from the United States and Russia, agreed to destroy all nuclear ** and related launch platforms on its territory, including strategic bombers. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine took over the 184th Regiment of the Strategic Aviation of the former Soviet Air Force, which has 44 Tu-160 "Corsair" strategic bombers and Tu-95 "Bear" strategic bombers.
In order to expand its strategic bomber force, Russia began negotiations with Ukraine in 1996 to try to purchase these 44 strategic bombers. However, the two sides have not been able to reach an agreement due to the exorbitant demands made by Ukraine. In order to prevent these planes from entering the Russian military sequence, the United States has taken various measures, including warning Ukraine not to violate the nuclear destruction agreement, providing a $300 million loan for economic construction, and bearing the cost of destroying strategic bombers.
Under the coercion and inducement of the United States, in December 1997, the United States and Ukraine reached an agreement, starting in September 1998, Ukraine began to destroy all strategic bombers and 487 X-55 air-launched cruise missiles, all with the support of the United States. On November 16, 1998, Ukraine, with the assistance of the United States, destroyed its first strategic bomber at the Priluki airbase.
However, the destruction process has since slowed down. Russia seized the opportunity to put pressure on Ukraine to repay its gas debt, or else pay off its debt with planes. With no way out, Ukraine had to hand over 8 Tu-160 and 3 Tu-95 to Russia, along with 587 Kh-55 air-launched cruise missiles.
Unable to give an account to the United States, Ukraine did not hand over all strategic bombers. After the transfer of 11 units, Ukraine continues to destroy strategic bombers. On 2 February 2001, the last Tu-160 was destroyed in the Chernihiv region, which was split into five sections. On May 17, the last Tu-95 was destroyed at the Uzin airbase in Kyiv Oblast, also divided into five pieces, and the fighter flew for only eight hours.
Ukraine did not completely destroy or ** strategic bombers, retained 4 of them, of which 1 Tu-160 and 1 Tu-95 were converted into museum exhibits, and 2 Tu-95 were converted into ecological laboratories. In order to show its sincerity, Ukraine also offered to destroy 30 Tu-22M "Backfire" bombers and more than 200 X-22 air-launched cruise missiles, which both the United States and Russia gladly accepted.
From today's perspective, Ukraine's destruction of these bombers and missiles seems to be a bit of a self-defeating feat of weapons. But at that time, Ukraine had no choice but to compromise because it lacked the financial resources to maintain these **, coupled with the threat of economic aid and energy debt from the United States and Russia.
This history shows that to maintain a strong military force, it must be backed by strong financial resources. Although China was unable to acquire the Tu-160 at that time, now that a new generation of stealth strategic bomber H-20 is about to be launched, the Chinese Air Force will surely become an important member of the strategic air force in the near future.
The article profoundly reveals a tortuous history in international politics, involving a game between China, Ukraine, the United States and Russia over strategic bombers in the 90s of the last century. First of all, through vivid descriptions, the article allows readers to empathize with the pressures and choices faced by Ukraine at that time. Under the dual coercion of the United States and Russia, Ukraine has to give up its powerful strategic bomber force, which is the result of a passive response in the international political chess game.
The various political tactics and pressure tactics revealed in the article have made people suspicious of the game between international powers. The United States has successfully influenced Ukraine's decision-making through warnings, loans and other means, using economic aid and energy debt as bargaining chips. Russia, on the other hand, skillfully took advantage of Ukraine's default on its gas debt and recovered a part of its strategic bombers in the form of "repaying debts by machine". This series of complex confrontations makes people think about the balance of power in international politics and the incompatibility of the game between countries.
Although Ukraine's final choice seems to be self-defeating, judging from the predicament at the time, they may not have many other options. Lacking sufficient financial resources and the technical ability to maintain equipment, coupled with strong pressure from the United States and Russia, Ukraine had no choice but to give in. This raises questions about whether the international community can provide a more just and equitable solution to alleviate the passivity of small countries in the great power game.
The article concludes by mentioning China's failure to acquire the Tu-160 and noting that China is now developing a new generation of stealth strategic bombers, the H-20. This section adds a lot of color to the article, showing China's rapid progress in military technology by comparing the past and the present. This has also led to reflections on China's future position and role in international affairs.
Overall, this article vividly restores the political environment and international relations at that time, and is a profound historical revelation for readers. Wrestling and games in international politics do not only take place on the battlefield, but also unfold in various political means and diplomatic mediation. Through the restoration and analysis of this period of history, this article provokes people's thinking about international relations, and at the same time makes us pay more attention to China's rise and development in today's world.
Disclaimer: The above content information is ** on the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or insinuate any real country, political system, organization, race, or individual. The above content does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising from the above or related issues, and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.
If the content of the article involves the content of the work, copyright**, infringement, rumors or other issues, please contact us to delete it. Finally, if you have any different thoughts about this event, please leave a message in the comment area to discuss!